IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v11y2021i3p90-d606906.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Diverse Family Structures in South Korea: Experiences and Perspectives of Nonmartial Cohabitants

Author

Listed:
  • Soo-Jung Byoun

    (Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs, Sejong 30147, Korea)

  • Shinwoo Choi

    (School of Social Work, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA)

  • Hye-Young Kim

    (Department of Social Work, Graduate School of Policy, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

Abstract

Historically, South Korean society has been deeply influenced by Confucianism, which has an emphasis on the traditional family structure. If a given family does not belong in the “traditional” norm, which is composed of husband, wife, and children, they are often discriminated against and ostracized. Despite the increasing number of nonmarital cohabiters in South Korea, research is still insufficient to understand the phenomenon. This study explores the prevalence of nonmarital cohabitation in South Korea, which is still met with discrimination. Online surveys and in-depth interviews were conducted with cohabiters to gain an understanding of the phenomenon and to explore their marriage and family values. The findings of this study indicate that cohabiters who chose cohabitation as an alternative to marriage had more progressive values. Findings from the study provide implications for practice and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Soo-Jung Byoun & Shinwoo Choi & Hye-Young Kim, 2021. "Exploring the Diverse Family Structures in South Korea: Experiences and Perspectives of Nonmartial Cohabitants," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:90-:d:606906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/3/90/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/3/90/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pau Baizán & Arnstein Aassve & Francesco C. Billari, 2003. "Cohabitation, Marriage, and First Birth: The Interrelationship of Family Formation Events in Spain," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 19(2), pages 147-169, June.
    2. Arnstein Aassve & Francesco C. Billari & Zsolt Spéder, 2006. "Societal Transition, Policy Changes and Family Formation: Evidence from Hungary," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 127-152, June.
    3. Nicole Hiekel & Aart Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    4. Alessandro Rosina & Romina Fraboni, 2004. "Is marriage losing its centrality in Italy?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 11(6), pages 149-172.
    5. Tomáš Sobotka, 2008. "Overview Chapter 6: The diverse faces of the Second Demographic Transition in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(8), pages 171-224.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Monika Mynarska & Anna Matysiak, 2010. "Diffusion of cohabitation in Poland," Working Papers 19, Institute of Statistics and Demography, Warsaw School of Economics.
    2. Anna Matysiak, 2009. "Is Poland really 'immune' to the spread of cohabitation?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(8), pages 215-234.
    3. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    4. Tomáš Sobotka, 2008. "Overview Chapter 6: The diverse faces of the Second Demographic Transition in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(8), pages 171-224.
    5. Roberta Rutigliano & Gøsta Esping-Andersen, 2018. "Partnership Choice and Childbearing in Norway and Spain," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 367-386, August.
    6. Maria Winkler-Dworak & Eva Beaujouan & Paola Di Giulio & Martin Spielauer, 2019. "Simulating Family Life Courses: An Application for Italy, Great Britain, and Scandinavia," VID Working Papers 1908, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    7. Paola Di Giulio & Roberto Impicciatore & Maria Sironi, 2019. "The changing pattern of cohabitation: A sequence analysis approach," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(42), pages 1211-1248.
    8. Avital Manor & Barbara S. Okun, 2016. "Cohabitation among secular Jews in Israel: How ethnicity, education, and employment characteristics are related to young adults' living arrangements," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(32), pages 961-990.
    9. Anne Brons & Aart C. Liefbroer & Harry B.G. Ganzeboom, 2021. "Parental socioeconomic status and the timing of first marriage: What is the role of unmarried cohabitation? Results from a cross-national comparison," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 45(15), pages 469-516.
    10. Júlia Mikolai, 2012. "With Or Without You. Partnership Context Of First Conceptions And Births In Hungary," Demográfia English Edition, Hungarian Demographic Research Institute, vol. 55(5), pages 37-60.
    11. Giuseppe Gabrielli & Jan M. Hoem, 2010. "Italy’s Non-Negligible Cohabitational Unions," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 26(1), pages 33-46, February.
    12. Maria Winkler-Dworak & Eva Beaujouan & Paola Di Giulio & Martin Spielauer, 2021. "Simulating family life courses: An application for Italy, Great Britain, Norway, and Sweden," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(1), pages 1-48.
    13. Jennifer L. Hook & Eunjeong Paek, 2020. "A Stalled Revolution? Change in Women's Labor Force Participation during Child‐Rearing Years, Europe and the United States 1996–2016," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 677-708, December.
    14. Judith C. Koops & Aart C. Liefbroer & Anne H. Gauthier, 2021. "Socio-Economic Differences in the Prevalence of Single Motherhood in North America and Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(4), pages 825-849, November.
    15. Teresa Castro Martín & Marta Dominguez Folgueras & Teresa Martín García, 2008. "Not truly partnerless: Non-residential partnerships and retreat from marriage in Spain," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 18(16), pages 443-468.
    16. María Davia & Nuria Legazpe, 2015. "Educational attainment and maternity in Spain: not only “when” but also “how”," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 871-900, December.
    17. Szymańska Wioletta & Michalski Tomasz, 2019. "Population changes in former voivodeship cities in Poland in the context of suburbanization processes and loss of the administrative function," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 7(3), pages 66-78, September.
    18. Tsimpanos, Apostolos & Tsimbos, Cleon & Kalogirou, Stamatis, 2018. "Assessing spatial variation and heterogeneity of fertility in Greece at local authority level," MPRA Paper 100406, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alessandro Rosina & Romina Fraboni, 2004. "Is marriage losing its centrality in Italy?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 11(6), pages 149-172.
    20. Zsolt Spéder & Balázs Kapitány, 2009. "How are Time-Dependent Childbearing Intentions Realized? Realization, Postponement, Abandonment, Bringing Forward," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 25(4), pages 503-523, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:90-:d:606906. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.