Theories Of Marriage | EssayIvy.com

Running head: THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 1

Theories of Marriage

Name

Institution

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 2

Theories of Marriage

In the contemporary world, marriage seems to be the most valued and supreme form of

union, far much beyond dating or cohabitation without living together. In spite of the fact that

marriage is contemporarily not perceived as a pointer of adulthood, the ideal of marriage

remains, and is widely viewed as a an obligation for childbearing as well as childrearing. Despite

the prevailing ideal for marriage, there is a considerable disconnect between societal notions

about marriage and the marital behavioral trends in the society. According to Shonkoff et al.

(2012), several young adults believe that a prolonged period of singleness is essential for

marriage preparedness. In light of this, many young adults spend their time on forming their

identity, pursing education, and pursuing their professional careers. In view of Lauer & Yodanis

(2010), since young adults are believed to experiment with different relationships, there is a high

likelihood that these adults spend most of their time dating numerous partners before they settle

down in marriage. Shonkoff et al. (2012) established that a third of young adults are hesitant

about marriage, in the believe that they are unprepared for it. Overall, the various trends in

marriage can be understood through the lens of attachment theory, economic theory, and life

course theory, all that have unique expiations about the trends in marriage.

Explaining Marriage Trends Using Attachment Theory

It has also been established that individuals who are insecurely attached are significantly

influenced by the negative experiences they had as young adults, compelling them to retain their

insecure styles of attachment. By strengthening the negative beliefs on marriage and

relationships, such individuals may remain insecurely attached and consequently avoid marriage

(Lauer & Yodanis, 2010). On the other hand, research findings have indicated that secure young

adults who experience positivity during dating are likely to be less affected by dating experiences

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 3

compared to the insecurely attached counterparts. Such individuals tend to have little or no

reasons to be hesitant about marriage, particularly when they maintain their positive ideals about

marriage. Carriere & Richardson (2009) posit that young women, particularly the low income

women who have children, tend to delay marriage because of their desire to have a long period

of courtship for purposes of evaluating whether their relationship is serious enough to lead to

marriage. This belief is in line with the attachment theory that supports the idea that if previous

relationships have yielded attachment insecurity, then young adults, both male and female, are

likely to prefer long courtship period in an attempt to build a secure relationship attachment that

seeks to strengthen their marital bond.

Lauer & Yodanis (2010) note that parental divorce as well as fear of divorcing one’s

partner can have an effect on the attachment security of young adults, thereby influencing their

desire to get into marital unions. While divorce is increasingly gaining acceptance, the fear of

divorce usually bars young adults, especially women, from getting into premature marriages.

According to Buss & Schmitt (1993), in view of most young women, marriage is a stage they

would like to consider only once, arguing that divorcing shortly after marriage significantly

undermines the purity of the engagement.

Much as attachments are established early in life with their secure base being primary

caregivers, the role is later moved onto romantic partners once individuals reach adulthood. In

contrast to childhood attachment bonds, attachments in adulthood are not asymmetrical but

rather reciprocal relationship that involves a sexual dimension (Lauer & Yodanis, 2010).

However, both parties have to equally contribute towards the relationship for avoidance of any

challenging power imbalance. Since every individual gets into a relationship with his or her

attachment history, their relationship with their partners will considerably be affected by their

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 4

attachment style. Therefore, having an understanding of the differences in the attachment styles

is critical to explaining the variance in the quality of relationships across various couples (Buss

& Schmitt, 1993). The major elements of the attachment theory are an individual’s configuration

of the dimension of the attachment and the internal working models. In this context, internal

working models refer to mental models of how a person perceives others and themselves (Lauer

& Yodanis, 2010). The models serve as guiding principles on how a person view himself or

herself as unacceptable or acceptable to his or her attachment partner. Conversely, other people’s

internal working models allow one to predict their view of how supportive r responsive their

attachment partners are. In this sense, Shonkoff et al. (2012) argue that maintaining a positive

model of both others and self leads to developing a secure style of attachment. Similarly, having

a negative model of either others or self-breeds an insecure style of attachment.

As Carriere & Richardson (2009) note, attachment is also gauged by a person’s

configuration of the dimensions of attachment- avoidance and anxiety. Despite the fact that

having low levels of both avoidance and anxiety is linked to having a secure style of attachment,

exhibiting high levels of these dimensions is linked to having attachment insecurity. Carriere &

Richardson (2009) describe the dimension of anxiety as having a fear of apparent rejection,

extreme need for other people’s approval, and a feeling of distress whenever your partner is

unresponsive or unavailable. On the other hand, possessing a high level of anxiety is linked to

emotional reactivity and assurance seeking. In other words, people who have high anxiety levels

tend to cling to their partners for fear of any indication of abandonment. Such individuals often

fall in the classification of anxiously attached. On the other side, the avoidance dimension is

often associated with fear of intimacy or dependence, hesitancy towards self-disclosure, and

elevated level of self-reliance.

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 5

Lauer & Yodanis (2010) link having a high avoidance level with emotional cutoff. In

their view, individuals with high avoidance level less likely to use their spouses as a secure base.

Rather, these individuals tend to distance themselves as opposed to turning to their spouses for

comfort and support. Therefore, a high avoidance level has been linked to possession of an

avoidance style of attachment. Moreover, it is possible for a person to have an elevated

dimension of both attachment avoidance and attachment anxiety (Lauer & Yodanis, 2010).

Typically, such individuals demonstrate traits of both forms of insecure styles of attachment and

find it very difficult to cope with interpersonal relationships. Individuals who are securely

attached demonstrate positive models of both other people and themselves. Similarly, such

people measure low not only on dimensions of avoidance but also dimensions of anxiety (Lauer

& Yodanis, 2010). It is also worth noting that having a secure style of attachment increases the

possibility of using security‐based strategies that enable people attain the objective of seeking

support and comfort from their romantic partners for purposes of regulating their emotional

effect.

Explaining Marriage Trends Using Economic Theory

The most basic manifestation of the social nature of human beings is the family, realized

through marriage. As a social being, man has been established to be naturally focused and

family-oriented (Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). Since family is the basic unit of marriage,

marriage establishes the creation of a family. For one to be a productive member of the society,

marriage has to come into picture, since people come into the world by virtue of families. From

an economic standpoint, marriage is important. For instance, a healthy marriage relationship is

critical as it directly influences moral, human, as well as social capital. In so doing, marriage

influences economic activity, resource use, as well as economic structures. In light of this

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 6

argument, the economic theory contends that resources are used inefficiently when channeled

towards policies, which discourage marriages rather than those that support them. Consequently,

this hinders the sustainability of actual economic growth, thereby propagating poverty. However,

the economic theory is engaged in attempting to ring a clear understanding of the reality of

marriage within economic activity. When dealing with the functions of distribution,

consumption, and production in the economy, economic theory tends to approach the decision-

making processes of families from a personal point of view (Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). In a

marriage setting, this approach applies to both the decision-making processes of members of a

family, and to the economic nature of the marriage covenant, both as producers and consumers.

In view of Sabatelli & Shehan (2009), individuals will marry when the expected utility to

be obtained from marriage exceeds that of remaining single. Similarly, people will stay married

provided the anticipated utility from being in a marriage surpasses that of remarrying or

becoming single. According to Stevenson & Wolfers (2007), this logic apple to other

relationship contracts, usually of indefinite duration, whereby the partners involved have the

choice of divorce or termination of the relationship. Economists have compared the association

between length of employment and employee turnover to marriage through assessment of the

utility-based decisions which occur irrespective of terminating either employment or marriage.

This analysis is furthered by Sabatelli & Shehan (2009) who explore the process behind the

decision of a partner to divorce. They argue that within the marriage contract, the basis of the

decision to divorce is whether the combined wealth of the duo exceeds that of their total single

wealth. In light of this argument, a spouse will consider terminating a marriage if the anticipated

single wealth will be higher than that of pre-divorce output, after any redistribution. In view of

the authors, the economic decisions made by employers are similar to those arrived at by couples

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 7

within a marriage. Through their analysis of the contract of marriage, Sabatelli & Shehan (2009)

reduce the associations within marriages to the pursuit of utility, hence shifting the natural

sociability of human beings to self-interest. As such, the authors distort the definition of marriage

by converting a connection between spouses into an exchange of objects.

In an attempt to rectify Stevenson & Wolfers (2007), distortion of the idea of marriage,

Sabatelli & Shehan (2009) compare marriage to other commercial relationships by using a

partnership. They contend that the association between a wife and a husband closely resembles

that of a contract of all family associations. However, they acknowledge that this relationship

fails to capture the reality of marriage. The reason they present is that it is chosen by the parties,

and in doing the choosing, individuals anticipate to be better off. What is more, marriage vows

are publicly and expressly exchanged the same way promises are exchanged during contracts

(Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). Additionally, at the most trivial level, a marriage involves sharing

of a household by couples, with exclusive sexual rights in the picture. However, the authors note

that the key facets of marriage are commitment as well as self-submission to your partner. It is

these aspects that explain the seemingly irregular facts about modern marriage when viewed

against contracts (Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). For instance, individuals often do not marry on

the basis of negotiable contracts, despite the fact that other types of negotiations take place over

the customary terms of marriage.

As opposed to the expectations of some people, study findings have indicated that

individuals who cohabit prior to their marriage have a relatively higher chances of divorcing

compared to those who do not. In view of Sabatelli & Shehan (2009), a partnership is relatively

more than a contract since partnerships involve voluntary exchanges whereby each party

contributes something are later receives something as a form of compensation for their efforts.

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 8

However, Sabatelli & Shehan (2009) acknowledge that finding an appropriate partner can be a

very painful business. As a result, economists have formulated methods of understanding this

process. For instance, Stevenson & Wolfers (2007) maintain that people marry or get married

because doing so makes economic sense. They add that marriage is grounded on the principle of

division of labor, arguing that the benefits accrued from marriage are determined by the

efficiency of the division.

In Sabatelli & Shehan’s (2009) model, getting a spouse hinges on two fundamental

principles. To begin with, the authors make an assumption that the form of exchange between

couples is a voluntary one. What is more, they assume that there are individuals looking for other

people either on internet boards or on newspaper ads, indicating the presence of a market.

Moreover, the authors argue that there is a demand for potential spouses as well as a rich supply

of hopefuls. Therefore, in view of the economic theory, an individual decides to marry when the

anticipated marriage utility surpass that anticipated from being single or from continued search

for a more appropriate partner (Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). On the same note, a married

individual considers terminating his or her marriage once the utility expected from being single

or remarrying another person outdo the loss in utility from divorce. The losses include those

arising from physical separation from children, among others. The authors conclude that due to

the fact that many people are searching for spouses, a market segment in marriage exists

(Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). Sadly, however, marriage is not the ultimate result between two

persons agreeing to be together. There are other pertinent questions that need to be answered,

pertaining to whether they will have children, who will perform house chores, among other

questions. The answers to such questions, according to Sabatelli & Shehan (2009), lie in the

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 9

division of labor. For instance, the person with comparative advantage in terms of earning wage

is the one to go out to work, and the other to remain behind to carry out household chores.

Overall, according to the economic theory, everything that occurs after marriage is

determined when choosing a marriage partner. Essentially, within the marriage, whoever has the

highest share of resources often decides on most family issues. However, the equilibrium in a

marriage market is influenced by how couples can foresee the tribulations or gains from the

potential marriage (Stevenson & Wolfers, 2007). The theory however, has key underlying

assumptions that need to be understood before its application. Fundamentally, it assumes that

families often pool their resources, which determine the choices made by the couples.

Explaining Marriage Trends Using Life course Theory

Several fundamental principles that underpin life course theory offer great explanations

to the concept and implications of marriage. The principles include heterogeneity, geographical

or socio-historical location, personal control, the influence of the past on the future, and timing

of lives. According to Hofferth & Goldscheider (2016), families in the contemporary world are

extremely heterogeneous, in comparison to those of the past. The reason is that besides families

with two biological parents who are married, children are increasingly living with unmarried

biological parents, some of whom are single parents, stepparents, and grandparents among other

relatives. What is more, children may have parents who are of the same gender (Hofferth &

Goldscheider, 2016). In this sense, socialization of parenting life is increasingly becoming

complex. As a result, it can be misleading to assume that particular children are being brought up

after engagement in two-sex by two biological parents. The implication is that the early

childhood experiences of family structures can have long-lasting effects on adulthood behaviors

and socialization during marriage.

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 10

Amato & DeBoer (2001) note that parenthood is increasingly becoming a heterogeneous

experience, especially for males in comparison to females. While mothers tend to stay together

with their children, most fathers do not. Rather, men have been found to commonly live with

their stepchildren. In this sense, Amato & DeBoer (2001) contend that the fact that young boys

brought up by their stepfathers have a higher likelihood of being stepfathers is a clear indication

that there is growing socialization for various forms of fathering roles.

Life course theory offers an explanation as to why there are varying outcomes of being

raised in different marriage types. The theory predicts that past childhood experiences in a family

has a significant influence on marriage attitudes, roles, and expectations in adulthood (Amato &

DeBoer, 2001). For instance, a child raised by two-parent families will have vital training with

regards to the roles of women and men in a marriage. It is inappropriate to assume that siblings

brought up in other types of families will be taught the same. Instead, they are likely to learn

different lessons from the very forms of families in which they were raised. The result will be

various concepts and beliefs about marriage life.

Following the fundamental role played by the emotional setting of learning about

marriage and family life, the learning that occurs at home is often very useful and significant to

children. As a result, such form of learning is often difficult to influence or modify (Hofferth &

Goldscheider, 2016). Children are hence likely to apply the very principles by which they were

brought up, with regards to marriage ideals. For instance, research findings have established that

being raised by a single parent leads to an isolating experience to children, thereby planting

unique marriage outlooks in the minds of such children. While few children spend their whole

childhood with single parents, boys may find it difficult to learn about partner skills when their

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 11

stay with single parents is prolonged (Hofferth & Goldscheider, 2016). Consequently, it requires

the help of a role model outside their family to help boys develop such skills.

Life course theory also maintains that social control, a factor that varies across different

forms of marriages or families, affects the manner in which individuals socialize and their

marriage decisions. Recent research findings have revealed that although a particular family may

be warm, when children are not properly monitored, they may not do well in their future

marriage lives in comparison to those who experience regular monitoring from their parents or

guardians (Amato & DeBoer, 2001). This finding implies that setting limit is a critical aspect of

proper parenting. It is however worth noting that keeping track and monitoring children is

relatively easy when both parents are responsible for, and committed to the task. Following the

ambiguity of stepparents’ role in childrearing, stepfamilies may be ineffective or less effective in

monitoring children. While some may argue that the parent can remarry, the new stepparent will

often experience difficulty in filling the role of the other parent, in relation to monitoring

children (Amato & DeBoer, 2001). It is for this reason that stepfathers have been found to be less

effective in monitoring children, in comparison to biological fathers. As such, the issue of

control has become extremely relevant to immigrant parents who tend to be relatively less

proficient in the culture and language of the host country (Amato & DeBoer, 2001). The reason

is that children usually act as guides and translators to their own parents, thereby reversing

family roles.

A child’s future marriage life and ideals can also be influenced by instability. According

to Hofferth & Goldscheider (2016), the disruption of future marriage practices are more

detrimental to the future lives of children. Changes in family structures often lead to more

disruption beyond changes in parenting, school, neighborhood, and friends, all which, have a

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 12

bearing on the children’s marriage mentality in future. Such changes may impact on children by

increasing stress upon them, thereby leading to behaviors aimed at reducing conflict and

enhancing closeness outside their families (Amato & DeBoer, 2001). The behaviors may include

increased sexual activity, drug abuse, and precocious behavior in adulthood, as well as early

withdrawal from parental home.

Overall, research findings have indicated that the responses of men to various family

processes are extremely different from those of females (Amato & DeBoer, 2001). The studies

argue that females tend to be influenced by the bonds they have with their mothers. It has also

been established that females growing up attached to their mothers do not transition to early

parenthood compared to those that are less close to their mothers. In view of Hofferth &

Goldscheider (2016), young women growing up with single mothers without living with their

fathers seem to transition to single motherhood at an earlier age compared to those who live with

both parents.

THEORIES OF MARRIAGE 13

References

Amato, P. R., & DeBoer, D. D. (2001). The transmission of marital instability across

generations: Relationship skills or commitment to marriage?. Journal of Marriage and

Family, 63(4), 1038-1051.

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on

human mating. Psychological review, 100(2), 204.

Carriere, J., & Richardson, C. (2009). From longing to belonging: Attachment theory,

connectedness, and indigenous children in Canada. Passion for action in child and family

services: Voices from the prairies, 49-67.

Hofferth, S., & Goldscheider, F. (2016). Family Heterogeneity Over the Life Course.

In Handbook of the Life Course (pp. 161-178). Springer, Cham.

Lauer, S., & Yodanis, C. (2010). The deinstitutionalization of marriage revisited: A new

institutional approach to marriage. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(1), 58-72.

Sabatelli, R. M., & Shehan, C. L. (2009). Exchange and resource theories. In Sourcebook of

family theories and methods (pp. 385-417). Springer, Boston, MA.

Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., McGuinn, L., ... &

Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care. (2012). The lifelong

effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232-e246.

Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2007). Marriage and divorce: Changes and their driving

forces. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 27-52.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."