SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the so-I-didn't-have-to-get-married??? dept.
a new study published in AJPH indicates that adults who are cohabitating have midlife health outcomes that are similar to adults in formal marriages. So in terms of the benefits specific to marriage, we can probably strike "longer, healthier life" from the list.
The study in question used 10,000 subjects from the British national Child Development Study, a birth cohort study that includes all people born in Britain during one week in March 1958. Participants were able to select their partnership status as married, cohabitating, or single. Health was measured using blood and inflammatory biomarkers, as well as respiratory capacity. The researchers controlled for previous socioeconomic status, previous health status, educational attainment, income, employment, and other demographic variables.
The study's results varied by gender. Among men, those who had never married/cohabitated displayed poorer overall health than men who were married during the observation period. By contrast, not marrying or cohabitating had less of a detrimental effect on women than on men. For women, the timing of the marriage mattered. Those who were married in their late 20s or early 30s had the overall best health, beating out both women who had married in their early 20s and women were never married/cohabitating.
Does co-habitating with cats or dogs count?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Bill Evans on Wednesday August 12 2015, @09:07PM
Perhaps we ought to invite Senator Rick Santorum to lend his perspective to this discussion.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13 2015, @01:09AM
Republican Congressman Steve King (of Iowa, of course) swears that SCOTUS said it's legal to marry your lawnmower. [blogspot.com]
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13 2015, @03:09AM
And if you should marry your lawnmower, and sustain injuries while consummating that marriage, we all foot the bill for your surgery. Thanks, Obummer!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13 2015, @04:31AM
You failed to mention that it was Romneycare before it was Obamacare.
You also failed to mention that it was originally thought up by The Heritage Foundation (a Right Wing think tank).
You freaks were fine with it until the black guy said he liked it.
You racist jerks are so completely transparent.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13 2015, @03:39PM
Some of us jerks who just happen to have white skin thought it was a horrible idea (not to mention just as illegal) when Romney made it happen in his little State.
Some of us actually LISTENED to Martin Luther King and took his advice to heart: we don't judge someone by the color of their skin, but by the color of their character. Romney and Obama are the same color to me. So is Trump, for that matter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @02:41AM
Obama is just another conservative who has done nothing but carry on Dubya's policies, but if its his policies that are the Right's problem, why were there no complaints when it was the white guy behind them? They were cheering on those exact same policies until the guy behind them was no longer white. If only one single thing changed that lead to a flurry of bitching and complaining (much of it bordering on and even out-right sedition and treason), then obviously that one and only thing that changed (the president's skin color) can be the only reason for the sudden complaints.