Kontakt 2014, 16(2):e138-e148 | DOI: 10.1016/j.kontakt.2014.05.001

De-standardization of family trajectories: Childbearing in unmarried cohabitation not only as an alternative but also as a pathway to marriageSocial Sciences - Original article

Miluše Vítečkováa,*, Jana Klímová Chaloupkováb
a Jihočeská univerzita v Českých Budějovicích, Pedagogická fakulta, katedra pedagogiky a psychologie
b Sociologický ústav AV ČR, oddělení Hodnotových orientací ve společnosti

Based on a secondary analysis of data from qualitative research of unmarried parental couples, this article explores childbearing in unmarried cohabitation from the perspective of de-standardisation and individualization of family trajectories. Drawing upon a differentiation of their situation at the moment around childbirth and their actual attitudes, it distinguishes heterogeneity of views of unmarried parents on the position of an unmarried cohabitation with child in their family trajectories. Overall, the analysis identifies five dimensions of individualization of attitudes in family formation processes: (1) diversification of views on timing of entry to marriage in terms of age and length of unmarried cohabitation, (2) an emphasis on situational barriers to entry into marriage, (3) weakening of influence of the family of orientation, (4) a consideration of views on the legal (dis)advantages of marriage, and (5) different symbolic meanings attached to marriage and unmarried cohabitation and to the status of married and unmarried partners.

Keywords: unmarried cohabitation; parenthood; family trajectories; marriage

Received: October 30, 2013; Revised: February 3, 2014; Accepted: May 6, 2014; Published: June 23, 2014  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Vítečková M, Klímová Chaloupková J. De-standardization of family trajectories: Childbearing in unmarried cohabitation not only as an alternative but also as a pathway to marriage. Kontakt. 2014;16(2):e138-148. doi: 10.1016/j.kontakt.2014.05.001.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Sobotka T, Toulemon L. Changing family and partnership behaviour: Common trends and persistent diversity across Europe. Demographic Research 2008;19(6):85-138. Go to original source...
    2. Nazio T. Cohabitation, Family and Society. London: Routledge; 2008. Go to original source...
    3. Kiernan K. Unmarried Cohabitation and Parenthood in Britain and Europe. Law & Policy 2004;26(1):33-55. Go to original source...
    4. Vývoj obyvatelstva v České republice v roce 2012. Praha: Český statistický úřad. [online] [cit. 2013-10-19]. Dostupné z: http://www.czso.cz/csu/2013edicniplan.nsf/p/4007-13
    5. Fialová L. Změny v charakteru mimomanželské plodnosti v českých zemích od 18. století. Demografie 2007;49(4):230-43.
    6. Hamplová D. (ed.). Děti na psí knížku? Mimomanželská plodnost v ČR. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.; 2007.
    7. Rabušic L, Hamanová J. Hodnoty a postoje v ČR 1991-2008. Pramenná publikace European Values Study. Brno: Masarykova univerzita; 2009.
    8. Chaloupková J. Nejdříve dítě, potom svatba? Rodinné dráhy neprovdaných matek. Gender, rovné příležitosti, výzkum 2011;12(2):30-9.
    9. Van de Kaa D. Europe's Second Demographic Transition. Washington: The Population Reference Bureau; 1987.
    10. Blossfeld HP, Klijzing E, Mills M, Kurz K (eds.). Globalization, Uncertainty and Youth in Society. London: Routledge; 2005. Go to original source...
    11. Oppenheimer VK. Cohabiting and marriage during young men's career-development process. Demography 2003;40(1):127-49. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Reed JM. Not Crossing the "Extra Line": How Cohabitors With Children View Their Unions. Journal of Marriage & Family 2006;68(5):1117-31. Go to original source...
    13. Edin K, Reed JM. Why don't they just get married? Barriers to marriage among the disadvantaged. The Future of Children 2005;15(2):117-37. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Smock PJ, Manning WD, Porter M. "Everything's There Except Money": How Money Shapes Decisions to Marry Among Cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family 2005;67(3):680-96. Go to original source...
    15. Edin K, Kefalas MJ, Reed JM. A peek inside the black box: What marriage means for poor unmarried parents. Journal of Marriage and Family 2004;66(4):1007-14. Go to original source...
    16. Gibson-Davis CHM, Edin K, McLanahan S. High Hopes but Even Higher Expectations: The Retreat From Marriage Among Low-Income Couples. Journal of Marriage and Family 2005;67(5):1301-12. Go to original source...
    17. Chaloupková J. De-standardization of Early Family Trajectories in the Czech Republic: A Cross-cohort Comparison. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 2010;46(3):427-51. Go to original source...
    18. Elzinga CH, Liefbroer AC. De-standardization of Family-Life Trajectories of Young Adults: A Cross-National Comparison Using Sequence Analysis. European Journal of Population 2007;23(3-4):225-50.
    19. Brückner H, Mayer KU. De-standardization of the life course: what it might mean? And if it means anything, whether it actually took place? In: Ross M (ed.). The Structure of the Life-Course: Standardized? Individualized? Differentiated? London: Elsevier; 2005, pp. 27-53. Go to original source...
    20. Heuveline P, Timberlake JM. The Role of Cohabitation in Family Formation: The United States in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family 2004;66(5):1214-30. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Levy R. Why Look at Life Course in an Interdisciplinary Perspective? In: Levy R, Ghisletta P, le Goff JM et al. (ed.). Towards an interdisciplinary perspective on the life course. London: Elsevier; 2005, pp. 3-32. Go to original source...
    22. Giele JZ, Elder GE. Life Course Research: Development of a Field. In: Giele JZ, Elder GH (eds.). Methods of Life Course Research. Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. London: Sage; 1998, pp. 5-27. Go to original source...
    23. Liefbroer AC, Billari FC. Bringing norms back in: a theoretical and empirical discussion of their importance for understanding demographic behaviour. Population, Space and Place 2010;16(4):287-305. Go to original source...
    24. Buchmann M. The Script of Life in Modern Society: Entry into Adulthood in a Changing World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1989.
    25. Vítečková M. Nesezdané soužití párů s dětmi. Dizertační práce. České Budějovice: Jihočeská univerzita; 2011.
    26. Švaříček R, Šeďová K. Kvalitativní výzkum v pedagogických vědách. Praha: Portál; 2007.
    27. Strauss A, Corbinová J. Základy kvalitativního výzkumu. Boskovice: Albert; 1999.
    28. Kaufmann JC. Chápající rozhovor. Praha: SLON; 2010.
    29. Perelli-Harris B, Kreyenfeld M, Sigle-Rushton W, Keizer R, Lappegård T, Jasilioniene A. The increase in fertility in cohabitation across Europe: examining the intersection between union status and childbearing. MPIDR Working Paper, Series No: WP-2009-021. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research; 2009. Go to original source...
    30. Vidovićová L, Gregorová E. Věkové normy v sociologické perspektivě. Sociální studia 2007;4(1-2):201-17. Go to original source...
    31. Settersten RA, Jr. The Salience of Age in the Life Course. Human Development 1997;40(5):357-81. Go to original source...
    32. Moors G. Values and Living Arrangements: a Recursive Relationship. In: Waite L (ed.). The Ties that Bind. Perspectives on Marriage and Cohabitation. New York: Aldine de Gruyter; 2000, pp. 212-26.
    33. Lauer S, Yodanis C. The Deinstitutionalization of Marriage Revisited: A New Institutional Approach to Marriage. Journal of Family Theory & Review 2010;2(1):58-72. Go to original source...
    34. Perelli-Harris B, Gassen NS. The reciprocal relationship between the state and union formation across Western Europe: policy dimensions and theoretical considerations. MPIDR Working Paper. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research; 2010. Go to original source...
    35. Orloff AS. Gender and the Social Rights of Citizenship: The Comparative Analysis of Gender Relations and Welfare States. American Sociological Review 1993;58(3):303-28. Go to original source...
    36. Zeman K. Nemanželská plodnost - demografický přehled. In: Hamplová (ed.). Děti na psí knížku? Mimomanželská plodnost v ČR. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.; 2007, pp. 17-27.
    37. Vítečková M. Rodičovství v nesezdaném soužití. In: Chaloupková J (ed.). Proměny rodinných a profesních startů. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.; 2010, pp. 117-50.
    38. Brines J, Joyner K. The Ties That Bind: Principles of Cohesion in Cohabitation and Marriage. American Sociological Review 1999;64(3):333-55. Go to original source...
    39. Giddens A. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1992.
    40. Reneflot A. A gender perspective on preferences for marriage among cohabitating couples; 2006:311-28. Demographic Research. [online] [cit. 2011-9-14]. Dostupné z: http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol15/10/ Go to original source...
    41. Pakosta P. Jedináčkovství a rozvod - vliv rozvodu na reprodukční dráhu žen. Sociální studia 2008;5(2):55-68. Go to original source...
    42. Sweeney M. Remarriage and Stepfamilies: Strategic Sites for Family Scholarship in the 21st Century. Journal of Marriage and Family 2010;72(3):667-84. Go to original source...
    43. Soukupová E. Neprovdané matky v sociálním systému. In: Hamplová D (ed.). Děti na psí knížku? Mimomanželská plodnost v ČR. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.; 2007, pp. 79-98.
    44. Beck U. Riziková společnost. Na cestě k jiné modernitě. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství; 2004.
    45. Beck U, Beck-Gernsheim E. The Normal Chaos of Love. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1995.
    46. Manning W, Smock PJ. Measuring and Modeling Cohabitation: New Perspectives From Qualitative Data. Working Paper Series 2004-10. Bowling Green: Bowling Green State University; 2004.
    47. Vítečková M, Jílková L. Nesezdané soužití - otázka pojmenování. Lidé města. 2010;13(1):73-86.
    48. Baxter J. To Marry or Not to Marry: Marital Status and the Household Division of Labor. Journal of Family Issues 2005;26(3):300-21. Go to original source...
    49. Hamplová D. Marriage and cohabitation: Qualitative differences in partnership arrangements. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 2002;38(6):771-88. Go to original source...
    50. Gupta S. The Effects of Transitions in Marital Status on Men's Performance of Housework. Journal of Marriage and Family 1999;61(3):700-11. Go to original source...
    51. Kenney C. Cohabiting Couple, Filing Jointly? Resource Pooling and U.S. Poverty Policies. Family Relations 2004;53(2):237-47.
    52. Heimdal KR, Houseknecht SK. Cohabiting and Married Couples' Income Organization: Approaches in Sweden and the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family 2003;65(3):525-38. Go to original source...
    53. Chaloupková J. Dohromady, nebo každý zvlášť? Hospodaření s příjmy manželských a nesezdaných párů. Sociologický Časopis/Czech Sociological Review 2006;42(5):971-86. Go to original source...

    Return to the content