Talk about a misleading headline: “Report: Cohabiting has little effect on couples’ success in marriage.”
USA Today can’t carry all the blame for misleading—the writers repeated what Pamela Smock, University of Michigan sociologist said. In contrast, the NY Times headline had a better grasp of the real takeaway, “Study Finds Cohabiting Doesn’t Make a Union Last.”
This is the truth. Studies show that there is a difference in types of cohabiting—the sliding kind and the deciding kind. The slide: Couples who never talk about marriage and “slide” into a cohabiting situation, usually break up. The decide: Couples who had already decided to marry and then move in together, are more likely to marry and stay together.
Importantly, cohabitation in the best “decide” situation is only neutral– research shows no positive effects on marriage, but lots of downsides are possible. Children especially suffer when their parents share little more than toothbrush space and rental agreement, but adults lose without marriage as well.
Also significantly, marriage is the basis for stable relationships—physically, emotionally and financially. There are a lot more reasons to encourage marriage than to scapegoat cohabitation.
Oliver Thomas uses just a couple of examples to claim that "secular" practices are responsible for a lower divorce rate in a USA Today article.
First, the things that are true. Yes–couples are marrying later in life and the divorce rate is lower. And yes, more couples are now willing to seek counseling. But it’s problematic to say that that professional marriage counseling, and later marital ages are "secular" solutions responsible for lower divorce rate.
Thirty is not a magical age at which more anniversaries become possible. According to the National Marriage Project, marrying after age 20 and a few semesters in college are key. In fact, the happiest marriages are formed between the ages of 23-27 according to University of Texas research.
Thomas also neglects the growing number of couples cohabiting with no commitment greater than a rental agreement. This is a "secular" factor contributing to the lower divorce rate because fewer people are marrying.
And a little faith-based "coercion"–to use Thomas’ term—significantly affects a person’s choice to marry (rather than cohabit), and their marital longevity. Singles who attend church are less likely to cohabit, and married couples who attend church together are more likely to stick with their wedding vows. Cohabiting has no positive results that have been measured.
Both faith and society are needed to create a marriage culture. And Americans could use a bit more cultural "coercion" to marry and stay married—from the faith community, family and the neighbors who don’t attend church.
See other factors that lower your chances of divorce.
The Gambling Titanic has smashed into the Berg of Recession. Its hull is filling with water quickly, and states are well advised NOT to bet on gambling any longer. Not even to plug budget gaps temporarily, especially in the Sea of Deflation where life boats are in short supply.
A recent article in USA Today (8/21/2009) summarizes the failing vice industry well with some noteworthy statements:
- “If you think states are looking for dough in all the wrong places to fill budget holes, you’ve hit the jackpot.”
- “For the relatively modest amount of tax revenue that gambling produces in most places — last year’s $6.8 billion was just 1% of state tax receipts nationwide it buys a disproportionate amount of problems: Addiction … scandal …”
- “Aside from the long-term economic and social costs of gambling, recent news suggests that it’s not even a reliable short-term solution to fiscal problems.”
- “[Gambling] becomes a zero-sum game as [more] states compete for the same pot.”
- “Gambling is here to stay, but by seeking to expand it as a something-for-nothing solution to budget shortfalls, states are only ducking tough choices between raising taxes or cutting services.”
- “For states serious about building sound economic foundations, the notion that gaming is the answer is, like the big Vegas casino of the same name, a mirage.”
Common sense dictates that if you’re starving, you don’t ask a thief for money. The same principle applies to cash-strapped states and gambling.
Here’s the take-away message: Don’t jump onboard the Gambling Titanic, it’s a sinking ship!
