Nonmarital relationships: Introduction

In the United States today, adults live in a variety of nonmarital relationships and situations, ranging from committed partners who cohabit, to people cohabit with differing levels commitment,1 apart.2 An increasing number are single or families choice non-intimate partners, while some intimate multiple at same time.3 The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all these relationship forms differently.4 coming years will reveal extent which impacts alter social legal landscape around relationships. These have produced range responses both existing law reform efforts. Meanwhile, scholars various disciplines studying relationships, including polyamorous arrangements other communities choice. Uniform Law Commission developed new proposal for uniformity this area that addresses property rights equitable claims, but not many obligations might accrue.5 This issue Family Court Review includes three articles presented discussed during Roundtable.6 “The Polyamorous Threat Nonmarriage,” Katharine K. Baker considers what official recognition cities like Somerville Cambridge, Massachusetts,7 portends ability cohabitants obtain end their relationship. Many fail enter into express agreements regarding matters distribution. As result, disputes arise one partner asks court infer existence an agreement share property, usually manner similar marriage.8 Instead viewing as rising tide lift argues polyamory make claims between more difficult maintain two reasons. First, alternative set norms it less normatively justifiable courts assume cohabiting couples intended similarly married couples. Polyamorists believe inherently fluid, financial commitments require clear formalities, assumptions about norms—as opposed direct communication negotiation—are oppressive.9 light norms, questions whether can do. Moreover, encouraging act on could oppress those different views. Second, if jurisdictions allow plural register domestic partnerships, become tenable want be legally recognized formally register.10 tend formalize only aspects they recognized.11 fact do so reinforces utility formal tools contracts registries, casts further doubt intentions not. create inter se obligations, already extremely limited under law, may nearly impossible—an outcome she appears welcome. “Legal Reforms Appropriate Cohabitants LATs,” Cynthia Grant Bowman how distinctions apart (Living Apart Together, “LATs”) should affect policy. proposes two-pronged approach would treat types couples—cohabitants LATs—differently. For cohabitants, because her belief cohabitation is marriage (more often than LATs) children,12 recommends possible reforms: (1) imposing status-based option, such after specific period time (her recommendation 2 years) having child together, couple deemed “domestic partners,” (2) allowing parties contract out imposed status its obligations; (3) establishing system registration partners.13 By contrast, LATs identify seek support caretaking relate health insurance, scheme attach certain rights, family leave hospital visitation 5 years, permit system.14 Finally, “Unwanted Cohabitation Agreements,” Margaret Ryznar identifies gaps our understanding cohabitants' attitudes toward agreements. especially important question given that, domestically, understood primary means securing conclusion relationship, describes “the cohabitation.”15 Yet, mostly appear small, informal survey conducted courses, half participants did prior commencing cohabitation.16 While making any conclusions based results, few future studies investigate further, particularly, attitude holds true, and, so, reasons why: Is reason unaware regulates relationship? Do think do? Could also why generally engage formalities? Or individuals optimistic potential, generally? contextualizes American by surveying countries regulate cohabitation, provide marriage; minimal statute relationship; According Ryznar, exploring necessary step guiding efforts domestically. demonstrate, topics explored through Nonmarriage Roundtables expanding, representing options nonmarriage. Although resolution remains critical concern, interested availability (such right services17) impact demographic variations previously overlooked oversimplified (including age, class, configuration18). We expect literature grow scope depth years. thank Editor-in-Chief Barbara Babb Social Science Editor Marsha Kline Pruett publishing articles. Third Roundtable engagement ideas comments