Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday March 28 2017, @01:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the xkcd-523 dept.

The most common reasons given for the breakdown of marriages or live-in partnerships in Britain are communication problems and growing apart, according to analysis by UCL researchers of the latest National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3).

[...] Natsal is the largest scientific study of sexual health lifestyles in Britain. It is carried out by UCL, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and NatCen Social Research [sic]

Natsal is run every 10 years, and includes a representative sample of men and women resident in Britain aged between 16 and 74. Natsal-3 was carried out between 2010 and 2012.

The study focused on the responses of 706 men and 1254 women to questions about their reasons for breakdown of a marriage or cohabiting relationship in the past 5 years.

[UCL is, of course, University College London. It has as part of one of its faculties the above-mentioned school.]

I would have guessed footie.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday March 28 2017, @06:00PM (5 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday March 28 2017, @06:00PM (#485350) Journal

    The premise of the study makes sense to me. The core advantage of a marriage is the emotional intimacy it affords. If you're doing it right, you don't have to pretend to be anything or anyone other than you are. Everywhere else, you do.

    At work, on the street, what-have-you, you have to maintain a projection to keep things going; and maintaining that projection always produces a level of anxiety. If you start doing the same thing in a marriage, maintaining a projection or hiding who you are and what you think, then there's no more emotional intimacy and no real reason to stay married.

    We all need to have the chance to be vulnerable, and the chance to be strong for someone else, too. The medium for that is communication.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:36AM (4 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:36AM (#485744) Homepage
    How does marriage provide more emotional intimacy than what I have with my partner of 18-years. Looking around at married people I know, most of them have less emotional intimacy, although for most of them it's because they're no longer married. We don't need no piece of paper from the city hall keeping us tied and true. I consider a relationship bound by mutual desire and respect superior to one held together because of externally-imposed obligations.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 29 2017, @12:23PM (1 child)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 29 2017, @12:23PM (#485831) Journal
      I gather the modern problem is that marriage comes with a variety of default legal protections that other sorts of relationships don't have. I gather, for example, that an estranged wife would probably get far more in a settlement of an estate (when someone shuffles off the mortal coil) without a will than a live-in partner without a formal contract would.
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday March 30 2017, @09:26AM

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Thursday March 30 2017, @09:26AM (#486405) Homepage
        In case of intestacy, yup, the defaults are different. Of course, a will will change that. I think my g/f said that I'll get some of her stuff if she croaks, I still think I'm immortal and haven't returned the favour yet. I am getting less immortal as the years fly by, of course...
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday March 29 2017, @12:27PM (1 child)

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday March 29 2017, @12:27PM (#485834) Journal

      In many places what you have would be considered a common law marriage, essentially long-term cohabitation, comingled finances, etc. The exact definition is unimportant, though, because what you have is the essence of the emotional sanctuary I was getting at. You could be gay in a long-term monogamous partnership in a place that does not consider it marriage, but in its most important aspects it's the same.

      The distinction between common law marriage and officially sanctioned marriage, I suspect, might count when it comes to divorce. I don't know for sure because I've never been divorced (thank god), nor do I know the law there. Maybe those more knowledgeable could say.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 29 2017, @01:02PM

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday March 29 2017, @01:02PM (#485856) Homepage
        Where we lived 7-17 years ago, Finland, had an official status "cohabitation without marriage" that permitted my non-EU g/f residency as a "partner of an EU citizen", but afforded no other rights or responsibilities.

        When it comes to residency, here in Estonia she's still afforded the same protection (whilst I'm still an EU citizen - fuck you very much UKIP), despite there being no exactly equivalent official status. Quite how we get away with it, we don't know. But the cops have never raised the issue as we renew our id cards and residency permits every few years. Obviously no externally-imposed financial implications exist. (We both coughed up 50% of the wodge for where we live, custody on a split could be messy. No plans for that any time soon, fortunately.) Fuck knows what happens when article 50 kicks in - I probably go all bomb-belt on Boris Johnson's arse, that solves the problem quickly.
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves