There is no "cohabit" to consider.
"Consider." Aha. That word tells me that you're designing solutions. In solving problems we first identify the problem and analyze it. Only then do we design the solutions. You're even farther ahead than I thought.
My references to cohabitation were as part of the problem identification process--isolating the salient variables in success in child rearing. If cohabitation works as well as marriage, then marriage clearly isn't the salient variable, it's something else. It's illogical to assert otherwise.
Since you insist on jumping ahead to solutions, I'll play along. I understand why you don't think cohabitation would be a viable solution. I wouldn't think so either. About the only problems that cohabitation solves that I know of are saving on rent and transportation time, which are clearly not the problem in question. If my several posts about problem identification have somehow failed to communicate to you that I'm not suggesting cohabitation as a solution to anything, well, I can see why you're arguing with me.
I understand the urge to rush to solutions. It's human nature to want to start designing the solution immediately before the problem is clearly identified and analyzed. The first thing people do is brainstorm solutions. It's instinctive and fun. That's a big part of why we end up with so many half-assed solutions. It takes training and discipline to lay the groundwork. Either that or a grant or contract that pays by the hour. <g>
So, it looks like you've jumped ahead and selected marriage as the only way to keep parents together. So, what makes you think that? Do you have some data? Most parents split, married or not. For the ones that stay together, is it the simple marriage status that is the critical variable? Or is it something else? Or maybe some combination of factors creates a synergy? For those who stay together simply because they're married, why? Can that factor be made to work for all or most couples, the ones who don't stay together now, or do we need different motivations? You skipped that part, too.
Way ahead of yourself. AKA rush to judgment.
This post was more lucid the first time I wrote it. Browser ate my response. This will have to do. |
