Events & Issues

New Delhi, 28 December 2010

Live-In Relationships

WILL IT REPLACE MARRIAGE?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Live-in relationships have been accepted in our society today, especially after the Supreme Court gave its stamp of approval to such social living. In a recent judgment it held that children born out of wedlock in such cases had legal rights. Many couples in metro cities across the country are now openly declaring such relationships. Obviously, the ever-increasing influence of Western lifestyles has led to these relationships getting woven into our social fabric.

Live-in relationships represent a diversion away from the permanent knot of marriage. Couples who choose to live together have sexual relationships but these are devoid of any life-long commitment towards each other. Presumably, youngsters opt for live-in relationships either for companionship and possibly to share the cost of living. Intertwined in these ties is the option to get separated if the association does not work or when the companionship is found to be unsuitable for sustainable living.

True, it is debatable whether such live-in relationships have been accepted or not. However, those who go in for such ties do not care about social customs and traditional values. Also correct, there is no survey undertaken to find out whether such associations have worked out well and the couples are satisfied living in this way. Also there is no data available on what percentage of such relationships finally end in marriage.

Importantly, rising urbanization and the influx of materialistic values in society along-with a lack of a sense of responsibility and search for the desired life partner leads an individual to get attracted towards such relationships. Moreover, since marriage nowadays takes place not before the age of 30 or even later in life once a person is well settled, such affairs are expected to increase in the coming years.

As is well known, Indian marriages are generally family and society driven. Therefore, an individual refrains from ‘breaking-the-knot’ due to his reverence for social customs. In spite of stresses and strains, it has been found that a couple tries to keep their marriage going. Despite there being no physical relationship even then the couple does not set their marriage aside. However, in a live-in relationship, there is no obligation to carry on.       

Interestingly, there have been many cases where after a live-in relationship for 2-3 years the couple agreed to marry. According to experts there are strong possibilities of a better understanding, stronger ties and sustained love in married couples who started their journey with a live-in relationship. If there are to be believed, such marriages are more successful than arranged ones, where the couples do not understand each other well.

But, another section argues the obverse. They feel that marriage is an institution where the couples come together on a social and religious bonding. Marriage, they aver, has permanence where both the husband and wife develop strong emotional bonds and inter-dependence with the passage of time.

Besides, the bonding gets stronger as soon as a child is born. However, in modern times with couples being educated, marriage sometimes may not be easy to carry on as an increasing number of divorces and separations have revealed. Notwithstanding, that in a live-in relationship the bonding is only for physical satisfaction and sexual pleasure.

Pertinently, since pre-marital sex is no longer taboo, live-in relationships for a short period might be acceptable. But after a while, a marriage may become essential when the couple decides to have a child. Specially, as according to law one has to declare the name off his/her father and mother.

There is actually no rationale or yardstick to guide or decide the success rating of a marriage or live-in relationship. The ever-changing values of society have been greatly influenced by western values and materialistic considerations which are very much different from ours.

Thus it is indeed very difficult to pass a judgment on either of these relationships. Even the most intelligent experts (whether marriage pundits, sociologists or psychologists) would find their advice lacking because at the end of the day, the liaison between two individuals is a private matter and depends upon varied factors such as needs, environment, adjustments, desires and values.     

Significantly, the Supreme Court in a recent judgment laid out four conditions. Clarifying the phrase “relationship in the nature of marriage”, in the Domestic Violence Act of 2005, which expanded the scope of maintenance, the Court ruled that extending the maintenance rights too much could undermine the rights of the legally wife and encourage claims from women in short-lived relationships.

Indeed, the last criteria laid down by the Apex court rules out maintenance if either live-in partner is married to someone else at the time of the relationship. The ruling is intended for those women faithfully residing with a man and has been cheated upon.    

Despite this, there is no need to ponder whether the institution of marriage is withering away. Live-in relationships and marriage will exist side by side. But unmarried relationships may increase as individuals decide to marry late or when both the male and females partners are busy with their jobs and their career.

In the coming years, it would be necessary to mould human relationships not on the basis of needs and desires but on compassion, love and fellow feeling. These values are intrinsic to our society and our tradition. It is, however, very difficult to visualize whether these would be able to offset materialistic trends that have made great inroads among the young generation. However, one has to agree that with changing values and mindsets, no relationship can be ignored as every relationship is unique.   ----- INFA 

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)