Defacto Relationships In Australia

Marriage in Australia is a legal lifelong commitment between heterosexual couples. Legal defacto relationships are heterosexual or homosexual relationships that do not have to be for life as it is in marriage, however, defacto relationships have the same legal rights as marriage. The pure relationship, according to Anthony Giddens is an emotionally satisfying relationship that continues until the satisfaction declines, at which time couples can disconnect from each other. It is important to look at marriage and the pure relationship to discover if they are compatible. This paper explores the legal requirements of married and defacto couples, as well as democracy and equality within relationships.
Marriage in Australia is defined as “...the …show more content…
Cherlin (2004) states that when two people are married the relationship moves from an emotional commitment to a legal commitment which is harder to revoke. In a pure relationship, one can leave the relationship at any time with little ramification which is why Cherlin (2004) states that marriage is incompatible with the pure relationship. Cherlin (20014) states that people who cohabitate are more emotionally invested and are thus more likely to be in a pure relationship as they do not have the pressure of legal obligations keeping them in the relationship. However, noting that under the current law in Australia, if one is living in a defacto relationship they are bound by the same legal rules as those who are married. This in itself means that a defacto relationship, which is also bound by legal rules, cannot be considered a pure relationship, but a legal relationship. If Cherlin’s argument in relation to legal obligation being incompatible with the pure relationship is accepted, then both marriage and defacto relationships are not compatible with the pure relationship due to legal …show more content…
That is, in previous generations, women were not seen as sexual beings, and those who were having sexual relations before marriage were seen to be of unsavory character. As such, Giddens (1992) states that sexual activity in previous generations led to a commitment of marriage, or shotgun weddings, due to pregnancy. This did not necessarily mean the couple were emotionally connected. In the current climate, Giddens (1992) states that perceptions of sexuality in women is changing and it is now socially acceptable for women to be sexually active before being married. Giddens (1992) states that sexual activity prior to marriage does not mean that one is necessarily connected emotionally to a person, however, with changing attitudes, it does suggest that getting pregnant before marriage means that couples no longer have to get married due to pregnancy. As such, couples can now find better connections and explore whether the relationship is emotionally viable, with options including separation, cohabitation or marriage. In this regard, marriage is irrelevant in relation to a pure