New partner, new living arrangements? The process of repartnering after separation

Conjugality in France has seen a number of changes over recent decades. First, we are witnessing diversified forms of unions beyond the ‘standard’ norm of marriage, such as cohabitation outside marriage, PACS (civil union), and non-cohabiting relationships. Second, intimate relationship trajectories are increasingly marked by discontinuity, with separations and repartnering occurring more frequently. Based on these observations, this article explores the present diversification and discontinuity by looking at the link between past conjugal history and the form taken by the subsequent union, i.e. whether cohabiting or not. Most studies on repartnering approach the subject solely through the prism of living together while overlooking non-cohabiting relationships as a separate form of union, thus shedding no light on the repartnering process, which may take varying amounts of time that depend on the characteristics of the previous union. Using data from the EPIC survey on individual and conjugal trajectories (Étude des parcours individuels et conjugaux, INED–INSEE 2013–2014), we trace the conjugal histories of the respondents by distinguishing between periods of non-cohabitation and cohabitation. Using survival functions and duration models, certain impediments to moving in together are identified—some of which are particularly prominent for women, such as the presence of dependent children, having been married, and having experienced a highly conflictive separation. Increased age at the time of repartnering also reduces the probability of living together.La conjugalité a connu de nombreuses évolutions en France. On observe, d’une part, une diversification des formes d’unions (mariage, cohabitation hors mariage, pacs, relations non cohabitantes) et, d’autre part, la discontinuité des parcours amoureux, marqués par des séparations et remises en couple plus fréquentes. Partant de ce double constat, cet article étudie le lien entre l’histoire conjugale passée et la forme, cohabitation ou non, que prend l’union suivante. La plupart des études sur la remise en couple l’abordent sous le seul prisme de la vie commune. Elles occultent la conjugalité non cohabitante comme forme d’union à part entière et laissent dans l’ombre le processus de remise en couple, plus ou moins long selon les caractéristiques de l’union précédente. Les données de l’enquête Étude des parcours individuels et conjugaux (Épic, Ined-Insee, 2013-2014) retracent l’histoire conjugale des personnes interrogées en distinguant les périodes de non-cohabitation des périodes cohabitantes. En utilisant des fonctions de survie et des modèles de durée, certains freins à l’emménagement sous le même toit sont identifiés, en particulier pour les femmes, comme la présence d’enfants à charge, le fait d’avoir été marié ou d’avoir vécu une séparation conflictuelle. Un âge avancé à la remise en couple réduit par ailleurs la probabilité de vivre ensemble

Interview Conditions and Bias Caused by the Presence of a Third Party in Responses to the ERFI Survey

In order to reduce biases, surveyors are instructed to ensure that interviews are conducted on a person-to-person basis, without the presence of third parties. However, they cannot impose the interview conditions. We thus describe as accurately as possible the interview conditions for each interview in order to be able to evaluate bias in the responses. The methodology used for the Study of Family and Intergenerational Relationships (ERFI) carried out by INED and INSEE in 2005 allows us to describe the interview conditions more accurately than in other surveys. While the results appear to suggest that it is ultimately preferable for interviews to take place with the spouse in attendance, contrary to the instructions given to interviewees, the presence of a third party particularly that of the interviewee's spouse gives rise to a lesser enumeration of past marital events, mainly by the male partner.Surveyors, Interview

Studying individual and conjugal trajectories in France: Scientific and methodological choices in the EPIC survey

Why should we perform a new survey on couple formation in France at the beginning of the 21st century’ And how should it be conducted’ This article presents the foundations of the EPIC survey on individual and conjugal trajectories (Étude des parcours individuels et conjugaux, INED–INSEE, 2013–2014), which is the third major French survey on couple formation following one on the choice of a spouse (Le choix du conjoint, 1959) and another on couple formation (La formation des couples, 1983–1984). It was designed to fulfil several objectives: capture the diverse forms of conjugality in light of renewed definitions of what constitutes a couple; characterize individual and conjugal trajectories through a retrospective approach; study the factors associated with not having a partner; and shed light on separation as a process. The survey also explored phenomena that have arisen in the last three decades: the creation of the PACS (civil union), the recognition of same-sex unions, and the rise of online dating. The article then presents the making of the survey, from methodological choices (coverage, sample sizes, and administration) to the practical aspects of data collection in the field (number of interviewers, participation rate, and representativeness).Pourquoi et comment réaliser une nouvelle enquête sur la formation des couples en France au début du XXIe siècle ? Cet article présente les principaux fondements de l’Étude des parcours individuels et conjugaux (Épic, Ined-Insee, 2013-2014), troisième enquête française sur la formation des couples après Le choix du conjoint (1959) et La formation des couples (1983-1984). Plusieurs objectifs ont guidé sa réalisation : saisir la diversité des formes de la conjugalité à partir d’une définition renouvelée du couple, rendre compte des trajectoires individuelles et conjugales grâce à un questionnement rétrospectif, étudier le fait de ne pas être en couple ou encore mettre au jour le caractère processuel de la séparation. Cette enquête aborde également des phénomènes intervenus depuis trois décennies : la création du pacs, la reconnaissance des unions de même sexe, l’essor des rencontres en ligne, etc. L’article revient ensuite sur la « fabrique » de l’enquête, des choix méthodologiques (champ, dimensionnement de l’échantillon, mode de passation) à la mise en œuvre pratique de la collecte sur le terrain (nombre d’enquêteurs, taux de participation, représentativité)

Unemployment delays parenthood in France

International audienceFertility seems to be less affected by the economic crisis in France than in most other developed countries. Is French fertility behaviour immune to the effects of unemployment? Analysing data from the ERFI survey (the French variant of the Generations and Gender Survey), which interviewed respondents three times between 2005 and 2011, Ariane Pailhé and Arnaud Loilier, show that unemployment does in fact influence fertility intentions and their realization

Les naissances « au fil des saisons »

Position du problème et panorama historique En 1989, Philippe Besnard s’est intéressé aux « effets de la ronde annuelle des saisons sur la vie des Français, sur leurs comportements, leurs habitudes, leurs humeurs et leurs désirs », sujet selon lui trop peu étudié et mal connu des sociologues. Dans un ouvrage dédié à l’étude des Mœurs et humeurs des Français au fil des saisons, il passait alors en revue un certain nombre de phénomènes humains et sociaux portant en eux l’empreinte du rythme des..

Le chômage retarde l'arrivée du premier enfant en France

International audienceLes hommes et les femmes ont moins l'intention d'avoir un premier enfant dans un avenir proche lorsqu'ils sont au chômage. En outre pour ceux qui souhaitent devenir parent, ce projet est retardé lorsqu'ils connaissent un épisode de chômage. Ce retard explique par un report de la mise en couple pour les hommes, et par l'attente d'une situation professionnelle stable pour les femmes. En revanche, le chômage n'affecte pas la réalisation des projets d'enfant pour ceux déjà parents

Unequal Neighbours? A French-German Comparison of Family Size Intentions

The neighbouring countries France and Germany show very different levels of fertility. Differences also exist between the two regions of East and West Germany. The aim of this paper is to help close a remaining gap in explaining these differences by applying a cultural concept of role models. Data is based on the German survey "Family-related role models" (2012) and the French survey "Situation de couple, intentions de fécondité et opinions sur la famille", ELIPSS (2013) offering a new approach to measuring the impact of social norms. The analysis uses multinomial logistic regression. We identified role models regarding the acceptance of childlessness on the one hand and large families on the other, as well as regarding the link between marriage and parenthood and the importance of financial security, suggesting different fertility-related cultures in France and Germany. There is a strong predominance of one general role model in France - that of having at least two children. In Germany, in contrast, there is a dominant role model - the two child family - but there are also several less central role models. The dominant model in France even leads to a sort of self-stigmatisation of individuals who want to stay childless, whereas childlessness is generally accepted in Germany. Role model differences between East and West Germany show a lower acceptance of large families and a higher acceptance of single-child families in the East. Our results highlight the importance of role models for fertility intentions as well as the relevance of cultural dimensions when studying the impact of the institutional framework on fertility

Unequal Neighbours? A French-German Comparison of Family Size Intentions

The neighbouring countries France and Germany show very different levels of fertility. Differences also exist between the two regions of East and West Germany. The aim of this paper is to help close a remaining gap in explaining these differences by applying a cultural concept of role models. Data is based on the German survey “Family-related role models” (2012) and the French survey “Situation de couple, intentions de fécondité et opinions sur la famille”, ELIPSS (2013) offering a new approach to measuring the impact of social norms. The analysis uses multinomial logistic regression. We identified role models regarding the acceptance of childlessness on the one hand and large families on the other, as well as regarding the link between marriage and parenthood and the importance of financial security, suggesting different fertility-related cultures in France and Germany. There is a strong predominance of one general role model in France – that of having at least two children. In Germany, in contrast, there is a dominant role model – the two child family – but there are also several less central role models. The dominant model in France even leads to a sort of self-stigmatisation of individuals who want to stay childless, whereas childlessness is generally accepted in Germany. Role model differences between East and West Germany show a lower acceptance of large families and a higher acceptance of single-child families in the East. Our results highlight the importance of role models for fertility intentions as well as the relevance of cultural dimensions when studying the impact of the institutional framework on fertility

“I’ve got somebody there, someone cares”: what support is most valued following a stroke?

Purpose: There is often a need for increased support following a stroke. This study explored what types of support are provided by different network members, and what support functions are most valued. Methods: Adults with first stroke were recruited from a stroke unit, and participated in in-depth interviews 8-15 months post stroke. Framework Analysis was used to build thematic and explanatory accounts of the data. Results: Twenty-nine participants took part. Main themes to emerge were: the spouse was the most important provider of support; children were a relatively stable source of support, although many participants expressed reservations about worrying a child; relatives and friends typically provided social companionship and emotional support rather than on-going practical support. The only universally valued support function was the sense that someone was concerned and cared. Other valued functions were: social companionship including everyday social ‘chit chat’; practical support provided sensitively; and, for many, sharing worries and sensitive encouragement. The manner and context in which support was provided was important: support was easiest to receive when it communicated concern, and was part of a reciprocal, caring relationship. Conclusions: As well as measuring supportive acts, researchers and clinicians should consider the manner and context of support