More Americans over 50 live together but don't marry

(LiveScience) More and more Americans over age 50 are choosing to live with their partner instead of getting married, according to a new study, which found that cohabitation among adults in that age range has more than doubled in the past decade.

The number of unmarried adults over 50 living together jumped from 1.2 million in 2000 to 2.75 million in 2010, the study showed. The research is based on data from the 1998-2006 Health and Retirement Study and the 2000 and 2010 Current Population Survey.

"Similar to their younger counterparts, older Americans are embracing cohabitation in record numbers," said lead researcher Susan Brown, who is co-director of the National Center for Family and Marriage Research at Bowling Green State University.

While the trend mirrors an embrace of cohabitation by younger generations, older couples living together tend to stay together longer than their younger counterparts, the study found.

Couples who were living together when the study began had been together for an average of eight years. Over the next eight years covered by the study, just 18 percent of these couples separated and only 12 percent got married, the researchers said.

As previous studies have suggested, the new research indicates that cohabitation may provide many of the benefits of marriage without some potential burdens, such as the mixing of financial assets. "Older adults desire an intimate partnership, but without the legal constraints marriage entails," Brown said in a statement from Bowling Green.

The researchers also found that women are especially hesitant to tie the knot later in life because of the perceived loss of freedom and caregiving strains marriage may involve. Demographically, most older people living with their partner are divorced, followed by those who have been widowed and then those who never married, the researchers said.

The study is detailed in the August issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family.

Follow LiveScience on Twitter @livescience. We're also on Facebook & Google+.

Popular in SciTech

11 Comments Add a Comment

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
Bojax39 says:: With the common law marriage statutes in many states, a lot of these people are legally considered married anyway. Still these folks are of a generation which practically wrote the book on cohabitation. It only makes sense that this is a comfortable and financially useful lifestyle many of them would return to in their senior years. Especially in these hard economic times.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
Transatlantique says:: Marriage is only good for the other partner if one of the partners is rich and there is no prenup. The family, of course, can lose big depending on how much. Its a good thing my aged 84 mum wasn't married when her aged 91 mate's daughter financially damaged mum by undue influence when she siphoned money from her for several years. His daughter was on "disability," lived in my mum's house for 11 years paying no overhead. He saved about £1000 annually from his retirement whilst my mum went into £25,000 debt supporting the two of them. At the end, I had to get a guardianship to cut the daughter off, and when this happened, said daughter left. The man and I had a few rows as well. I don't think I wouldn't have been able to do anything to stop the losses if my mum had been married.; reply

linkicon reporticon emailicon

Ulgnud says:

Shacking up gives many of the benefits of marriage without the responsibilities and commitments that go with it. The only limit appears to be where you stand on your morals. That is something they have to deal with.


Bojax39 replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; Has not so much to do with morals most times as with economics. More control over personal finances is one of the main benefits of cohabitation over marriage... but I don't expect a smug prig such as yourself would see that aspect.

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
johnlockesghost says:: When people reach a certain age where child bearing is not a consideration, marriage is nonsensical.; reply

linkicon reporticon emailicon

Jaylah54200 says:

No real surprise here. This article basically describes exactly how I feel about getting married again. Only real difference is that I don't want to "co-habitate."

I have absolutely no problem with a long-term, monogamous relationship with a member of the opposite sex. But I have no desire to get married again. And while I have no problem with us spending most nights at the same house, I don't want to live together.

I don't ever want a man's name on the deed to my little house. (The one I worked hard to buy and pay for.) Or on my bank account. I don't want to have to accommodate some guys falling-apart recliner in my decor because it's his "favorite chair." I never want a man getting the idea into his head that it's my "job" to wash his clothes, cook his meals, or clean his house again.

When I want to spend some time alone, I want to be able to be alone in MY house (he has his own house to go to).

And if we eventually choose to go our separate ways, I don't want the hassle of a divorce. I just hand him back his toothbrush and the extra set of clothes he's kept at my house and wave goodbye at the front door. I don't even need to get my key back. He never had one to start with since he never needed a way to come into my house when I wasn't here.

There are medical powers of attorney. You don't need to be legally married to give the right to make medical decisions for you to the person you choose.


johnlockesghost replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; Fair enough! Having sex with someone as well as doing deeds for them, like cooking, washing clothes, ironing, etc., should be done because you want to do them and not because you feel compelled to. As regards to sharing ownership in your valuables (e.g., your house, bank account and the like) don't share and don't expect to share in his. All in all, I think you have a healthy attitude regarding sharing your life with another.

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
hypnotoad72 says:: What, there are no tax incentives to marry anymore?

Or to even get a job too, no doubt...; reply

linkicon reporticon emailicon

emily3451 says:

only problem with this is that when a health crisis comes to pass the man or woman who remains healthy is not the next of kin and in fact has no rights at all with reguard to health care desicions and the like. It can be a rude awakening when it's a couple who have been together happily for many years but they find out that legally they have nothing. So if they not gonna get married they better make sure they have themselves protected legally.