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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Constructions,reconstructions and deconstructions of ‘family’ amongst people who live apart together (LATs)

This article explores how people who live apart from their partners in Britain describe and understand ‘family’. It investigates whether, and how far, non‐cohabiting partners, friends, ‘blood’ and legal ties are seen as ‘family’, and how practices of care and support, and feelings of closeness are related to these constructions. It suggests that people in LAT relationships creatively draw and re‐draw the boundaries of family belonging in ways that involve emotionally subjective understandings of family life, and that also refer to normative constructions of what ‘family’ ought to be, as well as to practical recognitions of lived family ‘realities’. This often involves handling uncertainties about what constitutes ‘family’.     

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.     

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.     

When work keeps us apart: a thematic analysis of the experience of business travellers

Whilst business travel is deemed important for organisational success and economic outcomes, little is known about the actual process of business travelling from the perspective of individuals who undertake such travel on a regular basis. Thus the current qualitative study examined how business travellers (three women and eight men) attempt to find a balance between work and family, by focusing on how time together and time apart are experienced. The results can be interpreted and framed within work/family border theory in that business travellers' borders are less defined and less permeable, thus requiring them to border-cross more frequently. This necessitates a process of negotiation with key border-keepers (their spouse/partner). Business travellers also undertake compensatory behaviours to make up their time away from family. In order to find a work/family balance, they go through a process of adapting, negotiating and tailoring their lives around their work commitments to alleviate work–life conflict.     

Living Apart Together and Money: New Partnerships,Traditional Gender Roles

Drawing on qualitative interview data from a sample of 54 men and women engaged in living apart together (LAT) partnerships in Belgium (Flanders), this study explored the organization and exchange of money in LAT arrangements. The data showed that the heterogeneity of LAT partnerships is reflected in couples' monetary behavior, with couples who foresee cohabitation (transitional LATs) showing more marriage‐like exchanges of financial support than those who perceive living apart together as a more permanent arrangement (permanent LATs). The economic position of the partners and the importance attached to economic independence and breadwinning mediate the impact of future expectations on the financial practices of LAT couples. The data also showed that traditional notions of gender and coupledom continue to be strongly influential, even in nontraditional types of partnerships.     

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.     

Remarriage,Unmarried Cohabitation,Living Apart Together: Partner Relationships Following Bereavement or Divorce

Substantial proportions of people enter into new partner relationships after bereavement or divorce. Nowadays in Europe, unmarried cohabitation and living‐apart‐together relationships are frequently opted for at repartnering. Drawing on the Netherlands’ Living Arrangements and Social Networks survey of men and women aged 55 to 89 years (N = 4,494), this article explicates the determinants that lead widowed or divorced people to enter into old and new types of partner relationships. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses revealed that age at most recent union dissolution, the number of partner dissolutions, working during and after the most recent union dissolution, and other demographic variables are important in weighing the pros and cons of different types of living arrangements.     

Relationship Churning and Parenting Stress Among Mothers and Fathers

Researchers have documented the consequences of relationship instability for parenting stress but have given little attention to within‐partner relationship instability. In this study, the authors used data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (N = 3,544) to estimate the association between within‐partner relationship instability (known as churning or on‐again/off‐again relationships) and parenting stress. First, they found that by the focal child's 5th birthday about 16% of biological parents experience churning. Second, compared to being stably together with or stably separated from the child's other parent, churning is associated with greater parenting stress for both mothers and fathers. Because parenting stress is the same or higher among churners compared to their counterparts who stably separate, this suggests that, more than a change in partner, relationship instability—whether within or across relationships—is tied to parenting stress.     

“I'll Be There for You”: Teen Parents' Coparenting Relationships

Marriage promotion policy agendas have focused research attention on coparenting relationships, but little is known about coparenting among teen parents. Using qualitative interviews with 76 teen mothers and fathers supplemented with site observations at a school and clinic, the authors investigated coparenting relationships and those relationships' embeddedness in extended families and social institutions. They identified prevalent coparenting trajectories and analyzed individual‐, interaction‐, and institutional‐level influences on coparenting. Coparenting trajectories diverged depending on whether the couple stayed together and assumed traditionally gendered parenting roles. Participants perceived that coparenting relationships strongly shaped their current and future socioeconomic, emotional, and practical circumstances and their success at “being there” for their child. Extended families, institutions, and social programs often pushed teen parents apart, although many participants felt they needed a functional relationship with the other parent. Coparenting relationships, considered jointly with extended families and social institutions, are fundamental for understanding teen parenthood and shaping effective social policies.     

Vetting and Letting: Cohabiting Stepfamily Formation Processes in Low‐Income Black Families

The authors examined cohabiting union formation processes by analyzing in‐depth interview data collected from 30 individuals in cohabiting relationships: 15 low‐income Black mothers of adolescents and their partners. Prior research suggests that cohabiting union formation is a gradual, nondeliberative process. In contrast, most couples in this study described a gradual but highly deliberative process. Mothers focused primarily on vetting their partners to ensure child well‐being and less on when and how their partners officially came to live with them, a process the authors call vetting and letting. Mothers delineated 4 strategies to ensure their child's well‐being when vetting their partners, and their partners reported that they understood the importance of participating in this process. The authors argue that vetting and letting is a child‐centered family formation process, not a partner‐centered union formation process, and that cohabiting union processes may vary substantially by subpopulation.     

Trans* Partner Relationships: A Qualitative Exploration

ABSTRACT

The study of romantic partner relationships among trans* individuals is critical to providing a more complete understanding of their unique challenges and experiences. There is a paucity of research in this area, despite its significance in the lives of trans* individuals. The current study sought to examine the nature of partner relationships for people who identify as trans* by looking at the common experiences that they might share. A sample of 38 trans* participants completed a one-hour, semi-structured interview that qualitatively investigated their experiences in partner relationships. The results indicate five important themes: (1) The Oppressive Gender Binary System, (2) Coming Out and Disclosure Decision, (3) Emotional and Physical Sexuality Concerns, (4) Healthy Relationships Are Work, and (5) Living an Authentic Life. Implications for future research and how to better support the trans* community are discussed.     

Till Faith Do Us Part …: Relation Between Religious Affiliation and Attitudes Toward Cross-Cultural and Interfaith Dating and Marriage

This article addresses the relationship between religious and/or cultural affiliation and attitudes toward cross-cultural and interfaith relationships among university students in Australia. The questions of interest were as follows: (1) what is the relationship between the three monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and attitudes toward interfaith dating and marriages, and (2) how do the participants perceive their religious backgrounds to impact on their decisions to enter or avoid cross-cultural and interfaith relationships? Using semistructured interviews, qualitative data were gathered from 57 students (42 women, 15 men, mean age 21.9 [SD 8.8]). The findings suggest that university students in Australia (Jewish, Christian, and Muslim) are generally disinclined to engage in a cross-cultural or interfaith relationship. Only some participants in the present study were open to engaging in a cross-cultural and interfaith relationship, provided the partner was neither too religious nor demanded for the participants to change in any way. However, none of these participants was actively searching for a partner of a different culture or faith. Finally, there was a clear reluctance by non-Muslim participants to be with a Muslim partner.     

Like a Parent and a Friend,but Not the Father: A Qualitative Study of Stepfathers’ Experiences in the Stepfamily

Research about the experience and position of stepfathers in stepfamilies is scarce. Using data from semi‐structured interviews with eight stepfathers, we aim to explore how stepfathers experience family life and their relationships with their (step)children and extended family members (biological father and grandparents), as well as how they describe their position within the stepfamily. Interpretative phenomenological analysis revealed three main themes: most participants saw themselves ‘like a parent and a friend.’ While none of them considered themselves as ‘the father’ – this position being assigned to the biological father – they described acting like a parent or a father figure in their relationships with the children. Secondly, despite some difficulties in the initial stages of formation of their new families, most participants described a positive evolution over time and were satisfied with their current family situation. Thirdly, the stepfather's positioning towards non‐cohabiting family members such as the biological father and grandparents added complexity but was managed well. Research findings are discussed in light of the current family therapy literature on working with stepfamilies.     

The Rationale Behind Texting,Videoconferencing, and Mobile Phones in Couple Relationships

Abstract

Smartphones and digital media are omnipresent in day-to-day life. There are positive and negative consequences to technology usage in established relationships; we also know that there are several theories outlining why people use technology generally. What is less clear, however, is how these two entities intersect. The purpose of this article is to determine the how different mechanisms related to technology—namely, texting, video calling, and e-mail—are used in established romantic relationships. Using a hermeneutics qualitative methodology and interviewing 17 individuals, we uncovered the rationale for why individuals decide on using particular methods of communication to engage with their romantic partner. We discovered unique reasons for texting as compared to video conferences, phone calls, and e-mail usage in established romantic relationships. Implications and future research are discussed.     

Looking inside the bag of tools: creating research encounters with parents with an intellectual disability

This paper examines the development of fieldwork methodology in a study that investigated the parenting experiences and parent support needs of a group of parents with an intellectual disability. It considers the ways in which the original planning for the project changed as the fieldwork unfolded, requiring adaptations to our methodological expectations and in the process deepening our understanding of the phenomena we were studying and reinforcing for us the importance of relationships in fieldwork‐based research. Three themes in particular are considered that became central to this research: research relationships; safety for participants/positioning of the researcher; suspending assumptions about impairment and disability and influences on life experiences.