The New Relationship: Living Apart, Together

Image result for Living Apart Together
According to Statistics Canada, approximately 1.9 million Canadians aged 20 and over were in a
Living Apart Together (LAT) arrangement in 2011. It’s not a huge number, but it is growing in
one category—the 60-plus—where it jumped from 1.8 per cent to 2.3 per cent from 2001-11.
  
Older adults embracing 'living apart, together'

Since 1990, the divorce rate among adults 50 years and older has doubled. This trend, along with longer life expectancy, has resulted in many adults forming new partnerships later in life. A new phenomenon called 'Living Apart Together' (LAT)--an intimate relationship without a shared residence--is gaining popularity as an alternative form of commitment. Researchers say that while the trend is well understood in Europe, it is lesser known in the U.S. This means that challenges, such as how LAT partners can engage in family caregiving or decision-making, could affect family needs.

“What has long been understood about late-in-life relationships is largely based on long-term marriage,” said Jacquelyn Benson, assistant professor in the College of Human Environmental Sciences. “There are now more divorced and widowed adults who are interested in forging new intimate relationships outside the confines of marriage. Recent research demonstrates that there are other ways of establishing long-lasting, high-quality relationships without committing to marriage or living together. However, U.S. society has yet to recognize LAT as a legitimate choice. If more people—young and old, married or not—saw LAT as an option, it might save them from a lot of future heartache.”

Benson and Marilyn Coleman, Curators Professor of Human Development and Family Science, interviewed adults who were at least 60 years old and in committed relationships but lived apart. The researchers found that couples were motivated by desires to stay independent, maintain their own homes, sustain existing family boundaries, and remain financially independent. Couples expressed challenges defining their relationships or choosing terms to properly convey the nature of their relationships to others. For example, the majority considered traditional dating terms such as ‘boyfriend’ and ‘girlfriend’ to be awkward terms to use at their ages.

“While we are learning more about LAT relationships, further research is needed to determine how LAT relationships are related to issues such as health care and caregiving,” Benson said. “Discussions about end-of-life planning and caregiving can be sensitive to talk about; however, LAT couples should make it a priority to have these conversations both as a couple and with their families. Many of us wait until a crisis to address those issues, but in situations like LAT where there are no socially prescribed norms dictating behavior these conversations may be more important than ever.”

Benson is seeking older adults from around the country in committed, monogamous relationships who are choosing to live apart (in a LAT relationship) or living together unmarried (cohabiting). Those willing to participate in her research can email loveafter60lab@missouri.edu. To find out more about Benson’s research, visit www.loveafter60lab.com.

“Older adults developing a preference for living apart together,” was published in the Journal of Marriage and Family. “Older adult descriptions of living apart together,” was published in Family Relations. Benson is the Missouri state specialist in gerontology for the College of Human Environmental Sciences Cooperative Extension.

Story Source:  Materials provided by University of Missouri Health.  Jacquelyn J. Benson, Marilyn Coleman. Older Adult Descriptions of Living Apart Together. Family Relations, 2016

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How the lives of Georgian gaolbirds and highwaymen shaped modern Britain

An unexpected way to recover from a breakup

Greek Bronze Age ended 100 years earlier than thought

Mood Instability and Your Characters

Remember faces but not names? You got it wrong.