IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v32y2015i10.html

Risk-avoidance or utmost commitment

Author

Listed:
  • Nicole Hiekel

    (Max-Planck-Institut für Demografische Forschung)

  • Renske Keizer

    (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)

Abstract

Background: Dutch adults grew up in a highly individualized country, characterized by high divorce rates, which may have influenced their views on cohabitation and marriage. Objective: We examine Dutch adults' perceptions of how similar or different cohabitation and marriage are, whether they believe that cohabitation would be a strategy to avoid the risk of divorce, as well as their views on why people marry in individualized societies. Methods: We analyze seven focus group interviews with 40 Dutch participants, collected in 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Results: Many participants discussed differences and similarities between cohabitation and marriage in a context of high divorce rates, and frequently viewed cohabitation as a risk-reduction strategy. At the same time, marriage was often seen as ―the real deal‖, in terms of legal arrangements, but also as a symbol of utmost commitment. Less educated participants viewed more financial advantages in cohabitation compared to marriage, and felt more strongly about the symbolic value of marriage than their highly educated counterparts. There was strong consensus that there is not, and should not be, a social norm to marry. Conclusions: In a context of high relationship instability, cohabitation has become a risk-reduction strategy. When norms to marry are weak, people may marry in order to emphasize the uniqueness of their relationship. However, the individualistic nature of Dutch society is mirrored in respondents' reluctance to set standards or proscribe norms on why and when to marry and their emphasis that cohabitation can also imply high levels of commitment.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicole Hiekel & Renske Keizer, 2015. "Risk-avoidance or utmost commitment," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(10), pages 311-340.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:32:y:2015:i:10
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2015.32.10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol32/10/32-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2015.32.10?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arland Thornton & Dimiter Philipov, 2009. "Sweeping Changes in Marriage, Cohabitation and Childbearing in Central and Eastern Europe: New Insights from the Developmental Idealism Framework [Transformations radicales du mariage, de la cohabitation et de la procréation en Europe Centrale et ," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 25(2), pages 123-156, May.
    2. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Michaela Kreyenfeld & Wendy Sigle-Rushton & Renske Keizer & Trude Lappegård & Aiva Jasilioniene & Caroline Berghammer & Paola Di Giulio, 2012. "Changes in union status during the transition to parenthood in eleven European countries, 1970s to early 2000s," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(2), pages 167-182, July.
    3. Kelly Musick, 2007. "Cohabitation, nonmarital childbearing, and the marriage process," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 16(9), pages 249-286.
    4. Cees H. Elzinga & Aart C. Liefbroer, 2007. "De-standardization of Family-Life Trajectories of Young Adults: A Cross-National Comparison Using Sequence Analysis," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 225-250, October.
    5. Nicole Hiekel & Aart Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    6. Jay Teachman & Jeffrey Thomas & Kathleen Paasch, 1991. "Legal Status and the Stability of Coresidential Unions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 28(4), pages 571-586, November.
    7. Brienna Perelli‐Harris & Wendy Sigle‐Rushton & Michaela Kreyenfeld & Trude Lappegård & Renske Keizer & Caroline Berghammer, 2010. "The Educational Gradient of Childbearing within Cohabitation in Europe," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 36(4), pages 775-801, December.
    8. Thornton, Arland & Axinn, William G. & Xie, Yu, 2007. "Marriage and Cohabitation," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226798660, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Laura Bernardi, 2015. "Exploring social norms around cohabitation: The life course, individualization, and culture," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(25), pages 701-732.
    2. Kirsten van Houdt & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2018. "Joint lifestyles and the risk of union dissolution: Differences between marriage and cohabitation," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(15), pages 431-458.
    3. Julia Mikolai & Ann Berrington & Brienna Perelli-Harris, 2018. "The role of education in the intersection of partnership transitions and motherhood in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(27), pages 753-794.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julia Mikolai & Ann Berrington & Brienna Perelli-Harris, 2018. "The role of education in the intersection of partnership transitions and motherhood in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(27), pages 753-794.
    2. Andreas Klärner, 2015. "The low importance of marriage in eastern Germany - social norms and the role of peoples’ perceptions of the past," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(9), pages 239-272.
    3. Nicole Hiekel & Aart Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    4. Paola Di Giulio & Roberto Impicciatore & Maria Sironi, 2019. "The changing pattern of cohabitation: A sequence analysis approach," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(42), pages 1211-1248.
    5. Bernice Kuang & Ann Berrington & Sindhu Vasireddy & Hill Kulu, 2025. "The changing inter-relationship between partnership dynamics and fertility trends in Europe and the United States: A review," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 52(7), pages 179-228.
    6. Sergi Vidal & Danilo Bolano & Mariona Lozano, 2026. "Partnership life courses and completed fertility in Spain," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 54(29), pages 935-972.
    7. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Laura Bernardi, 2015. "Exploring social norms around cohabitation: The life course, individualization, and culture," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(25), pages 701-732.
    8. Monika Mynarska & Anna Baranowska-Rataj & Anna Matysiak, 2014. "Free to stay, free to leave: Insights from Poland into the meaning of cohabitation," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(36), pages 1107-1136.
    9. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Stefanie Hoherz & Trude Lappegård & Ann Evans, 2019. "Mind the “Happiness” Gap: The Relationship Between Cohabitation, Marriage, and Subjective Well-being in the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, and Norway," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 56(4), pages 1219-1246, August.
    10. Andreas Klärner & André Knabe, 2017. "On the normative foundations of marriage and cohabitation: Results from group discussions in eastern and western Germany," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(53), pages 1637-1666.
    11. Alessandro Di Nallo, 2025. "The partnership context of first parenthood – and how it varies by parental class and birth cohort in the United Kingdom," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 53(16), pages 465-510.
    12. Joanne S. Muller & Nicole Hiekel & Aart C. Liefbroer, 2020. "The Long-Term Costs of Family Trajectories: Women’s Later-Life Employment and Earnings Across Europe," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(3), pages 1007-1034, June.
    13. Jan M. Hoem & Cornelia Mureşan & Mihaela Hărăguş, 2013. "Recent features of cohabitational and marital fertility in Romania," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2013-007, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    14. Kate H. Choi & Rachel E. Goldberg, 2020. "The Social Significance of Interracial Cohabitation: Inferences Based on Fertility Behavior," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(5), pages 1727-1751, October.
    15. Jennifer Holland, 2017. "The timing of marriage vis-à-vis coresidence and childbearing in Europe and the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(20), pages 609-626.
    16. Tom Kleinepier & Helga A. G. de Valk, 2016. "Ethnic differences in family trajectories of young adult women in the Netherlands: Timing and sequencing of events," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(24), pages 671-710.
    17. Nicole Hiekel & Aart C. Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    18. Ann Berrington & Brienna Perelli-Harris & Paulina Trevena, 2015. "Commitment and the changing sequence of cohabitation, childbearing, and marriage," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(12), pages 327-362.
    19. Gina Potârcă & Melinda Mills & Laurent Lesnard, 2013. "Family Formation Trajectories in Romania, the Russian Federation and France: Towards the Second Demographic Transition? [Trajectoires de formation de la famille en Roumanie, en Fédération de Russie et en France: en direction de la Seconde Transiti," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 69-101, February.
    20. Mioara Zoutewelle-Terovan & Torbjorn Skardhamar, 2016. "Timing of Change in Criminal Offending Around Entrance into Parenthood: Gender and Cross-Country Comparisons for At-Risk Individuals," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 695-722, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:32:y:2015:i:10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.