Marriage rates decline

The BBC reports that marriage rates in England and Wales are at their lowest level since records began. About 24% of weddings take place in churches.

Although there were uptick in the number of marriages in 2002 and 2004, the general trend is downward. For every 1,000 adult men, 21.8 married in 2008, compared with 22.4 in 2007. For women aged over 16 it was 19.6 per 1,000, down from 20.2 the year before.

What to make of this trend? One theory is that how people view marriage has changed. Rather than a hallmark and gateway to the rights and responsibilities of adulthood, marriage is now understood mainly in terms of the quality of the relationship. This is what an unnamed Church of England spokesperson told the Beeb:

A spokesman said: "We have found that marriage is regarded as a serious commitment and something people aspire to, even those already living together.

"Making a positive public decision to a committed, life-long relationship changes behaviour - especially for men.

"We have found that men coming for weddings are as interested in their relationship and the quality of it as in the day itself."


Posted by Andrew Gerns on February 12, 2010 9:00 AM | |
Comments (4)

It is because no one cares if women have sex before marriage or even have children without being married. Used to be the ticket to sex with certain women. And now women don't need to take on a husband with all the issues that brings. LOL

Posted by Ann Fontaine [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 12, 2010 11:24 AM

I wonder what to do with this - conundrum? anomaly? paradox? - that it appears that couples are taking marriage more seriously, even as they take sexual activity less seriously. Is this good news? Bad news? Both, and all the same news?

However, this is consistent with my own unscientific, anecdotal experience. Couples have relationships - and usually relations, and sometimes children - for some time before they decide to take on the legal and moral responsibilities. I fear we have failed twice: to model how seriously we might take interpersonal commitments, whether or not they include sex; and to educate our youth that relationships, much less relations, establish emotional and moral connections that need to be supported and addressed with commitment well before they begin thinking intentionally about "forever." We haven't clarified that the moral commitments need to be identified first, rather than tied explicitly to the legal commitments.

Marshall Scott

Posted by Execute [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 12, 2010 11:59 AM

I await the obligatory charge, "It's all the FAULT of allowing Teh Gays to marry!" (or in this case, "Civil Partnerships")

JC Fisher

Posted by tgflux [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 12, 2010 10:19 PM

Oh of course (dope slap) it's teh gay

Posted by Ann Fontaine [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 13, 2010 9:23 AM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space