People who live apart together (LATs): new family form or just a stage?

‘Living apart together’ – that is being in an intimate relationship with a partner who lives somewhere else (LAT) – is increasingly recognised and accepted as a specific way of being in a couple. On the face of it, this is a far cry from the ‘traditional’ version of couple relationships, where co-residence in marriage was placed at the centre and where living apart from one's partner would be regarded as abnormal, and understandable only as a reaction to severe external constraints. Some commentators regard living apart together as a historically new family form where partners can pursue a ‘both/and’ solution to partnership – they can experience both couple intimacy, but at the same time maintain personal autonomy and pre-existing commitments. Alternatively, others see LAT as just a ‘stage’ on the way to cohabitation and marriage, where LATs are not radical pioneers moving beyond the family, but are cautious and conservative, and simply show a lack of commitment. Behind these rival interpretations lies the increasingly tarnished spectre of individualisation theory. Is LAT some sort of index for a developing individualisation in practice? We take this debate further by using information from the 2006 British Social Attitudes Survey and from in-depth interviews with LAT partners. We find that LATs do resemble cohabitating (unmarried) couples in demographic and social terms, but also display quite diverse origins and motivations. One group of LATs do not see themselves as couple partners at all, but more as special boy/girlfriends. Others live apart mainly in response to external circumstances. But some LATs do seem to be developing a new way of living in their relationships, as a means of balancing both couple intimacy and personal autonomy over the longer term.     

People who live apart together (LATs) – how different are they?

‘Living apart together’– that is being in an intimate relationship with a partner who lives somewhere else – is increasingly recognised and accepted as a specific way of being in a couple. On the face of it, this is a far cry from the ‘traditional’ version of couple relationships, where co‐residence in marriage was placed at the centre and where living apart from one's partner would be regarded as abnormal, and understandable only as a reaction to severe external constraints. Some commentators regard living apart together as a historically new family form where LATs can pursue a ‘both/and’ solution to partnership – they can experience both the intimacy of being in a couple, and at the same time continue with pre‐existing commitments. LATs may even de‐prioritize couple relationships and place more importance on friendship. Alternatively, others see LAT as just a ‘stage’ on the way to cohabitation and marriage, where LATs are not radical pioneers moving beyond the family, but are cautious and conservative, and simply show a lack of commitment. Behind these rival interpretations lies the increasingly tarnished spectre of individualisation theory. Is LAT some sort of index for a developing individualisation in practice? In this paper we take this debate further by using information from the 2006 British Social Attitudes Survey. We find that LATs have quite diverse origins and motivations, and while as a category LATs are often among the more liberal in family matters, as a whole they do not show any marked ‘pioneer’ attitudinal position in the sense of leading a radical new way, especially if age is taken into account.     

Living apart together

Traditionally, marriage has been the social institution for couples that have been together for a long period. Some decades ago a new social institution appeared in the Western world: non-marital cohabitation, although this was slower to be accepted in some countries than in others. Living Apart Together (LAT) relationships, are a new phenomenon which seems to have the potential of becoming the third stage in the process of social change. In contrast to couples in commuting marriages which have one household in common, couples living in LAT relationships have one household each. We discuss some data on the frequency of LAT relationships in Sweden and Norway as well as some varieties of the phenomenon. Our analysis suggests that the existence of cohabitation as a social institution, alongside marriage, is a necessary precondition for LATs to be recognised as a social institution. LAT relationships could not exist unless a preceding social institution of cohabitation also exists.     

Ambivalence and Living Apart Together in Later Life: A Critical Research Proposal

Most unattached older persons who would like an intimate partnership do not want to remarry or be in a marriage‐like relationship. A growing trend is to live apart together (LAT) in an ongoing intimate relationship that does not include a common home. We address the debate about whether LAT constitutes a new form of intimate relationship in a critical assessment of research on LAT relationships that applies ambivalence and concepts from the life course perspective. We conclude that among older but not younger adults, LAT relationships are generally a stable alternative to living with a partner, negotiated in the context of current social institutions and arrangements. We propose research questions that address later life living apart together as an innovative alternative intimate relationship. We encourage comparative work on the unique challenges of later life living apart together, their implications for other family ties, and their connection to social and cultural arrangements.     

Living Apart Together: Alters- und Kohortenabhängigkeit einer heterogenen Lebensform

Living apart together (LAT) is a committed partnership between two partners living in different households. It is ignored in most social surveys (e. g. the German Mikrozensus) because these focus on partners sharing the same household. The German socio-economic panel (SOEP) provides the unique opportunity to study LAT partnerships separately from singledom and cohabitation since 1992. The current study used this opportunity to test four hypotheses about LAT: LAT increased historically; decreases until the end of the female reproductive period (age 40 years); is thereafter a life form of its own without transition into co-residence; and at all ages is less stable than cohabitation and marriage. The results confirmed all four hypotheses.     

Older Adults Developing a Preference for Living Apart Together

What is understood about late life partner relationships is largely based on long‐term marriage, with little attention given to understanding the process of forming new partnerships in older adulthood. However, marked growth in cohabitation and greater awareness of living apart together (LAT) suggests a need for further investigation. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore how decisions about LAT are made among later‐life men and women. Twenty‐five participants completed life history calendars and semistructured interviews that examined how their current relationships evolved into LAT. Seven contributing factors were identified: relational and personal goals, age, caregiver burden, partner factors, relationship histories, and shifts in social mores. What participants were “doing” during the process of deciding to live apart together was working to resolve their long‐held and often ingrained beliefs about romantic relationships. Three preferences for LAT emerged from this study: opposing, ambivalent, and advocating. Future directions for research are discussed.     

Parents' Partnership Decision Making After Divorce or Widowhood: The Role of (Step)Children

Using data from the Netherlands Kinship Panel Surveys, this study investigated divorced and widowed parents' (N = 350) decision making about living arrangements after repartnering: Twenty‐eight percent lived apart together (LAT) and others lived together (remarried or cohabiting). The focus was on determinants of LAT: Women, older respondents, residents of larger cities, and parents of 2 or more children are more apt to LAT. On the basis of additional qualitative interviews with LAT respondents (n = 25), the reasons for LAT were investigated. Data showed that many children are involved in pure boundary work in an effort to guarantee the continuation of their family. Other (step)children use the sabotage or refusal types of boundary work, not accepting the new partner or excluding a parent from contact, especially with grandchildren. Many of these efforts are successful. To preserve the ties with their children, parents often adapt their decision making about the living arrangements with a new partner accordingly.     

MOVING OUT TO MOVE UP: DUAL‐CAREER MIGRATION AND WORK–FAMILY TRADEOFFS

Using data from a survey of new entrants to the junior PhD job market in economics, this paper shows that dual‐career location problems compromise the personal and professional lives of early‐career PhDs. Contrary to the common assumption that couples who do not live together break up, we find that living apart is a viable solution to location problems in the first year after graduate school. Surprisingly, PhDs facing moderate location problems are more likely than those facing severe location problems to make career sacrifices on behalf of their relationship; PhDs facing severe location problems are more likely to live apart. (JEL, J12, J44, A11)     

Women's agency in living apart together: constraint,strategy and vulnerability

Recent research suggests that women can use living apart together (LAT) for a reflexive and strategic undoing of the gendered norms of cohabitation. In this article we examine this assertion empirically, using a representative survey from Britain in 2011 and follow‐up interviews. First, we find little gender differentiation in practices, expectations, or attitudes about LAT, or reasons for LAT. This does not fit in with ideas of undoing gender. Secondly, in examining how women talk about LAT in relation to gender, we distinguish three groups of ‘constrained’, ‘strategic’ and ‘vulnerable’ female interviewees. All valued the extra space and time that LAT could bring, many welcomed some release from traditional divisions of labour, and some were glad to escape unpleasant situations created by partnership with men. However, for the constrained and vulnerable groups LAT was second best, and any relaxation of gendered norms was seen as incidental and inconsequential to their major aim, or ideal, of the ‘proper family’ with cohabitation and marriage. Rather, their agency in achieving this was limited by more powerful agents, or was a reaction to perceived vulnerability. While the strategic group showed more purposeful behaviour in avoiding male authority, agency remained relational and bonded. Overall we find that women, at least in Britain, seldom use LAT to purposefully or reflexively undo gender. Equally, LAT sometimes involves a reaffirmation of gendered norms. LAT is a multi‐faceted adaption to circumstances where new autonomies can at the same time incorporate old subordinations, and new arrangements can herald conventional family forms.     

Money management and views of civil partnership in same‐sex couples: results from a UK survey of non‐heterosexuals

Recent legislation in the UK has extended many of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of heterosexual marriage to same‐sex couples who register their partnerships. Prior to the Civil Partnership Act (2004) however, little was known about financial arrangements in same‐sex couples, nor the extent to which these mirrored those of married or cohabiting heterosexuals. This paper reports the findings from the first large‐scale survey in the UK to investigate finances and civil partnership beliefs in a convenience sample of non‐heterosexuals: 510 individuals, of whom 386 were currently in a same‐sex relationship, participated in the survey. Our findings showed less merging of finances (such as in pooling, allowance, and whole wage systems) than is typical in heterosexual married couples. The results of a series of multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that rating CP as more important, and having both names on the mortgage, significantly reduced the odds of independent (ie, separate) management of finances. Participants were almost unanimous in their endorsement of CP as a form of legal recognition, with a large majority saying that they would also consider it for themselves.     

Cohabitation Transitions Among Low-income Parents: A Qualitative Investigation of Economic and Relational Motivations

At the intersection of the cohabitation and residential mobility literatures is an opportunity to better understand the factors that shape cohabitation choices for low-income couples. By investigating push and pull factors associated with cohabitation, this study aimed to identify linkages between cohabitation transitions and the broader socioeconomic context within which they occur. Collecting data from both members of low-income couples and carefully tracking all residential and cohabitation transitions made it possible to identify a wide range of push and pull factors that motivate couples to move. The findings suggest that cohabitation transitions were often motivated by economic necessity. Romantic partnerships, while important, were less frequently mentioned than other factors (i.e., interpersonal negotiations, finances, housing quality) in determining a couple’s living arrangements. These findings have important implications for understanding the complex relationship between economic and non-economic factors that shape romantic relationships.     

TOGETHER – A Couples’ Program to Improve Communication,Coping, and Financial Management Skills: Development and Initial Pilot‐Testing

The accumulated knowledge about the negative impact of financial strain on couple's relationship functioning and the magnitude of the latest economic downturn have brought together the fields of financial counseling and couples’ therapy. This article describes the development of a new interdisciplinary program that aims at helping couples under financial strain improve their financial management, communication, and dyadic coping skills. The article also reports the results from its initial pilot‐testing with data collected from 18 financially distressed couples before and after participation in the program and 3 months later. Results from repeated measures ANOVAs suggest that the program may help reduce both partners’ financial strain and the male negative communication and improve both partners’ financial management skills and strategies to cope together with financial strain, and the male relationship satisfaction. These findings together with the high satisfaction reported by participants regarding the structure and content of the sessions and homework suggest that this program may be a promising approach to help couples experiencing financial strain. Gender differences, clinical implications, and possibilities for further research are also discussed.     

Gay and Lesbian Couples at Home: Identity Work in Domestic Space

ABSTRACT

Social research into gay/lesbian experiences of home has tended to posit domestic environments as alienating for gay/lesbian subjects, silencing their sexual identities. Meanwhile, work on the spatiality of sexual identity more broadly has largely focused on individuals or communities, not couples or households. In this context, this article aims to recover the importance of home for gay/lesbian couples. I explore how cohabiting gay/lesbian couples generate shared identities through domestic space, examining various ways in which these couples use homes to establish and consolidate their partnerships. Empirical data is drawn from twenty-three in-depth interviews with gay/lesbian Australians who are cohabiting, or have cohabited, with a long-term partner. The sample is largely limited to white, educated, middle-class gay men and lesbians living in urban Australia, providing an ethnographic window into the domestic identity-formation of a particular community of practice. Four key themes regarding “coupled identities” at home emerged from the interviews: (i) the importance of privacy and control at home for enabling gay/lesbian partnerships; (ii) the negotiated creation and use of shared domestic spaces; (iii) the accumulation and arrangement of household objects in those domestic spaces; and (iv) the importance of maintaining separate “personal” spaces for each partner for the well-being of the relationship.     

Can Stress Build Relationships? Predictors of Increased Marital Commitment Resulting from the 2007–2009 Recession

Although some studies have examined factors that can help married couples maintain their relationship quality during financial stress, few have examined factors that might actually help marriages flourish during financial stress. This study examined participants’ reports of their commitment increasing because of the 2007–2009 Recession using dyadic data from a national sample of married couples. We found that religious marital sanctification, relationship maintenance behaviors, and social and financial support from family and friends were all related to both wives’ and husbands’ reports that their commitment had increased during the Recession. Wives who faced employment- or housing-related problems reported increased commitment. Finally, the more economic pressure participants felt during the Recession, the more their relationship commitment increased.     

Risk Indicators of Elder Mistreatment in the Community

ABSTRACT

This study examined risk indicators of chronic verbal aggression, physical aggression, and financial mistreatment in a population-based sample of 1,797 independently living elderly in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Included were socio-demographic characteristics, physical and psychological health, and functional capacity. The data were collected using standardized interviews that took place in the homes of the respondents. The results showed that chronic verbal aggression was associated with an elder living with a partner or other(s) and in poor or bad health. Physical aggression was associated with an elder living with a partner or other(s) and having depressive symptoms. Finally, financial mistreatment was associated with being male, living alone, being partially dependent in instrumental activities of daily living and having depressive symptoms. The results indicate that the risk indicators of victims of financial mistreatment differ from those of chronic verbal aggression and physical aggression, suggesting that financial mistreatment may occur more often as a single form of abuse whereas verbal and physical aggression may more frequently occur together.     

Sexually open versus sexually exclusive marriage: A comparison of dyadic adjustment

In a study conducted in 1978, using Spanier's (1976) Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), couples in a sexually open marriage and couples in a sexually exclusive marriage were compared on dyadic adjustment. One hundred and thirty sexually open respondents were matched with 130 sexually exclusive respondents. It was found that there was no difference in response patterns between people in a sexually open marriage and those in a sexually exclusive marriage who were still living together with their spouses. On the other hand, persons who were no longer living together with their spouses, regardless of whether they were open or exclusive sexually, scored significantly lower on dyadic adjustment.The author gratefully acknowledges James R. Adams, Ph.D., for his part in the conduct of this research.     

Couples Who Live Apart: Time/Place Disjunctions And Their Consequences*

Couples who live apart present a unique opportunity to study the consequences of tampering with our culture's marital co-residence norm. Interviews with 37 spouses, representing members of 21 couples who are legally married and who live apart in service to career demands of both, suggest that time and place discontinuities result from two residence living. Two residences mean that spouses are not able to mesh and coordinate time schedules, nor do they share the common base of their co-resident counterparts. The time/place disjunctions that result threaten these marriages' ability to “make sense” to the partners of such unions. This paper examines the sense-jeopardizing consequence of living apart and suggest that this marital form's inherent strains make it a difficult lifestyle.     

Reunifying Versus Living Apart Together Across Borders: A Comparative Analysis of sub‐Saharan Migration to Europe

This article studies the process of reunification in Europe among “living apart together across borders” (LATAB) couples of African origin (DR Congo, Ghana, and Senegal). Couple reunion is conceived as a multilevel process, wherein state selection (through immigration policies in destination countries) interacts with self‐selection (at the couple level), under influence of the social context at origin. Based on event history analyses of the MAFE project, empirical results show that LATAB is a majority and durable living arrangement for sub‐Saharan migrants, that the odds if reunifying depend on gender and inter‐generational relationships, and that restrictive contexts at destination do not deter couple reunion.     

Outcomes of sexually open marriages

This study follows up a 1978 matched sample of 82 couples to find out if there were differences in marital stability between the sexually open and the sexually exclusive couples. In 1983 no statistically significant difference in marital stability was found. Of couples providing follow‐up data, 23 (68%) of the 34 sexually open couples and 32 (82%) of the 39 sexually exclusive couples were still together. Of the 23 couples who were sexually open in 1978, two couples had changed from a contract of sexual openness to one of sexual exclusivity; of the 32 couples originally exclusive, one couple changed in the interim to a sexually open marriage. In addition, data on marital happiness, extramarital sex, jealousy, changeableness, job change, and additional education are reported and a comparison between the two groups made. Differences between the two groups were found in number of people living in the household, job change, and additional education. Couples in the sexually open group were more likely to have either additional people or fewer people in their households. Both higher education for women and outside work for women were associated with marital instability, irrespective of group.     

Who Is in the Stepfamily? Change in Stepparents' Family Boundaries Between 1992 and 2009

Guided by trends of increased prevalence and social acceptance of stepfamilies, the authors argue that stepparents are more likely to include stepchildren in their personal network in recent times. Data are from observations by 2 studies: (a) the Living Arrangements and Social Networks of Older Adults Study and (b) the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam in 1992–2009 of 247 Dutch stepparents age 54–91 years. The results revealed that in 1992, 63% of the stepparents had stepchildren in their personal network, and this percentage increased to 85% in 2009. The network membership of stepchildren was less likely for stepparents from living‐apart‐together partnerships. Stepmothers less often included stepchildren in their personal network than stepfathers. Both effects may be understood in terms of family commitment. Stepfamily boundaries have become more permeable over time, suggesting that there is an increased potential for support exchange and caregiving within stepfamilies.