Researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted a marriage survey last year in which they interviewed 22,000 men and women between the ages of fifteen and forty-four. Forty percent of those interviewed in the study were married. In their study, researchers found that the growing trend of living together before marriage no longer plays a role in predicting divorce as it has in the past.
The trend of living together before marriage is so common – approximately sixty percent of couples live together before they marry – that “it’s not surprising it no longer negatively affects marital stability,” stated Wendy Manning, the co-director of the National Center for Family & Marriage Research at Bowling Green State University.
CDC researchers found those couples who were engaged and living together before they married were just as likely to have marriages that lasted fifteen years as those couples who did not live together. Researchers also found those women who either lived together and were engaged or who did not live with their future spouse before the wedding had a sixty percent chance of their marriage surviving for at least fifteen years.
However, the study did reveal the marriages of those couples who lived together but were not engaged were less likely to survive to the ten-to-fifteen-year mark.
The explanations for these findings could be more lax attitudes concerning commitment, lower education levels or family histories that may have created pessimism about marriage in these couples.
One professor of Human Development and Family Science at Oregon State University, Richard Setterson, Jr., said cohabitating before marriage is different for each individual. Those living as a couple may see the experience “as a trial marriage, usually without kids, that often ends in marriage.” However, there are those people who put off marriage because they are pursuing an education or have just started a new career or who just move from “one living-together relationship to another.”
This study by the CDC did report one statistic than many other studies have recently reported – nearly half of all first marriages in this country will end in divorce within twenty years.
When two people are united in marriage, they simplify their lives by combining financial assets such as checking and saving accounts, a move which, according to one marriage therapist, Beth Erickson, brings “greater intimacy.”
Erickson’s view is shared by the majority of Americans as showed by a recent survey conducted by Merrill Lynch in February. According to Merrill Lynch’s Affluent Insights Survey, “89 percent of married couples manage their money collaboratively.” The survey revealed, however, that 57 percent of these married couples argue over money.
Not all financial experts believe pooling finances in a marriage is a wise move. Financial adviser Nick Scheumann said, “It would be better if more people split it out. When it comes to commingled assets, a lot of married people can’t handle it.” The survey conducted by Merrill Lynch reports that money disputes are the significant contributor to one in three divorces.
Listed below are five benefits of keeping finances separate in a marriage.
- Separate Accounts Add Flexibility and Safety of Diversified Investments – A married couple can insure more when each person sets up a separate account.
- Credit Scores Stay Single – Credit scores are tied to single individuals, not couples. Opening a bank account in your own name is the first step in establishing your credit score.
- Shared Money Means Shared Responsibility – When a couple pools their money, neither person takes full responsibility for the account, and that makes it easier to spend and harder to save.
- Marriage Is Not Always a Tax Benefit – An accountant can figure out if you would reap more savings by filing single or as a married couple.
- Self-Employed and Small-Business Expenses – Again, an accountant would be needed to assess whether it would be beneficial to have separate or joint accounts come tax time.
One compromise for couples deciding whether to pool finances or not would be to keep some accounts separate while establishing a joint account both spouses contribute to for covering household expenses.
One of the most popular male country music singers today is Jason Aldean. Jason became popular with the release of his 2005 album “Jason Aldean,” and in 2006 was named the “Top New Male Vocalist” at the Academy of Country Music Awards.
After his debut album’s success, Aldean’s popularity kept rising and the awards kept pouring in. Aldean has scored eleven No. 1 country singles, and because of the popularity of his songs, he performs to sold-out crowds.
Although the singer has reached success in his career, unfortunately with so much time spent on the road touring, his marriage is no longer successful. Aldean filed for divorce from his wife of twelve years on April 26.
The former Jessica Usserty and Aldean were high school sweethearts who married in 2001, and have two daughters, Keeley, 10, and Kendyl, 5. The couple seemed to have an ideal marriage until Jason was caught cheating at a bar in California with a former “American Idol” contestant, Brittany Kerr, in September of last year.
Although the couple tried to make a go of their marriage after the incident, it appears that Aldean has strayed more than once and when Jason went on tour in February of this year, Jessica stayed home.
Jason publicly apologized to fans for his behavior, but then turned around and filed for divorce from Jessica.
Aldean is worth an estimated $20 million, and since his wife has been with him before he made it to the big time in country music, she should be entitled to her fair share, possibly half, of his fortune. According to one unnamed source in the National Enquirer, Jessica “can show she was instrumental in Jason achieving success, but even more, she can show she is the wronged party in this.”
In a high asset divorce, it is very important to hire a experienced divorce attorney who is well versed in high asset property division and who will take the time to negotiate property divisions that will be fair and equitable to both parties.
Steve Nash, a professional National Basketball Association all-star who plays for the Los Angeles Lakers, is battling with his ex-wife, Alejandra, over child support for his three children.
According to Sportsworld report.com, Nash reports he has made his wife a millionaire through their divorce, as she received $5 million in the divorce settlement, and receives $30,000 a month from him, as well. Nash also remarked that he pays over 90 percent of his children’s school and other activity expenses, as well as paying 82 percent of the children’s nanny expenses, too. He feels, according to TMZ.com, that his ex-wife will spoil his children with luxurious items such as limos, games and other unnecessary items if he pays more in support .
Alejandra Nash lives in Arizona where Steve lived as well until he was traded to the Los Angeles Lakers in July of 2012. An Arizona judge agreed with Nash that his ex-wife did not need more money to support their children and ruled Alejandra is not entitled to child support. However, Alejandra has not only appealed the Arizona judge’s decision, but is contemplating moving to California, a state known for its strict child support laws, in an effort to force Nash to pay more support.
Nash met Alejandra Amarilla in Manhattan in 2001, and they married in June 2005. The couple’s twin daughters, Lola and Bella, were born on October 14, 2004, and their son, Matteo Joel, was born on November 12, 2010. On the day of his son’s birth, Nash made a statement announcing his son’s birth, calling it a ‘bittersweet moment’, revealing that he and his wife had lived separately for several months and were in the process of dissolving their marriage.
Original story found here.