During this essay, my goal is to find out whether cohabitation, being married, or being single (i.e. without a partner) are better thought of as distinct and different lifestyles, or simply as different stages within various contemporary relationship histories. To do this, I will begin by discussing the Second Demographic Transition (SDT) introduced in 1986 by Lesthaeghe and Van de Kaa to illustrate the changes in family structures, the breakdown of relationships and the reorganization of families in the West. I will then examine Coleman's critique of SDT, where he states that SDT is neither a "second" transition or a "demographic" transition, but a limited examination of different ways of life. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Following this, I will explore singleness, including the trends and reasons why individuals live alone, and how the married couple with children is no longer fundamental. , enabling a change in post-modern living conditions. Let's also discuss how the meaning of singleness has changed, but it still carries a negative stigma for some people. I will continue by examining cohabitation and how non-marital cohabitation has become more prevalent, with the majority of people having cohabited at some point in their lives. I will first consider two types of cohabitation, cohabitation as a substitute for marriage and, secondly, premarital cohabitation, while also observing an increase in births to cohabiting couples and how the growth of cohabitation and non-marital births has led to a change in attitudes towards marriage, cohabitation and parenthood. Finally, I will discuss marriage trends by looking at how marriage rates have declined over the past quarter century. I will use reports from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to see how, although there was an increase in marriage rates between 2009 and 2012, marriage rates fell again in 2013. I will discuss also from the increase in first marriage rates relative to the decline in remarriages. unemployment rates and the trend that women tend to marry younger than men. I will then conclude by summarizing the body of my essay and how to live together, be married or live alone. I will start by returning to the second demographic transition (SDT). SDT was first introduced by Lesthaeghe and Van de kaa in 1986 to illustrate changes in family structures, relationship breakdown, and reorganization of families in the West (Lesthaeghe, 1998). Visible changes in family structures result from delayed marriage, increased cohabitation, singlehood, and increased reproduction for cohabiting couples. Patterns of dissolution are characterized by increasing divorce rates and rampant dissolution of cohabitors, with structures of family rearrangement shifting from remarriage to postmarital cohabitation. Goldscheider (2000) believes that SDT is the result of the first demographic transition, with its main attribute being the increase in divorce and cohabitation, which makes unions less central and less stable in the lives of men and women. Goldscheider (2000) also notes that with the increase in divorce, men are now more likely to move in and out of the lives of women and children and that, byTherefore, parenting is not an integral part of a man's life compared to a woman's. The second demographic transition has, however, been the subject of criticism. Coleman (2004) argues that SDT is neither a “second” nor a “demographic” transition, but a limited examination of a different way of life. Coleman (2004) argues that SDT is not truly demographic because it pays more attention to marriage and its alternatives rather than mortality and population growth, and that SDT does not refer to migration internal or international in relation to the first demographic transition. Coleman also argues that SDT is not a transition, stating that "a 'transition' must be complete and irreversible, because the 'first' is considered to be, not a transient cyclical change but a permanent movement, shared by the most individuals in a population, between one long-term sustainable demographic model and another. However, Lestaeghe (2010) defends SDT by arguing that, throughout the first demographic transition, declining fertility was controlled by immense emotional and economic investment in the child, while the rationale for SDT was the adult self-awareness in the position of parent. and an accomplished and satisfied adult. Believing that this change was supported by the invention of highly effective contraception. During the first transition, couples used contraception to avoid pregnancy. In comparison, the fundamental decision throughout SDT was to stop the use of contraception for reproductive purposes. Lesthaeghe (2010) also discussed various contrasts between the first and second transitions in order to defend SDT. First, marriage regimes, describing how in Western Europe the trend towards late marriage deteriorated due to the evolution of wage employment, with a fundamental movement towards earlier marriage, which persisted until the mid-1960s, meaning the lowest average ages at first marriage since the Renaissance in the mid-20th century. In comparison, after 1965, the age at marriage began to increase, but due to cohabitation before marriage, leaving home later and living alone, a considerable number of already married people began to decline . The SDT also highlighted the increase in cohabitation after marriage and procreation within cohabitation. Other contrasts in marriage included divorce and remarriage. During the first transition, there was rigorous divorce legislation with an emphasis on strengthening marriage and family, so divorce rates during this period were low. In comparison, the SDT found an increase in divorce rates, seen as a challenge to the moral order of church and state (Lesthaeghe, 2010). A final comparison of marriage was that of remarriage, comparing the fact that during the first transition, remarriage only occurred for widows and widowers. However, thanks to SDT, cohabitation and other living arrangements, including living alone together (LAT), are favored over remarriage. From there, I will explore singleness and the trends and reasons why individuals live alone. Over the past 30 years we have seen a substantial increase in the number of people living alone in the UK, with the percentage of single-person households almost doubling between 1971 and 2000. Roseneil and Budgeon (2004) state that “the heterosexual couple, and in particular the married and cohabiting heterosexual couple with children, no longer occupies the center of societiesWestern societies and cannot be taken for granted as the basic unit of society. Roseneil and Budgeon (2004) continue to examine the various reasons for this situation, including how, over the past 30 years, increases in divorce, increases in non-marital births, births to single mothers, proportion of single-parent families, the increasing number of single-person households and the increasing number of women deciding not to have children have all contributed to changing postmodern living conditions. With recent changes in living and relationship trends, the meaning of singleness has also changed. It is now common to refer to someone as "bachelor" rather than as a "spinster" or "bachelor". This perception has also been subject to recent changes during the 19th century. Women were characterized by marriage and motherhood. An unmarried woman tended to be known as an unmarried daughter, sister, or aunt. The perception of single women began to advance when women began to enter the workforce through paid employment, and there was an increase in educational opportunities for women. As a result, women became more independent by choosing to delay marriage, and with the divorce rate increasing, they chose to live alone. However, single women are still portrayed negatively, with people believing they need something more. Reynolds et al (2007) argue that single women experience a degree of stigma, are marginalized due to their individualism and are often portrayed as being outside conventional relationships or family structures, arguing that traditional family structures continue to be representative of the widespread culture. in the West. Research undertaken by Macvarish (2006) suggests that for women aged 34 to 50, singlehood is more difficult than modern descriptions tend to indicate. Modern descriptions of single life imply that individuals are freed from the responsibilities or demands of a relationship or motherhood. However, the research participants felt that this was not an accurate representation and that there was an ambiguity between autonomy of responsibility and the fear of not having the possibility of leaving celibacy or to enter maternity ward. The majority of women in the study suggested that although they felt content living alone, it was not what they wanted for the future. Recent statistics from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) show that in the UK there were 7.6 million people living alone in 2012, of which 4.2 million were aged 16 to 64, with the largest number being men. This could be explained by the fact that more men than women remain single. However, for those aged over 65 and residing alone, the majority were women, this could be due to the fact that women predominantly marry older men and also have a longer life expectancy. In relation to single individuals who may decide to cohabit, cohabitation is the term given to unmarried couples in a sexual relationship who reside together. In contemporary societies, cohabitation outside of marriage has become more prevalent, with large numbers of people having cohabited at some point in their lives. Due to the heterogeneity of cohabiting couples, the various cohabitation classifications cohabit, albeit to different degrees. There are two variations of cohabitation,first, cohabitation as a substitute for marriage, in which individuals abandon marriage as an institution and therefore decide to cohabit. Second, in the case of premarital cohabitation, cohabitation is considered preliminary before marriage, subsequently successful relationships will evolve into marriage, while unsuccessful relationships will dissolve. The prevalence of cohabitation saw considerable growth beginning in the late 1980s. According to the General Household Survey (GHS), more than fifty percent of couples cohabited before marriage, hence living together before marriage. Marriage has now become a majority practice. Between 2004 and 2007, cohabiting unions lasted an average of four years before first marriage, more than double that of cohabiting unions in the early 1980s. Beaujouan Ni Bhrolcháin (2014) indicates that life stages were delayed : between 2004 and 2007, first marriages were postponed for five years. years, compared to first marriages between 1980 and 1984. They also claim that due to the increase in births outside marriage, first marriages are on average later than the first birth. The GHS estimates that between 2000 and 2007, around 30% of women who had their first child were in a common-law relationship, an increase of 24%. % compared to 1980-1984. Following the modern rise in cohabitation and the increase in births within cohabiting unions, there has also been a visible change in people's attitudes towards parenthood and marriage. Reports from the British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) show that in 1987, 70% of individuals believed that marriage should precede parenthood, up from 54% in 2000. However, these figures change with age. , for example, people aged 65 and over tend to agree that marriage should proceed with the birth of a child, while those aged 18 to 24 only 53% agree. agreement. Couples who have a child through cohabitation are less likely to marry than those who cohabit in a common-law union. not have children. According to the British Household Panel Study (BHPS), women whose first birth took place in cohabitation are 67% less likely to end cohabitation through marriage than women without children. Morgan (2000) states that for cohabiting people with limited education or who are subject to financial difficulties, the probability of having a child while cohabiting is higher than that of more educated couples. . Additionally, couples with higher education are more likely to progress their cohabiting union toward marriage, compared to those with limited education. The move from cohabitation to marriage is said to be linked to the economic status of the couple: cohabiting couples where one or both is unemployed are more likely to dissolve their relationship, while cohabiting unions where one or both two of the individuals are employed would likely progress. at the wedding. To build on this, I will discuss wedding trends. Over the past quarter century, marriages have declined. Wilson and Smallwood (2007) claim that following individuals' decisions to delay marriage or cohabit, marriage rates in the UK have fallen by more than 30%. When studying marriage trends and marriage rates, Wilson and Small (2007) also look at population statistics and state that in 1851 more than 150,000 marriages took place, but that 5.5 million people of more than 15 years have remained single, divorced, or widowed. In comparison,..