Mon compte

connexion

inscription

   Publicité R▼


 » 
allemand anglais arabe bulgare chinois coréen croate danois espagnol espéranto estonien finnois français grec hébreu hindi hongrois islandais indonésien italien japonais letton lituanien malgache néerlandais norvégien persan polonais portugais roumain russe serbe slovaque slovène suédois tchèque thai turc vietnamien
allemand anglais arabe bulgare chinois coréen croate danois espagnol espéranto estonien finnois français grec hébreu hindi hongrois islandais indonésien italien japonais letton lituanien malgache néerlandais norvégien persan polonais portugais roumain russe serbe slovaque slovène suédois tchèque thai turc vietnamien

Significations et usages de Cohabitation

Définition

cohabitation (n.)

1.the act of living together and having a sexual relationship (especially without being married)

   Publicité ▼

Merriam Webster

CohabitationCo*hab"i*ta"tion (?), n. [L. cohabitatio.]
1. The act or state of dwelling together, or in the same place with another. Feltham.

2. (Law) The living together of a man and woman in supposed sexual relationship.

That the duty of cohabitation is released by the cruelty of one of the parties is admitted. Lord Stowell.

   Publicité ▼

Définition (complément)

⇨ voir la définition de Wikipedia

Voir aussi

cohabitation (n.)

cohabit, live, live together, shack up

Locutions

Dictionnaire analogique

Wikipedia

Cohabitation

                   

Cohabitation is an arrangement where two people who are not married live together in an intimate relationship, particularly an emotionally and/or sexually intimate one, on a long-term or permanent basis.

More broadly, the term cohabitation can mean any number of people living together.

Contents

  Reasons for cohabitation

Today, cohabitation is a common pattern among people in the Western world. More than two-thirds of married couples in the US say that they lived together before getting married.[1] "In 1994, there were 3.7 million cohabiting couples in the United States."[2] This is a far cry from a few decades ago. Before 1970, cohabitation was illegal in the United States.[3] According to Dr. Galena Rhoades, "Before 1970, living together outside of marriage was uncommon, but by the late 1990s at least 50% to 60% of couples lived together premaritally.[4] According to the U.S. Census, "the number of unmarried couples living together increased tenfold from 1960 to 2000." [5] Nowadays, it is seen as a normal step in the dating process.[6] In fact, "cohabitation is increasingly becoming the first coresidential union formed among young adults." [7] People may live together for a number of reasons. Cohabitants could live together in order to save money, because of the convenience of living with another, or a need to find housing.[6] Many researchers contend that one of the biggest reasons for cohabitation is that couples no longer believe in marriage. However, when given a survey of the reasons why they cohabitate most couples listed reasons such as spending more time together, convenience based reasons, and testing their relationships, while few gave the reason that they do not believe in marriage.[8] The extremely high costs of housing and tight budgets of todays economy are a also factors that can lead a couple to cohabitation.[5] Today sixty percent of all marriages are preceded by a period of cohabitation.[9] Researchers suggest that couples live together as a way of trying out marriage to test compatibility with their partners, while still having the option of ending the relationship without legal implications. "More than three quarters of all cohabitators report plans to marry their partners, which implies that most of them view cohabitation as a prelude to marriage.[10] Cohabitation shares many qualities with marriage, often couples who are cohabitating share a residence, personal resources, exclude intimate relations with others and, in more than 10% of cohabitating couples, have children.[11] "Many young adults believe cohabitation is a good way to test their relationships prior to marriage.[12] Couples who have plans to marry before moving in together or who are engaged before cohabiting typically marry within two years of living together.[13] "About 10% of cohabiting unions last more than five years." [14] According to a survey done by The National Center for Health Statistics, "over half of marriages from 1990-1994 among women began as cohabitation.[15]

Cohabitation can be an alternative to marriage in situations where marriage is not able to happen for financial or other reasons, such as same-sex, some interracial or interreligious marriages.[13] Other reasons might include cohabitation as a way for polygamists or polyamorists to avoid breaking the law, a way to avoid the higher income taxes paid by some two-income married couples (in the United States), negative effects on pension payments (among older people), or philosophical opposition to the institution of marriage (that is, seeing little difference between the commitment to live together and the commitment to marriage).

Cohabitation, sometimes called de facto marriage, is becoming more commonly known as a substitute for conventional marriage.[16] In some states which recognize it, cohabitation can be viewed legally as common-law marriages, either after the duration of a specified period, or if the couple consider and behave accordingly as husband and wife.[17] (This helps provide the surviving partner a legal basis for inheriting the deceased's belongings in the event of the death of their cohabiting partner). In today's cohabiting relationships, forty percent of households include children, giving us an idea of how cohabitation could be considered a new normative type of family dynamic.[9]

  Contemporary objections to cohabitation before marriage

There has been a documented increase in the number of cohabiting couples in the last fifty years. In 1960, there were there were approximately 450,000 couples cohabiting in the United States; by 2011, the number had increased to 7.5million.[18]Because of the dramatic increase in the number of cohabiting couples, there are fewer objections to this kind of relationship than there were in the 1960’s. Contemporary objections to cohabiting couples center around three primary topics; religion, social pressure, and the effect of cohabitation on a child’s development.

Religious reasons are a primary factor cited by people for the opposition of cohabitation. All three major world religions Christianity, Judaism, and Islam have stances of opposition to cohabitation.[19] [20] [21] These religious groups agree that cohabitation before marriage is a violation of their moral beliefs on the sanctity of a sexual relationship between a man and a women outside of marriage. “Pre-marital, extra-marital and same-sex relationships are all forbidden in Islam.”[22] While most members of these groups don’t adhere to the strict nature of their religious organization’s belief on cohabitation, the pressure from other members of the group or religious authorities lead to a drop in cohabitation. Pope John Paul II felt that, “de facto free unions, i.e., those unions without any publicly recognized institutional bond, are an increasing concern.”[23] As for the Jewish perspective, “For example, normative Judaism forcefully rejects the claim that never marrying is an equally valid lifestyle to marriage. Judaism states that a life without marrying is a less holy, less complete, and a less Jewish life.” [24]

Religion can also lead to societal pressures against cohabitation especially within large Evangelical Christian communities. [25] “Researchers have posited many ideas about why cohabitation has increased in the United States and how the beliefs or opinions of others might affect one’s decision to cohabit. Some have noted that a decline in religious authority and changes in religious structures have accompanied the rise in cohabitation.” [26] In addition to Religious pressures, there are familial pressures that prevent cohabitation. Young adults that grew up in families that oppose cohabitation have lower rates than their peers.[27]

Finally, there has been an increase in the research performed on the relationship between cohabitation and its effect on child development.[28] People have opposed cohabitation because they believed that it led to an unstable environment for a child’s development. Some Studies have shown a decrease in math skills and an increase in delinquency among children of cohabiting couples. [29] However, when other environmental influences like poverty, low education of the parent, and violence in the home are controlled; children of cohabiting couples are developmentally similar to their peers from a two parent family. [30]

  Effects on marriage and family life

  Likelihood of split

Conflicting studies on the effect of cohabitation on marriage have been published. But over the years, evidence indicating cohabiting increases the likelihood of split has always been more prevalent than evidence that it is helpful.

For married couples the percentage of the relationship ending after 5 years is 20%, for cohabitators the percentage is 49%. After 10 years the percentage for the relationship to end is 33% for married couples and 62% for cohabitators. [31]

A scientific survey, conducted by researchers at Denver University, of over 1,000 married men and women in the United States of America found those who moved in with a lover before engagement or marriage reported significantly lower quality marriages and a greater possibility of a separation than other couples. About 20 percent of those who cohabited before getting engaged had since suggested splitting - compared with only 12 percent of those who only moved in together after getting engaged and 10 percent who did not cohabit prior to marriage.[32]

Psychologist Dr. Galena Rhoades said: "There might be a subset of people who live together before they got engaged who might have decided to get married really based on other things in their relationship - because they were already living together and less because they really wanted and had decided they wanted a future together. We think some couples who move in together without a clear commitment to marriage may wind up sliding into marriage partly because they are already cohabiting.".[32] Many cohabiting couples may also end up getting married due to pressure from their parents.[original research?]

There is a term for this used by those who research this area; "sliding, not deciding." It means that a couple slowly slides into cohabitation instead of making a clear, conscious decision to move in together and take the next step in their relationship. One partner may stay overnight on occasion, then it becomes a regular occurrence, and then the two decide it makes more sense to save money and only pay rent on one residence instead of two when only one is being occupied full time. Moving in together to save money or for convenience, or any other reason similar to these is not a sign of a healthy relationship. If the decision is not properly discussed, men and women may view moving in together in different ways. Women most often view it as a step towards marriage, while most men view it as a test for the relationship or a way to postpone commitment. When a couple views marriage as the next step and goes for it without reevaluating the relationship and making sure they are getting married for the right reasons, or because they have put so much time and resources into it already and it would be harder to break up, then the marriage will most likely not be successful.[33] [34]

  Effect on children

The parenting role of cohabiting partners could have a negative effect on the child. The partner that is not the parent, usually the father, does not have "explicit legal, financial, supervisory or custodial rights or responsibilities regarding the children of his partner" says Waite.[35] This can cause an unstable living arrangement for the child and can cause the child to act out in a certain way because the mother or father's partner is "not their real parent."

In 2001, research was done on the effects of living in a cohabiting household versus a single-parent household on teenagers. The results showed that White teenagers fare worse living in a cohabiting household than living in a single parent household. They tend to do worse in school, are more likely to get suspended or expelled, and have just as many behavioral and emotional problems as those living with a single-parent. The impact for Hispanic teens is just as dramatic and the impact for Black teens is less noticeable.[36]

  Abuse and infidelity

A University of Chicago researcher Linda Waite [35] Professor in Sociology, states " 16 percent of cohabiting women reported that arguments with their partners became physical during the past year, while only 5 percent of married women had similar experiences." Most cohabiting couples have a faithful relationship but Waite's surveys also showed that 20 percent of cohabiting women reported they had secondary sex partners, compared to only 4 percent of married women reported the same.

According to an article by Judith Treas and Deirdre Giesen, cohabiting couples are twice as likely to experience infidelity within the relationship than married couples.[37] The institute of marriage is viewed by many as a highly regarded form of commitment. Living together without being married may be a commitment, but does not have the same sense of finality as marriage.

  Financial effects

Senate GOP leader Trent Lott decided[when?] to pull a bill to abolish "the [[marriage penalty," "which in the tax code reflects the fact that married couples who both work for wages frequently pay more in taxes then if they earned the same amount of income but weren't married. And the more equal the incomes of the couple, the steeper the marriage tax penalty." [38] The Earned income tax credit (EITC) is a wage supplement for low-income workers, but the problem is the EITC is not for married couples because they have to combine their wages, which again leads to "the marriage penalty." If couples do not get married then their wages do not have to combine and the EITC in a way is "paying for" low-income couples not to marry. In other words low-income couples chose not to marry because they need to combine their wages which leads to the EITC taking more of their income.[38]

  Other effects

Couples who cohabit are more likely to have a poorer financial picture because one partner is less likely to support the other partner financially since they are not legally married and the one partner is not obligated to. There has been questioning about people who cohabit living a shorter life because their partner is not going to remind them about doctor's appointments or speak up about unhealthy behaviors or risks. Also unmarried men and women are more likely to commit a crime compared to married men and women. Male cohabitators are less likely to be a part of the childcare but half the time they are responsible for child abuse. Lastly, couples who cohabit are more likely to cheat on their partner, which leads to a high percentage of getting a sexual transmitted disease. [39]

  No effect

A conflicting study, published by the National Center for Health Statistics, with a sample of 12,571 people, concludes that those "who live together before marriage and those who don't both have about the same chances of a successful union".[40]

  Cohabitation by region

  Americas

In America in 2007, it is estimated that 16.4 million households were maintained by two opposite sex persons who said they were unmarried. [41]

  • In Mexico, 18.7% of couples were cohabiting as of 2005.[42] Ley de sociedad de convivencia: the Spanish name for "Cohabitation Societies Law", legislation created on November 9, 2006, by the Legislation Assembly of Mexico City to establish legal rights and duties for all those cases where two people (due to either sexual, familial or friendly reasons) are living together.
  • Cohabitation in the United States became common in the late 20th century. As of 2005, 4.85 million unmarried couples were living together, and as of 2002, about half of all women aged 15 to 44 had lived unmarried with a partner. Seven states still have anti-cohabitation laws on the books, but they are almost never enforced and are now believed to be unconstitutional since the legal decision Lawrence v. Texas in 2003.[43]
  • "Cohabition was almost impossible in the United States prior to the 1960s. Laws prevented unmarried couples from registering in hotels and it was very difficult for an unmarried couple to obtain a home mortgage. From 1960 to 1998, cohabition moved from disreputable and difficult to normal and convenient." PBS: Social disruptions

During the year of 1999, cohabitors among those aged 35 to 54, those who are divorced or separated, black and Hispanic men, and most especially among those with children.[44]

the 2009 American Community Survey conducted by the Census Bureau, the proportion of 30-to-44-year-olds living together has almost doubled since 1999, from 4% to 7%. Fifty-eight percent of women aged 19 to 44 had ever cohabited in data collected in 2006-08, while in 1987 only 33% had. Cohabitation is much more prevalent among those with less education. “Among women ages 19 to 44, 73% of those without a high school education have ever cohabited, compared with about half of women with some college (52%) or a college degree (47%),” note the Pew study’s authors, Richard Fry and D’Vera Cohn. [45]

  Asia

  • In Bangladesh cohabitation after divorce is frequently punished by the salishi system of informal courts, especially in rural areas.[46]
  • Cohabitation in India had been taboo since British rule. However, this is no longer true in large cities, but is not often found in rural areas which are more conservative. Live-in relationships are legal in India. Recent Indian court rulings have ascribed some rights to long term cohabiting partners. Female live-in partners have economic rights under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 subject to following conditions as laid by Honourable Supreme Court of India in case of D. Velusamy v D. Patchaiammal:

(a) The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses. (b) They must be of legal age to marry. (c) They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being unmarried. (d) They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time.

  • In Indonesia, an Islamic penal code proposed in 2005 would have made cohabitation punishable by up to two years in prison.[47] The practice is still frowned upon, and many hotels and boarding houses have been raided by police for allowed unmarried couples to share a room.
  • In Japan, according to M. Iwasawa at the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, less than 3% of females between 25-29 are currently cohabiting, but more than 1 in 5 have had some experience of an unmarried partnership, including cohabitation. A more recent Iwasawa study has shown that there has been a recent emergence of non-marital cohabitation. Couples born in the 1950s cohort showed an incidence of cohabitation of 11.8%, where the 1960s and 1970s cohorts showed cohabitation rates of 30%, and 53.9% respectively. The split between urban and rural residence for people who had cohabited is indicates 68.8% were urban and 31.2% were rural.[48]
  • In the Philippines, around 2.4 million Filipinos were cohabiting as of 2004. The 2000 census placed the percentage of cohabiting couples at 19%. The majority of individuals are between the ages of 20-24. Poverty was often the main factor in decision to cohabit.[49]

  Europe

  • In Bulgaria, cohabitation is very common; 53.4% of all children born in 2009 were into families of unmarried couples.[50]
  • Sweden, 56% of babies are born to people who are not married.[51]
  • France, 48% of babies are born to people who are not married.[51]
  • Britain, 42% of babies are born to people who are not married.[51]
  • In late 2005, 21% of families in Finland consisted of cohabitating couples (all age groups). Of couples with children, 18% were cohabitating.[52] Of ages 18 and above in 2003, 13.4% were cohabitating.[53] Generally, cohabitation amongst Finns is most common for people under 30. Legal obstacles for cohabitation were removed in 1926 in a reform of the Criminal Code, while the phenomenon was socially accepted much later on.
  • In the UK, 25%[citation needed]of children are now born to cohabiting parents.
  • In France, 17.5% of couples were cohabiting as of 1999.[42]

  Middle East

  • The cohabitation rate in Israel is less than 3% of all couples, compared to 8%, on average, in West European countries.[54] As of 1994, the rate of premarital cohabitation in Israel was 25%.[55]
  • Cohabitation is illegal according to sharia law (for the countries that enforce it)[56][57]

Aside from the law, cohabiting remains very much taboo across the region. Nevertheless, the issue of cohabitation of unmarried couples has featured in some Tunisian movies, such as Les Silences du Palais (1994)

  Oceania

In America, in 2003, 22.5% of couples were cohabiting.

  Hungary

The literature on second demographic transition argues as well that highly educated women are more prone to engage in cohabitation, although the reasons are different: they are less concerned with respecting the societal norms.[59] Some scholars argued that cohabitation is very similar to being single in the sense of not giving up independence and personal autonomy. [60]

In Hungary, cohabitation was an uncommon phenomenon until the late 1980s and it was largely confined to the divorced or widowed individuals. [61] Among the ethnic groups, Gypsy/Rroma tended to have higher rates of cohabitation, mainly due to their reluctance to register their marriages officially. [62] Since the 1980s, cohabitation became much more frequent among all ethnic groups and it has been argued to have strongly influenced the decline in fertility. [63]

  See also

  References

  1. ^ "Cohabitation is replacing dating", "USA Today", 7/18/2005
  2. ^ Brown, S.L., & Booth, A.(1996). Cohabitation versus marriage: A comparison of relationship quality.Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(3), 668-678.
  3. ^ "No Wedding? No Ring? No Problem.". U.S. News and World Report 128: 48. 2000. 
  4. ^ Rhoades, G.K., Stanley, S.M., & Markman, H.J.(2012). A longitudinal investigation of commitment dynamics in cohabitating relationships.Journal of Family Issues, 33(3), 369-390.
  5. ^ a b Jayson, S.(2005, July). Cohabitation is replacing dating.USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/2005-07-17-cohabitation_x.htm
  6. ^ a b Kramer, Elise (September/October 2004). "Cohabitation: Just a Phase?". Psychology Today 37: 28. 
  7. ^ Goodwin, P.Y., Mosher, W.D., & Chandra, A.(2010). Marriage and cohabitation in the United States: A statistical portrait based on Cycle 6 (2002) of the National Survey of Family Growth (National Center for Health Statistics).Vital Health Statistics, 23, 1-55.
  8. ^ Rhoades, G.K., Stanley, S.M., & Markman, H.J.(2009a).Couples' reasons for cohabitation: Association with individual well being and relationship quality.Journal of Family Issues, 30, 233-258.
  9. ^ a b "Cohabitation". ForYourMarriage.org. http://foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/church-teachings/cohabitation/. Retrieved March 16, 2012. 
  10. ^ Brown, S.L., & Booth, A.(1996).Cohabitation versus marriage: A comparison of relationship quality.Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(3), 668-678.
  11. ^ Brown, S.L., & Booth, A.(1996).Cohabitation versus marriage:A comparison of relationship quality.Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(3), 668-678.
  12. ^ Rhoades, G.K., Stanley, S.M., & Markman, H.J.(2009a).Couples' reasons for cohabitation:Associations with individual well being and relationship quality.Journal of Family Issues, 30, 233-258.
  13. ^ a b Murrow, Carrie; Lin Shi (2010). "The Influence of Cohabitation Purposes on Relationship Quality: An Examination in Dimensions". The American Journal of Family Therapy 38: 397–412. DOI:10.1080/01/01926187.2010.513916. 
  14. ^ Brown, S.L., & Booth, A.(1996).Cohabitation versus marriage:A comparison of relationships quality.Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(3), 668-678.
  15. ^ Goodwin, P.Y., Mosher, W.D., & Chandra, A.(2010).Marriage and cohabitation in the United States:A statistical portrait based on Cycle 6 (2002) of the National Survey of Family Growth (National Center for Health Statistics).Vital Health Statistics, 23, 1-55.
  16. ^ "Cohabitation - Trends and Patterns, Reasons For Cohabitation, Meanings Of Cohabitation, Consequences of Cohabitation, Conclusion". Net Industries. http://family.jrank.org/pages/279/Cohabitation.html. Retrieved March 16, 2012. 
  17. ^ Solot, Dorian. "Common Law Marriage Fact Sheet". unmarried.com. http://www.unmarried.org/common-law-marriage-fact-sheet.html. Retrieved March 16, 2012. 
  18. ^ Jay, M (4/15/2012). "The Downside of Cohabitation Before Marriage". New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/opinion/sunday. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  19. ^ Halstead, J (1997). "Muslims and Sex Education". Journal of Moral Education 26 (3): 317-331. http://ebscohost.con. Retrieved 4/22/12. 
  20. ^ United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Marriage Preperation and Cohabitating Couples". United States Catholic Conference Inc.. http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/marriage-preparation/cohabiting.cfm. Retrieved 4/22/21012. 
  21. ^ Prager, D. "Judaism's sexual revolution: Why judaism (and then christianity) rejected homosexuality". Orthodoxy Today. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/PragerHomosexuality.php. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  22. ^ Halstead, J (1997). "Muslims and Sex Education". Journal of Moral Education 26 (3): 317-331. http://ebscohost.com. Retrieved 4/22/12. 
  23. ^ United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Marriage Preperation and Cohabitating Couples". United States Catholic Conference Inc.. http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/marriage-preparation/cohabiting.cfm. Retrieved 4/22/12. 
  24. ^ Prager, D. "Judaism's sexual revolution: Why judaism (and then christianity) rejected homosexuality". Orthodoxy Today. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/PragerHomosexuality.php. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  25. ^ Thorton, A; Axinn, W. (1992). "Reciprocal effects of religiousity, cohabitation, and marriage". American Journal of Sociology 98 (3): 628-651. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781460. 
  26. ^ Thornton, A; Axinn, W. (1993). "Reciprocal effects of religiousity, cohabitation, and marriage". American Journal of Sociology 98 (3): 628-651. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781460. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  27. ^ Newman, B (2011). Development Through Life: A Psychosocial Approach. Wadsworth. ISBN 1-111-34466-3. 
  28. ^ Dunifon, R; Kowaleski-Jones, L (2002). "Who's in the house? race differences in cohabitation, single-parenthood, and child development". Child Development 73 (4). http://ebscohost.com. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  29. ^ Dunifon, R; Kowaleski-Jones, L. (2002). "Who's in the house? race differences in cohabitation, single-parenthood, and child development". Child Development 73 (4): 1249-1264. http://ebscohost.com. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  30. ^ Coontz, S. (8/30/2011). "Cohabitation Doesn't Cause Bad Parenting". New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/opinion. Retrieved 4/22/2012. 
  31. ^ Cohabitating and Domestic Partnership." PsychPage | …perspectives on psychology in daily life. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.psychpage.com/family/mod_couples_thx/cohabitation.html
  32. ^ a b "Couples who live together before marriage more likely to get divorced". The Daily Telegraph (London). 2009-07-16. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5840263/Couples-who-live-together-before-marriage-more-likely-to-get-divorced.html. 
  33. ^ Jay, Meg (April 14, 2012). "The Downside of Cohabiting Before Marriage". New York Times. 
  34. ^ Jayson, Sharon (July 18, 2005). "Cohabitation is Replacing Dating". USA Today- Lifestyle. 
  35. ^ a b Harms, W. (2000, March) The University of Chicago Chronicle: Research Looks At Cohabitation's Negative Effects. Vol. 19. No. 11. http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/000302/cohabit.shtml
  36. ^ Nelson, Sandi; Rebecca L. Clark, Gregory Acs (May 2001). "Beyond the Two-Parent Family: How Teenagers Fare in Cohabitating Couple and Blended Families". Urban Institute. New Federalism: National Survey of America's Families (B-31). http://www.urban.org/publications/310339.html. Retrieved 20 April 2012. 
  37. ^ "Sexual Infidelity Among Married and Cohabiting Americans". Journal of Marriage and the Family 62 (1): 48-60. February 2000. 
  38. ^ a b Horn, W. (1998, October) Government Punishes Marriage, Pushes Cohabitation.Institute for American Values. Retrieved from: http://www.americanvalues.org/html/mp8.html
  39. ^ Cohabitating and Domestic Partnership." PsychPage | …perspectives on psychology in daily life. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.psychpage.com/family/mod_couples_thx/cohabitation.html
  40. ^ Jayson, Sharon (October 14, 2010). "Report: Cohabiting has little effect on marriage success" USA Today. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-03-02-cohabiting02_N.htm>
  41. ^ Cherlin, Andrew (2010). Public and Private Families. New York: McGraw Hill. pp. 227. ISBN 978-0-07-340435-6. 
  42. ^ a b c Anne-Marie Ambert: Cohabitation and Marriage: How Are They Related?. The Vanier Institute of the Family, Fall 2005)
  43. ^ http://www.sullivan-county.com/bush/7_states.htm
  44. ^ Casper, L. Cohen, P. & Simmons, T. (1999, May). "HOW DOES POSSLQ MEASURE UP? Historical Estimates of Cohabitation." Census Bureau Homepage. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0036/twps0036.html
  45. ^ Luscombe, B. (2011, June). More Americans Are Cohabiting, But the Benefits of Living Together Apply Mainly to the Wealthier, More Educated. A healthy balance of the mind, body and spirit. Retrieved March 21, 2012, from http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/27/the-strange-economics-of-living-together/
  46. ^ Women and Islam in Bangladesh By Taj ul-Islam Hashmi, page 112
  47. ^ "Indonesia plans new morality laws". BBC News. 2005-02-06. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/world/asia-pacific/4239177.stm. Retrieved 2010-03-28. 
  48. ^ http://paa2006.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=61321
  49. ^ :: GMA News.TV ::
  50. ^ [1] based on the official statistics of the National Statistic institute of Bulgaria(Bulgarian)
  51. ^ a b c Sember, Brette. "Unmarried With Children". http://unmarriedwithchildren.net/. Retrieved 1 December 2011. 
  52. ^ The Finnish population structure of 2005 at Statistics Finland (Finnish/Swedish)
  53. ^ Elected MPs and candidates by family type in 2003 at Statistics Finland (English)
  54. ^ [2]
  55. ^ Kaplan, Amit. 2002. The roads of freedom: cohabitation patterns in Israel. M. A. Thesis, Tel-Aviv University (in Hebrew)
  56. ^ See commentary on verses [Quran 23:1]: Vol. 3, notes 7-1, p. 241; 2000, Islamic Publications
  57. ^ Tafsir ibn Kathir 4:24
  58. ^ Australian Bureau of Statistics
  59. ^ Lesthaeghe. R, ( 1983), A Century of Demographic and Cultural Change in Westem Europe: an Exploration of Underlying Dimensions. Population and Development Review. 9(3), 411-435.
  60. ^ Rindfuss, R.R, and van del Heuve!, A. ( 1990). Cohabitation: A precursor to marriage or an altemative to being single? Population and Development Review, 16. 703-726.
  61. ^ Carlson E. & KJingerA. (1987), Partners in life: Unmarried couples \nHnx\^ziy. European Joumal of Population, 3, 85-99
  62. ^ Barany. Zoltan. (2002). The East European Gypsies.Regime Change. Margmality, and Ethnopolitics. Cambridge: University Press
  63. ^ Speder. Z. (2001). "Turning Points of the Life Course." Retrieved on 07/01/2007 from http:// www.dpa.demografia.hu

  External links

   
               

 

Toutes les traductions de Cohabitation


Contenu de sensagent

  • définitions
  • synonymes
  • antonymes
  • encyclopédie

dictionnaire et traducteur pour sites web

Alexandria

Une fenêtre (pop-into) d'information (contenu principal de Sensagent) est invoquée un double-clic sur n'importe quel mot de votre page web. LA fenêtre fournit des explications et des traductions contextuelles, c'est-à-dire sans obliger votre visiteur à quitter votre page web !

Essayer ici, télécharger le code;

SensagentBox

Avec la boîte de recherches Sensagent, les visiteurs de votre site peuvent également accéder à une information de référence pertinente parmi plus de 5 millions de pages web indexées sur Sensagent.com. Vous pouvez Choisir la taille qui convient le mieux à votre site et adapter la charte graphique.

Solution commerce électronique

Augmenter le contenu de votre site

Ajouter de nouveaux contenus Add à votre site depuis Sensagent par XML.

Parcourir les produits et les annonces

Obtenir des informations en XML pour filtrer le meilleur contenu.

Indexer des images et définir des méta-données

Fixer la signification de chaque méta-donnée (multilingue).


Renseignements suite à un email de description de votre projet.

Jeux de lettres

Les jeux de lettre français sont :
○   Anagrammes
○   jokers, mots-croisés
○   Lettris
○   Boggle.

Lettris

Lettris est un jeu de lettres gravitationnelles proche de Tetris. Chaque lettre qui apparaît descend ; il faut placer les lettres de telle manière que des mots se forment (gauche, droit, haut et bas) et que de la place soit libérée.

boggle

Il s'agit en 3 minutes de trouver le plus grand nombre de mots possibles de trois lettres et plus dans une grille de 16 lettres. Il est aussi possible de jouer avec la grille de 25 cases. Les lettres doivent être adjacentes et les mots les plus longs sont les meilleurs. Participer au concours et enregistrer votre nom dans la liste de meilleurs joueurs ! Jouer

Dictionnaire de la langue française
Principales Références

La plupart des définitions du français sont proposées par SenseGates et comportent un approfondissement avec Littré et plusieurs auteurs techniques spécialisés.
Le dictionnaire des synonymes est surtout dérivé du dictionnaire intégral (TID).
L'encyclopédie française bénéficie de la licence Wikipedia (GNU).

Copyright

Les jeux de lettres anagramme, mot-croisé, joker, Lettris et Boggle sont proposés par Memodata.
Le service web Alexandria est motorisé par Memodata pour faciliter les recherches sur Ebay.
La SensagentBox est offerte par sensAgent.

Traduction

Changer la langue cible pour obtenir des traductions.
Astuce: parcourir les champs sémantiques du dictionnaire analogique en plusieurs langues pour mieux apprendre avec sensagent.

 

4266 visiteurs en ligne

calculé en 0,047s


Je voudrais signaler :
section :
une faute d'orthographe ou de grammaire
un contenu abusif (raciste, pornographique, diffamatoire)
une violation de copyright
une erreur
un manque
autre
merci de préciser :