12/15/2000

“The Case for Marriage Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially”

I’ve been sitting here, fingers poised on keyboard, waiting for the words to come out-- words capable of reviewing this book without saying that I had a hard time reading it and I feel sorry I have failed in that endeavor. I did not enjoy this book’s dry style of delivery. Yes, it makes a case for marriage, or more solidly, for serious commitment with another human being. It is filled with statistics on our quality of life, longevity, and sense of happiness in and out of marraige. Their argument supports marriage as the relationship structure necessary for society to grow; claiming that people must create their own grounded, committed unity. The book claims children are better off if you are committed, even if you hate each other. The authors ask how anyone can deny the benefits of marriage? (As if taking the vows form a bond that shouldn’t be broken, for the sole purpose of the institution, all other thoughts and emotions be damned). I wonder how many of our fore-mothers would have loved to have the freedom we have today to leave a bad situation and try again.  After all we are only human, we make mistakes, we should learn from them.

Perhaps I look too far into things, but I want to know why marriage is better for you than committed cohabitation? Commitment can come in differing forms. Our society won’t even allow some people to marry because they aren’t opposite sexes. Is their commitment worth less? And what about the heterosexual couples who choose not to legally marry, are they less committed to each other? Why?  The book did not answer these questions for me.

The book didn’t delve into any theories on marriage vs. cohabitation, or even our feelings. Change is never addressed. As our species moves in time we change, evolve. The possibility that our relationships will also evolve isn’t even suggested. The fact that we live much longer lives today makes it only logical that we examine whether we will have more than one “marriage,” legally or not, and that we should learn how to deal with the issues instead of denying that it might be time for divorce. One gist of the book is that marriage is the only thing that will keep a man from going bad, we must save them from themselves girls, so let’s take over!

I found it archaic in so many ways. I believe that people should commit to relationships.I also believe that people should be responsible for their actions and take responsibility for their mistakes.But I am still not convinced marriage is the only way to do this.

The authors, Linda J. Waite and Maggie Gallagher claim that divorce is bad for the children, even if the parents hate one another. They argue that the only reason to break up a marriage with children is when physical violence occurs in a marriage. Shouldn’t we teach our children to make the best of their lives and not be afraid to evolve? When two adults are responsible for a family they must sacrifice things. Anyone in any relationship will sacrifice; it is part of being a human being. Accepting others’ views when they aren’t the same as yours is one such sacrifice. But once the sacrifice becomes larger than the life together, then the adults have the right and responsibility to step away and move on. There is no reason the kids should lose either parent because of divorce. Both parents should shoulder the responsibility of sacrificing their personal thoughts for the thoughts of their children. Both parents should share in the rearing. The kids will have two homes instead of one, but isn’t that better than living in one home that is overbearingly tense? Even adults who don’t constantly fight cannot keep their animosity towards one another from those who live with them.

I agree with some points the authors make. Financially, married couples are usually better off simply because they live in one home. In homes in which both partners work, income is pooled, and due to the commitment to growing old together any money left, after expenses, is invested for the future. Once you find the person you can spend the rest of your life with it is a good idea to build towards a comfortable retirement. But this too can be accomplished without marriage. So is marriage really the answer?

Commitment in any form seems to be the only necessary ingredient. I didn’t find any insight in the book that marriage is better than committed cohabitation. Perhaps I am biased because I am a divorced woman living with a divorced man and our relationship is very committed. We have legal agreements drawn up regarding everything we own together. We love and respect each other and we are planning to spend the rest of our lives together. Why not marry each other? I was hoping the book would give me a good argument but I was left feeling that my relationship is fine as it is, our commitment is to each other, not society.

If you are looking for a well-documented resource on the virtues of marriage, look no further: “The Case for Marriage” is the book for you. It is thoroughly researched. But, if you are looking for cerebral gratification, keep looking. “The Case for Marriage” is dry and very one sided. We should be discussing how our relationships can evolve and work better for all, rather than sticking our heads in the sand for the sake of an “institution.”