Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 130, Issue 2, pp 799–817 | Cite as

A Life Course Perspective on Living Apart Together: Meaning and Incidence Across Europe

  • Inge Pasteels
  • Vicky Lyssens-Danneboom
  • Dimitri Mortelmans
Article

Abstract

The increased variability in family types and forms of relationships is the most apparent outcome of family change in recent decades in Europe. One relationship that has emerged and recently become more visible, both in society and in science, is a ‘nonresidential partnership’ termed living apart together (LAT). We explore the meaning and incidence of LAT partnerships across Europe using a life course perspective. Cluster analysis using five cluster variables (living independently from parents, never having lived as a couple before, the intention to cohabit in the future, the age of the respondents, and the duration of the relationship) was carried out on data from the Generations and Gender Survey for ten countries. Four types of non-residential partnership across Europe are revealed. From a measurement perspective, a simplified model provides empirical evidence that three indicators are sufficient to detect and situate LAT relationships on a partnership continuum: (1) having a nonresidential partner, (2) the age of the respondent, and (3) the duration of the LAT relationship. Classifying relationships with a non-resident partner can be carried out efficiently if information about the age of the respondent and the duration of the current LAT relationship is available.

Keywords

Living apart together Non-residential partnership Life course 

References

  1. Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K. (1984). Cluster analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlow, A., & James, G. (2004). Regulating marriage and cohabitation in 21st century Britain. The Modern Law Review, 67(2), 143–176. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2004.00482.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. (2002). Foreword: Individually, together. In U. Beck & E. Beck-Gernsheim (Eds.), Individualization. Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences (pp. XIV–XIX). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Beaujouan, E., Regnier-Loilier, A., & Villeneueve-Gokalp, C. (2009). Neither single, nor in a couple: A study of living apart together in France. Demographic Research, 21(4), 75–108. doi: 10.4054/demres.2009.21.4.Google Scholar
  5. Bernardi, L., & Oppo, A. (2009). Living apart together at parents home (LATAP): A mediterranean route to adulthood. XXVI IUSSP international population conference: Marrakesh.Google Scholar
  6. Borell, K., & Ghazanfareeon Karlsson, S. (2003). Reconceptualizing intimacy and ageing. Living apart together. In S. Arber, K. Davidson, & J. Ginn (Eds.), Gender and ageing: Changing roles and relationships. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Castro-Martín, T., Domínguez-Folgueras, M., & Martín-García, T. (2008). Not truly partnerless: Non-residential partnerships and retreat from marriage in Spain. Demographic Research, 18(16), 436–468. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2008.18.16.Google Scholar
  8. Cherlin, A. J. (1978). Remarriage as an incomplete institution. American Journal of Sociology, 84(3), 634–650. doi: 10.1086/226830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Graaf, A., & Loozen, S. (2004). Bijna 400 duizend personen kiezen voor een lat-relatie. In CBS (Ed.), Bevolkingstrends jaargang 52 (pp. 60–63). Heerlen/Voorburg: CBS.Google Scholar
  10. de Gierveld, J. (2004a). The dilemma of repartnering: Considerations of older men and women entering new initimate relationships in later life. In K. Davidson & G. Fennell (Eds.), Intimacy in later life (pp. 85–103). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. de Gierveld, J. (2004b). Remarriage, unmarried cohabitation, living apart together: Partner relationships following bereavement or divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(1), 236–243. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00015.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Gierveld, J., & Latten, J. (2008). Incidentie en Achtergronden van Transitionele en Duurzame Latrelaties. Bevolkingstrends, 3, 29–38.Google Scholar
  13. Duncan, S., & Phillips, M. (2010). People who live apart together (LATs)—How different are they? The Sociological Review, 58(1), 112–134. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954x.2009.01874.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elder, G. H. J., Johnson, M. K., & Crosoe, R. (2004). The emergence and development of life course theory. In J. T. Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the lifecourse (pp. 3–19). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Elder, G. H. J., & O’Rand, A. M. (1995). Adult lives in a changing society. In K. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 452–475). Boston: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  16. Ermisch, J., & Siedler, T. (2009). Living apart together. In J. Ermisch & M. Brynin (Eds.), Changing relationships. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Everitt, B. S. (1993). Cluster analysis (3rd ed.). London: Halsted Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ghazanfareeon Karlsson, S., & Borell, K. (2002). Intimacy and autonomy, gender and ageing. Ageing International, 27(4), 11–27. doi: 10.1007/s12126-002-1012-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghazanfareeon Karlsson, S., & Borell, K. (2005). A home of their own. Women’s boundary work in LAT-relationships. Journal of Aging Studies, 19(1), 73–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2004.03.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gecas, V. (2003). Self-agency and the life course. In J. Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 369–388). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar
  22. Hagestad, G. O. (1990). Social perspectives on the life course. In R. H. Binstock & A. L. George (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (pp. 151–168). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hagestad, G. O. (2003). Interdependent lives and relationships in changing times: A life-course of families and aging. In R. A. Settersten Jr (Ed.), Invitation to the life course: Towards new understandings of later life (pp. 135–159). Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  24. Hagestad, G. O., & Neugarten, B. L. (1985). Age and the life course. In E. Shanas & R. Binstock (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (2nd ed., pp. 36–61). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  25. Haskey, J. (2005). Living arrangements in contemporary Britain: Having a partner who usually lives elsewhere and living apart together (LAT). Population Trends, 122, 35–45.Google Scholar
  26. Haskey, J., & Lewis, J. (2006). Living-apart-together in Britain: Context and meaning. International Journal of Law in Context, 2(1), 37–48. doi: 10.1017/S1744552306001030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaufman, L., & Rousseeuw, P. (1990). Finding Groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Levin, I. (2004). Living apart together: A new family form. Current Sociology, 52(2), 223–240. doi: 10.1177/0011392104041809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Levin, I., & Trost, J. (1999). Living apart together. Community, Work and Family, 2(3), 279–294. doi: 10.1080/13668809908412186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liefbroer, A. C., Poortman, A. R., & Seltzer, J. A. (2015). Why do intimate partners live apart? Evidence on LAT relationships across Europe. Demographic Research, 32(251–286), 2015. doi: 10.4054/DemRes..32.8.Google Scholar
  31. Lodewijckx, E., & Deboosere, P. (2011). Huishoudens en families: Stabiliteit en snelle veranderingen gaan hand in hand. GGP Belgium Paper Series, 6, 31.Google Scholar
  32. Lyssens-Danneboom, V., Eggermont, S., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). Living apart together (LAT) and law: Exploring legal expectations among LAT individuals in Belgium. Social and Legal Studies, 22(3), 357–376. doi: 10.1177/0964663913478960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Milan, A., & Peters, A. (2003). Couples living apart. Canadian Social Trends, Summer, 2–6.Google Scholar
  34. Regnier-Loilier, A., Beaujouan, E., & Villeneuve-Gokalp, C. (2009). Neither single, nor in a couple. A study of living apart together in France. Demographic Research, 21(4), 75–108. doi: 10.4054/demres.2009.21.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reimondos, A., Evans, A., & Gray, E. (2011). Living-apart-together (LAT) relationships in Australia: An overview. Family Matters, 87, 43–55.Google Scholar
  36. Roseneil, S. (2006). On not living with a partner: Unpicking coupledom and cohabitation. Sociological Research Online, 11(3), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider, N. F. (1996). Partnerschaften mit getrennten haushalten in den neuen und alten Bundesländern. In W. Bien (Ed.), Familie an der schwelle zum neuen jahrtausend (pp. 88–97): Leske & Budrich.Google Scholar
  38. Settersten, R. A, Jr. (2003). Age structuring and the rhythm of the life course. In J. T. Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 81–98). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Skinner, D. A., & Kohler, J. K. (2002). Parental rights in diverse family contexts: Current legal developments. Family Relations, 51(4), 293–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2002.00293.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Strohm, C. Q., Seltzer, J. A., Cochran, S. D., & Mays, V. M. (2009). Living apart together relationships in the United States. Demographic Research, 21(7), 177–214. doi: 10.4054/demres.2009.21.7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Inge Pasteels
    • 1
  • Vicky Lyssens-Danneboom
    • 1
  • Dimitri Mortelmans
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations