Marriage, French Style

In today's Boston Globe I read an article entitled, "Among French, little love is lost for traditional trips to the altar." The article informs us that the the marriage rate in France has decreased over 30% and the out of wedlock births have reached 59% for first-born French children. Segolene Royal, the woman who was nominated by the socialist party for president in the elections for next year, and in a cohabiting relationship with her partner, says, "Nowadays, people who don't want to get married don't do it to rebel or to reject religion; they do so because to them, loving someone doesn't have anything to do with society. It's personal." The article goes on to say, Contrary to predictions three decades ago, when the marital downslide began, French family social structures have not disintegrated. Instead, society has accepted and embraced changing attitudes. French laws stopped distinguishing between children born in or out of wedlock more that 30 years ago."

It is interesting to compare this rosy picture of the demise of marriage with actual sociological data. A recent publication by Institute for American Values entitled, Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-Six Conclusions from the Social Sciences, maintains that the conclusions from many sociological studies that have been done over the last several years indicate the crucial importance of marriage especially for children. Following are a few of the findings that relate most to this Boston Globe article:
1. The fact that parents are married increases the probability that both mothers and fathers will have a good relationship with their children. The report says, "Even cohabiting, biological fathers who live with their children are not as involved and affectionate with their children as are married, biological fathers who reside with their children."
2. Marriage and cohabitation are not functional equivalents. Concerning this finding, the report says,
"...children living in cohabiting unions do not fare as well as children living in intact, married families...A major problem associated with cohabitation for children is that cohabiting unions are much less stable than married unions. One recent study found that 50 percent of children born to a cohabiting couple see their parents' unions end by age five, compared to only 15 percent of children born to a married couple."
3. "Marriage, and a normative commitment to marriage, foster high-quality relationships between adults, as well as between parents and children." I want to quote an extended passage from this finding because it addresses the notion that all that matters is love.

Some say that love, not marriage, makes a family. They argue that family structure per se does not matter. Instead, what matters is the quality of family relationships. Others argue that the marital ethic of lifelong commitment needs to be diluted if we seek to promote high-quality relationships. Instead, the new marital ethic should be conditional, such that spouses should remain together only so long as they continue to love one another.

These arguments, however, overlook what we know about the effects of marriage, and a normative commitment to the institution of marriage, on intimate relationships. By offering legal and normative support and direction to a relationship, by providing an expectation of sexual fidelity and lifelong commitment, and by furnishing adults a unique social status as spouse, marriage typically fosters better romantic and parental relationships than do alternatives to marriage. For all these reasons, in part, adults who are married enjoy happier, healthier, and less violent relationships, compared to adults who are in dating or cohabiting relationships.

This report contains many other findings, as well, but these three address the issues that are at least indirectly supported by the article in the Boston Globe. I'm wondering what you think about this new social paradigm of the relative unimportance of marriage.