ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLESCohabitation is not a recent phenomenon,
nor one unique to the United States. In Sweden
and other Scandinavian countries, for example,
cohabitation has become so common that it is
considered a social institution in and of itself. It is a
variant of marriage rather than of courtship; ap-
proximately 30 percent of all couples in Sweden
who live together are unmarried (Tomasson 1998).
People who cohabit have the same rights and
obligations as do married couples with respect to
taxation, inheritance, childcare, and social welfare
benefits. Many of these unions have children born
within them, and there is little stigma attached to
being born ‘‘out of wedlock.’’ Another study of
eighty-seven Canadian couples, located through
newspaper wedding announcements, reported that
64 percent of the couples had cohabited for some
period, 43 percent of these for over three months.
In contrast, cohabitation is relatively rare in more
traditional and Roman Catholic nations such
as Italy.
Cohabitors tend to differ from noncohabitors
in a variety of sociodemographic characteristics.
For example, cohabitors tend to see themselves as
being more androgynous and more politically lib-
eral, are less apt to be religious, are more experi-
enced sexually, and are younger than married
persons. Although cohabitors may argue that liv-
ing together prior to marriage will enhance the
latter relationship by increasing their knowledge
of their compatibility with day-to-day living prior
to legalizing the union, such optimism is generally
not supported. While some studies indicate no
differences in the quality of marriages among
those who first cohabited and those that did not,
others find that those people who cohabit have
higher rates of divorce. This may, however, have
nothing to do with cohabitation per se but rather
may be due to other differences in the personali-
ties and expectations of marriage between the
two groups.
A wide variety of personal relationships exist
among cohabiting couples. Several typologies have
been created to try to capture the diversity found
within these relationships. One particularly useful
one, articulated by Macklin (1983), is designed to
exemplify the diversity in the stability of such
relationships. She discusses four types of cohabiting
relationships. These include: (1) temporary or casual
relationships, in which the couple cohabits for
convenience or for pragmatic reasons; (2) going
together, in which the couple is affectionately in-
volved but has no plans for marriage in the future;
(3) transitional, which serves as a preparation for
marriage; and (4) alternative to marriage, wherein
the couple opposes marriage on ideological or
other grounds.Although attitudes toward cohabitation have
become increasingly positive, especially among
younger persons, Popenoe and Whitehead (1999)
remind us that cohabitation was illegal throughout
the United States before 1970 and remains illegal
in a number of states based on a legal code
outlawing ‘‘crimes against chastity’’ (Buunk and
Van Driel 1989). These laws, however, are rarely if
ever enforced. In the Netherlands, or in other
countries where cohabitation is institutionalized,
the majority of the population sees few distinc-
tions between cohabitation and marriage. Both
are viewed as appropriate avenues for intimacy,
and the two lifestyles resemble one another much
more so than in the United States in terms of
commitment and stability.The future of cohabitation, and the subse-
quent changes in the attitudes toward it, is of
considerable interest to sociologists. Many predict
that cohabitation will become institutionalized in
the United States to a greater degree in the near
future, shifting from a pattern of courtship to an
alternative to marriage. Whether it will ever achieve
the status found in other countries, particularly in
Scandinavia, remains to be seen.CHILDFREE ADULTSThere is reason to believe that fundamental changes
are occurring in the values associated with having
children. As economic opportunities for women
increase; as birth control, including abortion, be-
comes more available and reliable; and as toler-
ance increases for an array of lifestyles, having
children is likely to become increasingly viewed as
an option rather than a mandate. Evidence is
accumulating to suggest that both men and wom-
en are reevaluating the costs and benefits of par-
enthood. Approximately 9 percent of white and
African-American women and 6 percent of Latina
women indicate that they would like to have no
children (U.S Bureau of the Census 1998).