Does Cohabitation Set A Bad Example?

April 17th, 2012 - By Erica Renee

Your grandmother shunned it and your mother warned you against it, but shacking up, or cohabitating with your mate sans the ‘I Do’ has become the new marriage for many women; and chances are, if you aren’t the one shacking up, you know someone who is.

In fact, a recent study claims that the number of cohabitating mates has risen within the past decade, with more couples having children while living under the same roof. While some people may defend the idea of cohabitating parents living together by saying that at least two parents are under the same roof raising a child, others aren’t as forgiving an argue that this practice sets a bad example for children, causing them to disregard the union of marriage.

The study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as part of the National Survey of Family Growth, found that first births among unwed parents living under the same roof between the ages of 15 to 44 has risen from 12 percent in 2002 to 22 percent between 2006 and 2010. This can easily take the pressure out of being a single parent, but the fact still remains that the parents are unwed. So are these parents setting a bad example for their offspring?

W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, stated in a 2011 New York Times article appropriately titled, “A Shaky Foundation,” that being raised by cohabitating parents is dangerous to kids because it ‘does not institutionalize commitment in a way that is easily understood by romantic partners and their family and friends.”

Wilcox also added that compared with marriage, “cohabitation furnishes less commitment, stability, sexual fidelity, and safety to romantic partners and their children. Consequently, cohabiting couples are more than twice as likely to break up and four times more likely to be unfaithful to one another, compared with married couples.”

Still, it can easily be said that there are couples who never lived together, got married, had children, and then abruptly divorced leaving behind a messy situation and upset children. But on the flipside, there are also couples who lived under the same roof, had children, and seemingly made it work. But even if the cohabitating parents stuck together, researchers say the following question still remains: Does it still set a bad example showing lack of commitment and disregard to marriage?

The reality is that most children mimic what they see; and those ideals, whether good or bad from childhood, are usually carried into adulthood. Marriage is a sacred union; and over the years we’ve seen it marred by open marriages and publicity stunts, which could ultimately lead children and some adults to think negatively about having or the necessity of such a union.

Living together before marriage has become widely acceptable in today’s society, with most people arguing that living with a person allows them to ‘test them out’ before marriage. Maybe this saves some people the drama and hassle of marrying only to end in divorce, but once a child is involved, is it fair to ‘test out’ a relationship at the risk of setting a bad example? Let us know your thoughts.

More on Madame Noire!

More from StyleBlazer
More from MommyNoire

Comment Disclaimer

Comments that contain profane or derogatory language, video links or exceed 200 words will require approval by a moderator before appearing in the comment section. XOXO-MN

  • noshacking

    I don’t believe in “playing house”. I’m not moving in with a man unless we’re married or VERY engaged(like our wedding is like in a couple months).

  • RahTruth

    Why is the woman good enough to be the mother of the man’s child but not his wife? And, vice versa. It sets a bad example for children and teaches them that marriage isn’t a big deal. Unmarried people who live together avoid making a real (legal and spiritual) commitment to each other. It’s safe for them. I do not believe in “playing house”. If a man wants to act married, we need to get married. No exceptions.

    • Sandy

      The one flaw in your response is this:  Two people can make a spiritual commitment to each other without making it legal.  People get that confused ALL the time.  A marriage is between a man, a woman and God (Jehovah or Allah) performed by someone ordained.  That’s why you have to register your marriage with the government and a Government Officials don’t perform the ceremony.

      • racheldachel

         Actually, judges and justices of the peace are, in fact, government officials and they do perform ceremonies. You don’t have to get married in a church for it to be legal.

      • RahTruth

         I meant exactly what I said- LEGAL and spiritual. Getting it registered makes it legal.

  • Allie1234

    I believe it is bad. If you have been
    shacking up, having kids and being a family you take away something
    new by being married. Once you get married there is nothing left but
    divorced.

  • Pingback: Does Cohabitation Set A Bad Example? | Z 107.9

  • Janubie

    So would they suggest parents who have babies should rush to marry? If marriage isn’t in the plans just yet, it isn’t in the plans. We dont need to go back to shot gun weddings its 2012

    • racheldachel

       How about not having babies until after marriage?? It’s funny you say that marriage might not be in the plans yet, but then why should children be in the plans? I find it sad that so many of the people on here talk about their kids and how living together outside of marriage is setting a bad example, but isn’t having children outside of marriage a bad example?

      Call me old-fashioned, but I neither lived with nor had children with my husband prior to getting married. We took the time to get to know each other —we didn’t even have sex until we had discussed religion, children, family, finances, goals, etc. We went into our relationship with the intent that it would be a serious one (and committed to that ideal, the hard work it entails and the rewards that it brings.

      It is 2012… Birth control has been readily available for longer than most of us on here have been alive. There’s really no excuse beyond ignorance or laziness at this point (unless an unwanted pregnancy is the result of a rape) for grown folks to be having unplanned children, hence no reason for shotgun weddings.

  • Ms_Sunshine9898

    absolutely! shacking teaches kids that you don’t have to make commitments and the you can always have one foot in the door and the other out. it teach young girls that it’s ok to give a man everything and all the desires of a marriage without getting that marriage they desire, and young boys learn that they don’t have to marry their baby mama because it’s much easier to take off when you don’t have a marriage. why would anyone want that for themselves?

  • RenJennM

    Only move in together when you become engaged. That way, you can live together for the duration of your engagement (a year, two year, four yours… however long it’s taking you two to get married/plan the wedding) so that you can see if you two are really meant to be together. 

    Cohabitating changes EVERYTHING. You’re no longer going over to see them; they’re now RIGHT THERE. You’re no longer spending the night; they’re in your bed EVERY night. They’re no longer leaving a toothbrush in your bathroom; now it’s a whole side of the sink, a bathroom, a closet, a bed, a floor with clothes all over it, a kitchen, cabinets filled with the crap they eat, the living room with their video games splayed on the floor, and your TV(s). You’re no longer sharing as a courtesy, but you’re now sharing as a necessity — meaning HALF of everything! That all changes the dynamic of a relationship, and many couples begin to see their partners in a whole new light. 

    Plus, when (oops, I mean, if) the relationship ends, you or they have to move out. Not only do you (or they) lose a significant other, you (or they) lose a HOME! smh… I rather just say, “it’s over” and chuck the deuces.

  • anti-shaking

    Shaking does set a bad example. As a woman, why would you want to play wifey before your time to be a wife?  I am now married to this man, but I would have never full out shaked with him before hand. True, I spent more time at his place than mine, and living rent free would have been nice, but you can’t put a price on peace of mind!  Why do women with kids shak? that’s got to be the worst! YOU want to live with that man, NOT THE KIDS, so they livin’ wit a joka now too ’cause of what you want, whether it’s best for the kids or not! on the RHOA reunion, Kandy said she’s moving in with Todd. So now, her daughter sees mommy living with man #2. DUMB MOVE KANDI!!!!!!!!! I might be too idealistic, but one should almost believe that one’s mother is damn near a virgin! Now, these women are living too loosely in front of their kids and sluts and thugs are being raised as result!!!  I’m 35 years old now and I can say that deciding not to shak in my single days was a very wise decision. Plus, you will NEVER know everything about a person, if so you would be a god. As such, shaking is really not going to reveal more about the person than some good ol’ fashion courting would do!!!!

  • Davan Ward

    I’m going to be different on this. Marriage is nice but it’s not for everyone. Furthermore, most people I know who have been married or are married were no different then people who cohabitate in a lot of way. They still had good and bad behaviors. It’s like people think if you get married all your problems are automatically solved when they are not. My mom has been with the same man for 26yrs, with no ring. My mom just never wanted to get married. No fear of commitment on her part. My step dad has asked numerous times and always her answer is no. The fact she doesn’t want marriage didn’t affect my desire for it, and I am happily married, but I don’t feel if I had chosen to just cohabitate we would have been any less committed. As long as two people are under the same roof and committed to raising their kids, I don’t see the problem. Sometimes, I think it’s more for the feel good factor and religion that people push marriage so hard.

    Again, let me be clear, I’m talking about two parent homes, not single parent homes. 

  • jackieOsassin

    why buy the cow…when the milk is free, my lovelies? 

  • Jus Sayin’

    IN MY OPINION
    cohabitating , if you have no kids is fine as long as there is a time limit – say at the end of 1 year we get married or move out and on

    but should be no cohabitating when children are involved as it can be confusing for them as well as undermine the meaning of stability

    • LiiSH

      Even though I personally don’t believe in cohabitation (for me) right now (I never know how I will feel when that right person comes along), this seems reasonable to me. I worry that living with a person makes everything too comfortable, cause you to settle before its right. People don’t necessarily like to step out of comfort zones. A time limit can give you time to evaluate.

      And I agree 100% on the kids thing even tho my parents shacked and unshacked for years. I was never confused it just became a part of life. It did alter how I responded to the parent who wasn’t around all the time though.

  • Guest

    There are 10 unmarried, cohabitating couples. 5 couples get married, 5
    couples break up and move out. Out of the 5 married couples, 3 get
    divorced. It can then be said that, “60% of couples who cohabitate prior
    to marriage get divorced,” when really, it’s 30%, which is
    significantly lower than the ~50% nationwide divorce rate.

    I say – living together before you get married helps prevent doomed marriages from occurring.

    • SuperGuest

      No, no, no, overall that is an 80% failure rate for any couple cohabiting. According to this statistic, only 2/10 when on to form lasting unions over the duration of this study which Im assuming is less than 10 years, based on the relatively recent trend of cohabitation. So basically this gives a 20% chance of success to a 50% chance in general marriage trends. I wouldn’t take those odds, but its up to you.

  • CaliGirlED

    Been there done that. I would say it does set a bad example IF you are teaching your child(ren) to save sex for marriage. I’m hoping that the example I’m setting now, for my teenage daughter, will over shadow the one I set when she was younger. Only time will tell, meanwhile I stay prayerful.

    On the flip side, it’s not living under one roof that is “sinful”, it’s having pre-marital sex. People want to cast the stones at couples who live together, and turn a blind eye to the ones who don’t, but yet are screwing like jackrabbits! LOL!!! This is always lost in that argument, and I know that it always will be. *shrugs*

    • Bpassion

      I agree.  If you have children, set an example. 

    • 30thoughts

      I think it’s safe to assume that if you’re “shacking up,” you’re having premarital sex, don’t you? They kind of go hand in hand.

      • CaliGirlED

        Never assume. There are some rare instances where people live under the same roof and don’t have sex.

        That’s like assuming all married couples have sex. There are those rare instances where it’s just not the case.

        • 30thoughts

          Rare instances equals I’m going to assume.  Bringing up things that happen 1% of the time (like cohabitating couples not having sex) is pointless There are exceptions to every rule, but if it happens even 90% of the time, I’m going to assume it’s true, until told otherwise.

      • Miss Anonymous

        Well you dont have to be living together to have premarital sex.

        • 30thoughts

          Duh

  • Toya Sharee

    This study is funny to me, because this has been a current debate among myself and co-workers.  My parents were very open-minded and didn’t necessarily insist on love, marriage, co-habitation and children going in that order.  I don’t think marriage is just a “piece of paper” as some would like to refer to it, but I do think there are plenty of people who think the title of marriage will guarantee stability and good home.  Your children aren’t going to grow up thinking their parents are in a stable relationship and they should do the same when they get older all because they can pull out your marriage license and hold it in their hands.  What’s important is the examples and behaviors parents set forth whether they are legally married or not.

    My opinion: Living with someone before you legally agree to spend your life with them allows you to really know what you’re signing up for.  You never know someone until you see how they live.  Marrying someone I didn’t know on this level would be like taking a gamble because the honest truth is not everyone is able to live together. 

    “Cohabitation furnishes less commitment, stability, sexual fidelity, and safety to romantic partners and their children. Consequently, cohabiting couples are more than twice as likely to break up and four times more likely to be unfaithful to one another, compared with married couples.”  I don’t think these behaviors have as much to do with cohabitation and people whore just generally not ready for commitment.  I know lots of married people who cheat and lots of cohabitants that are great parents and great partners.  The same goes vice-versa.   If marriage is important to you, have the conversation before you shack up and during. If it’s a priority to both partners, it will happen regardless of if you change your address or not.

  • Sid92

    Cohabitation is one of the main reasons why relationships fail or delay marriage. I wouldn’t recommend it, but if it floats your boat go for it. There are more cons than pros when it comes to cohabitation. Check out this link on the stats of Cohabitation:  http://www.civitas.org.uk/hwu/cohabitation.php. Now I’m not saying that everybody that lives with their partner before is going to break up, but waiting until marriage increases your chances of staying together and that’s what we want right? Forever.

  • LiiSH

    My thoughts as of now are NO. I just don’t believe in shacking up. Lol it is probably the last truly conservative belief I have in my mind. I would like to save that until marriage. You never know what your getting into, even if you do decide to live together before marriage.People still hide things. There is no end to annoying things you find out about a person, so I just don’t have a reason to say yes to it.

  • luverly

    As J.Hud sings, “its a new dawn…” It is 2012…let people do what works for them. We have all been trying to rewrite tradition. If couples feel they are ready to live together then they should try it. If shacking up doesn’t work out then you move out and move on.

    If you are against cohabitating then don’t.

    Simple =)

  • Litonyab

    I don’t think shacking up is bad at all.  It gives you the opportunity to really get to know your partner before taking that huge step into marriage.

Get the MadameNoire
Newsletter
The best stories sent right to your inbox!
close [x]