Cohabitation and Marriage: Current Status - Challenges - Perspectives

Cohabitation and marriage: current status - challenges – perspectives

Introduction

It is often claimed that society, upbringing and education are in crisis, that education is going through a turbulent period. The essence of the problem, however, is undoubtedly deeper. Education is marked by permanent development and innovation not only in society, but especially in the family. And it is precisely in the family that increasingly changing rules in the educational process can be observed. Why? Probably also because the classical model of the family seems to be ridiculed to such an extent that the absence of pragmatic family social networks is noticeable. The acceleration of the times is felt more and more. Relationships are crumbling, families are atomizing. We are witnessing new types of family coexistence, such as single, mingle, patchwork families, homosexual families, etc. More and more young heterosexual couples do not enter into marriage because they consider marriage to be unnecessary formalities, declaring that "they do not need a piece of paper to love each other!" On the other hand, as if in opposition, young homosexual couples are demonstrating, demanding the legalization of their relationship up to the level of marriage or registered partnership. So we can observe that the traditional understanding of family formation (we mean heterosexual marriage) no longer needs "a piece of paper to legalize its relationship," while emerging forms of marital (as well as family) coexistence require "this piece of paper." We therefore ask why certain groups no longer need this "piece of paper," and conversely, why others demand this "piece of paper"?

1 Cohabitation – A New Trend in Family Formation

Marriage is represented in almost all countries around the world, whether in the form of civil or religious marriage or in forms that are often distant not only from our culture and mentality, but also from their religious worldview, e.g., as can be seen in primitive African polygamous tribes. Lat. Matrimonium is translated as marriage. This term consists of two words: "mater" (mother) and "munia", or "munus" (task, mission). Marriage is defined in all cultures as a relationship between one man and one woman, while in some countries (such as Slovakia) marriage is also defined as an equal relationship between a man and a woman. Marriage fulfills:

• legal aspect: it is a contract between a man and a woman,
• natural aspect: spouses who form a community are focused primarily on the good of the marriage itself: the good of the spouses, procreation and raising children,
• social aspect: this community is based on human nature,
• cultural, religious aspect: traditional marriage is understood as a relationship between one man and one woman (equality: Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox and Jewish religions; inequality, or so-called caste system: Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Confucianism).

Marriage is enshrined in Slovak family law as a permanent community of a man and a woman; its main purpose is to establish a family and raise children. This community, based on a legal relationship, is founded on the principles of voluntariness and equality. In the Slovak legal system, therefore, we recognize two types of marriage:

• religious or
• civil form (also known as civil marriage).

Marriage is a union of one man and one woman, concluded in a manner established or recognized by the Slovak Republic. No other union may be concluded in this manner. The special protection that the law grants to marriage cannot be granted to any union other than marriage. Marriage is often defined as an institution that performs certain tasks or functions in society. Understood in this way, marriage regulates relations between two people, primarily: property and legal relations. The phenomenon of marriage is demonstrated in almost all religions in the same way, i.e., marriage is understood as a union between a man and a woman, always performed sacramentally, or "ceremonially," for the purpose of mutual love, procreation and raising children, and last but not least, the creation and preservation of social status (in a broader and narrower sense, e.g., family).

Cohabitation, or legalized partnership is not a modern trend of the 21st century. Legalized partnerships began to be discussed as early as the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, while the phenomenon of homosexuality was prominently presented at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries. Legalized partnership is a legal form of allowing a union of two people of the same sex to enter into a mutual relationship as an alternative to marriage.

Aspects of partnership life:

• Legal aspect: The legal perspective in countries where legalized partnership does not exist is either absent or largely fragmented, or no obligations arise from partnerships, so if a couple separates, there are no legal sanctions for them.
• Social aspect: relationships man/woman (cohabitation), man/man or woman/woman (homosexual unions), are less permanent in statistical indicators (see table later)
• Natural aspect: absent…
• Cultural, religious aspect: this is an alternative to the traditional understanding of marriage. Marriage, from Lat. matrimonium is translated as mater (mother) and unus or munus (task, mission). A homosexual relationship can therefore, from an etymological perspective, always be designated only as a partnership. In states (the Netherlands...) where the term homosexual marriage exists legislatively, they are currently dealing with complaints to the constitutional court about an "etymological paradox." No religion officially approves of homosexual unions (only tolerates them).

The issue of legalizing homosexual partnerships (to the position of equal status with the classical form of marriage) is a sensitive topic. Not to mention the fact that traditional heterosexual relationships refuse to enter into and conclude marriage, claiming they do not need a "piece of paper" as proof of their love, while homosexual relationships or couples demand this "piece of paper." This is paradoxical and forces us to reflect on what is valuable and what is downright rejectable about this piece of "paper"... If we proceed from established conventions and models of the family, such a "basic unit of society" in Slovakia and throughout the European region is non-traditional. Not only from a biological and reproductive perspective, but also from the perspective of common paradigms. Traditional notions of marriage as a legalized union of a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation and raising children are slowly being replaced in Europe by a more liberal approach. The law on registered partnership is already in effect in eighteen European countries and allows same-sex partners to enter into unions similar to marriage. The law regulates the creation and termination of a partnership. Such a union is concluded before a registry office. It guarantees partners the right to information about health status and the right to inherit. It also establishes mutual maintenance obligations and allows for the joint upbringing of children, but not adoption. Traditional marriage is protected in various ways in Europe, for example, by the constitutions of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Ireland, or several states of the United States of America (Alaska, Hawaii, Nebraska, Nevada, Texas = approved own constitutional amendments protecting the definition of marriage; Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and others = approved protection of marriage by law or referendum; an exception is the state of Massachusetts, where homosexual marriage is legalized, as well as in Canada and the Republic of South Africa).

Table No. 1: Legislation of traditional marriage in some countries of the world

Source: TOMÁNEK, P. 2012a. Manželstvo, rodina a legalizované partnerstvá v EÚ. In Rodina v treťom tisícročí – Familiaris consortio – nádej pre súčasnú rodinu, 2012. p. 308.

In Slovakia, as in other EU countries, marriages are concluded before state and church authorities (according to the confessions recognized by the given state on its territory, e.g., Roman Catholic, Greek Catholic, Orthodox, Islamic religion and others). On the issue of legalized partnerships, however, we can also observe more significant interstate differences (from a legal perspective).

The legal regulation of life partnerships between two persons of the same sex in the EU and abroad is implemented in three forms:

1. de facto cohabitation – mutual rights and obligations of partners arise after the expiry of a specified period of cohabitation, usually regardless of the gender of the partners,
2. registered partnerships – a special legal institution representing state-recognized cohabitation of same-sex partners or regardless of gender, from which similar or equal rights arise as in the case of marriage,
3. marriages – marriages of homosexual couples are equivalent to marriages of heterosexual partners, including the possibility of raising children.

The first country to legalize homosexual marriages was the Netherlands (2001), followed by Belgium (2003), Spain (2005), and the most recent state to approve legalized homosexual marriages was France (2013). Although the United Kingdom approved homosexual marriages (2005), in comparison with the previous states, they are not officially recognized in the UK. The issue of legalizing homosexual marriages is often linked to the adoption of children for these homosexual married couples. Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, and also the United Kingdom have approved this idea. In Denmark, Norway, Germany, and France, homosexual spouses are allowed to adopt their partner's child.

Table No. 2: Homosexual partnerships or marriages in Europe

Source: TOMÁNEK, P. 2012a. Manželstvo, rodina a legalizované partnerstvá v EÚ. In Rodina v treťom tisícročí – Familiaris consortio – nádej pre súčasnú rodinu, 2012. pp. 309-310.

According to a survey conducted by the Center for Public Opinion Research (In Rovnost šancí) in October 2005 and data from research agencies GEORG and Focus, it was found that Slovaks are less tolerant towards homosexuals (including homosexual partnerships and marriages) than people in the Czech Republic. The survey comprised 1075 people. It found that only 24% of Slovaks would agree that homosexual couples should have the right to marry. The survey also revealed that 21% of Poles, 25% of Hungarians, and as many as 42% of Czechs answered the same question affirmatively (in percentage terms). Marriage and family do not hold a special social status and higher protection from society because of the individual fulfillment of the goals of individual members of the marriage, but primarily because of the unique and socially beneficial contribution that marriage and the family founded upon it bring to society as a whole. Therefore, we believe that the state should prefer a union that is in its "vital interest," i.e., a marital union that ensures the potential for the creation of a family, because childless marriages will not be in the vital interest of this society. The main mission of marriage is to establish a family and raise children. The natural position and function of the family and marriage arise from the basic needs of the human being. The status of special protection, in turn, arises from the reasons of the generally beneficial contributions of the family and marriage to society. The dimension of parenthood therefore directly belongs to the consciousness of every person who has entered into a marital union. Cohabitation (Ger. Wildehe), or registered partnerships (heterosexual and homosexual) and their promotion directly threaten the institution of marriage and, last but not least, the institution of the family. Heterosexual partner coexistence, in other words also often referred to as concubinage or cohabitation, fulfills the function of mutual enrichment of the partners, but the other basic functions (such as reproductive and educational) often go unnoticed, because many contemporary heterosexual partnerships are so burdened by work and social obligations that they do not want to take on additional responsibility, namely the procreation and upbringing of children. Homosexual partner coexistence does not even fulfill the basic reproductive function. Homosexual partners can become "parents" only:

• through adoption (if we mean a male-male relationship), or
• through a direct lineage (e.g., when a woman or a man from a first heterosexual relationship brings their own child, which was entrusted to their care, into a homosexual relationship).

Homosexuality thus often becomes an intermediate step towards establishing homosexual registered partnerships. The institution of marriage is often trivialized by these processes. Yet marriage has always been understood as the prerequisite of the basic unit of society – the family. Basic means that it can divide, i.e., pass on life. Unit – that it contains life within itself. Of society – thus the fact that without a future population the world will not exist... And the family is the first socializing environment where the child receives the first models of behavior. It is the place where his or her personality is built for the first time. And the primary influence on building a child's personality is always the mother and father.

2 Developmental Stages of Marriage and Family

Marriage and family evolve. The development of marriage is counted from the first joint spoken YES. Marriage and family are marked by children, family relationships, circumstances, and other factors that make marriage and family more flexible and resilient. Entering marriage with the conviction that THIS marriage will be the best is a mistaken view. Just as marriage develops, changes and matures, so do the people, children, relationships, attitudes, and opinions within it mature. These facts must be taken into account, because many people today who enter marriage separate and run away after the first conflict. This is a classic textbook example of an immature person who behaves like a child in such a situation, one who starts a fire but does not know how to put it out.

Developmental stages of marriage according to Tirpák (2010, pp. 51-52) are: 1. the period of marriage and family, the first 18 months: spouses get to know each other, have common interests, know where each other is. They are sensitive to one another and mutually observe how they behave towards their surroundings, especially the opposite sex. They begin to understand the connections regarding family members. Often the first pregnancy occurs, the first spontaneous abortions, dealing with the first conflicts. If the housing issue has not yet been resolved, spouses begin to think intensively about it. The foundations of mutual trust are established. With the arrival of a child come other worries and joys. The husband must take care not only of his wife during pregnancy but must also realize that the world will now revolve not around him, but around the child. The wife must not forget to evenly distribute her attention between the child and the husband. 2. the period of marriage and family up to three years: in most marriages, the first, if not the second, child is born. The family is stable, spouses understand each other. They are cautious about their child and are very careful about who says what about their child. With the arrival of the second child, sensitivity decreases. What they did not overlook with the first child, they will certainly overlook with the next. Not that the younger child receives less love and care, but the parents are more experienced and mature and will not be thrown off balance by any stumble of their offspring. If the spouses have been living with parents up to now, in most cases they consider moving to their own home. Parents lay the first foundations of ethics. The first information about religious orientation is also a necessary part. 3. the period of marriage and family up to six years: the first crises appear, in some cases infidelity. Obligations increase for both parents. Children begin to grow up and act out. Family relationships with the extended family either strengthen or degrade. On the other hand, this is the most beautiful period for parents, because they see the child growing from an early age, experiencing with him or her the first falls, first words, first questions, or first crushes in kindergarten. Sibling arguments often occur in the family over who owns which item, etc. The housing issue is often already resolved. Spouses most frequently pay off a mortgage. They develop their personalities, meet people with similar life goals. 4. the period of marriage and family up to twelve years: spouses have their first crises behind them. Their relationship is more stable. Mutual re-infatuation arrives. The possibility of having another child or children opens up. Parents know all the school obligations of their children. It is a period of personality growth not only for the children, but also for the marriage. Parents begin to meet at school with their former classmates, also parents, and exchange experiences and memories. They are relatively happy and considerate of each other. Spouses already know each other's boundaries. 5. the period of marriage and family up to twenty-five years: marriage is relatively stable. Parents often deal with pubertal issues, first serious love affairs, sexual and spiritual orientation of their children. Spouses discover the charm of their years, build their careers. In this period, another child is rarely born. Spouses attend various gatherings and enjoy going out to have fun while their children are cared for by extended family. At the end of this period, spouses usually pay off the mortgage on their housing. 6. the period of marriage up to fifty years of marriage: this is a period of great turbulence. Infidelity, alcoholism, job loss, feelings of inferiority often occur. Spouses prepare their children for their future lives. When a child leaves, they experience empty nest syndrome. If one spouse dies, the other often loses their spark for life. It is a period of their children's weddings, successful completion of studies, first grandchildren. It is a period of vacations, rest. Parents pass on the wisdom of life to their children. It is a period of beautiful memories. It is a period of wisdom, prudence, optimism, and criticism, which are actually signs of a perfectly developed and emotionally mature personality.

We also offer another typology of developmental stages of marriage:

1. young family: up to age 30, children and 5-year marriage,
2. "middle-aged family" (Tamášová, 2007, p. 55): parents, adolescent children, 15-25 year marriage,
3. empty nest: spouses together, children have left,
4. visitor family: after the death of a partner, widowhood and widowerhood.

3 Social Factors Affecting the Institution of Marriage and Family

J. Gabura (2006, p. 55) states that among the most frequent social factors that most influence the development and formation of the family are: "migration and the associated urbanization of the population, atomization of the family, and emancipation." All of these social factors are connected with work, seeking a livelihood, and moving for it, which also leaves an impact on the functioning of the family itself. Population migration is very closely linked to the urbanization of the population and the atomization of the family. People moving for work led and still leads to the mixing of different cultures, which manifests itself most between spouses in different socio-cultural backgrounds, differences in values, ideas, customs, traditions, and lifestyles to which the spouses were accustomed before entering marriage. This difference is often the cause of various arguments or misunderstandings in marriage. Moving to cities for work, urbanization, moreover breeds anonymity and represents the core of socio-pathological phenomena. Addictions of various kinds, violence, or theft, when a person's self-control fails, have a negative impact not only on the individual but also on his or her family members. Not only the individual suffers, but the whole family; mentally, physically, socially, economically. The situation is not made easier by the atomization of the family, which in the case of many young spouses weakens and breaks the bonds of the spouses with their extended family. Although society values and understands emancipation as an effort to equalize both genders, emancipation nevertheless represents another social factor that significantly affects the functioning of the family. O. Matoušek (1997, p. 32) states that: "the tension between traditional roles of men and women and current changes in these roles negatively affect the current stability of the family." Although on one hand, women's emancipation associated with educational and career growth leads to the mother's absence in the family, the paradox is that the same emancipation is, on the other hand, a necessity for the functioning of the family given the need for optimal financial security of the family, which is a response to the financial demands of the times. A poor or weak financial situation in the family necessarily leads to absence in the family concerning not only women but also men, who strive to improve the situation with overtime at work or a second job. The situation is further complicated by the constant lengthening of the period of work activity associated with the ever-increasing retirement age. B. Drexlerová (2011, p. 75) notes that it is precisely "insufficient financial security that adversely affects the satisfaction of the needs of all family members and the running of the household. Further consequences of the socio-economic problems of families include:

• lack of time,
• stress,
• social insecurity arising mainly from the possibility of job loss, constant inflation, and high competition in the labor market (caused mainly by the young generation without obligations)."

The family is a specific social environment, a cultural unit where upbringing and values, whether material or spiritual, are passed on. But in recent times, the family and marriage have been exposed to many, especially demographic, changes. Among the most common changes we include: increasing age of women at marriage entry, a significant decline in natality, reduction of family structure (max. 2 children), incomplete families, divorce rate, registered homosexual and heterosexual partnerships, homosexuality and lesbianism, fear of children, lack of finances, living space, impotence, deprivation (long-term unmet needs), atomization of the family (breakdown of the traditional family), entropy = extinction of the family, etc., workaholism, prostitution and pornography, addictions (internet, drugs, alcohol) and gambling, various deviations, liberalism, intergenerational problems, "rising individualism, availability of contraception, declining influence of churches and traditional religions on families, abortion rates, change in women's status, increased mobility, breakdown of traditional communities" (Tamášová, 2007, p. 38).

The basic indicator of socio-economic problems is precisely the level of achieved income. If the socio-economic situation in families, which is accompanied by stress, tension, and uncertainty, is unfavorable, it is also reflected in the quality of family relationships. According to M. Hardy et al. (2011), the biggest socio-economic problems in families include especially: unemployment, working for minimum wage, the ability to keep a job, indebtedness especially of young families in the form of late payments, loans, mortgages, arrears for energy, phone, etc. Problems caused by insufficient income and leading to feelings of shame, helplessness, or psychological burden also include: inadequate housing conditions, barriers to access to education or culture, insufficient health care, etc.

J. Gabura (2006) also includes mass media and the weakened influence of the church among other social factors affecting the functioning of families. Mass communication media, which willy-nilly influence the thinking, actions, behavior and expectations of their consumers, offer a model of an exemplary, ideal, or pathological family as imitation patterns, which in a certain way affects the comparison and satisfaction or dissatisfaction of partners with family life. Communication, joint conversations, interest in children or the partner are replaced by passive consumption in the form of television, video, computer games, or the internet. Authority, esteem, and respect for the family are also fading under the weakened influence of the church and its more benevolent approach or view of divorced people and the premarital sexual life of partners.

Declining marriage and birth rates, marriage and parenthood at a higher age and the associated overall aging of the population, increasing numbers of children born outside marriage, the rise of single-parent families, or increasing divorce rates essentially represent a consequence arising from the action of unfavorable social factors (Gabura, 2006). "The social problems that many families struggle with daily could be so bearable that they would not represent a fundamental problem for a normal and natural existence in society. The long-awaited recovery is currently slowed down, indeed virtually halted" (Gašparíková, 2009, p. 117). If a radical change does not occur in the area of social policy that would create a system or social program that is transparent, permanently financially sustainable with equal opportunities for all, guaranteeing the maintenance and development of human, economic, social, and cultural rights towards a decent standard of living for all, many families, especially young ones, will continue to struggle with social problems, which will affect the stability and expected functioning of the family.

The so-called marriage market also remains a question. It is often an inaccurate name. It essentially obscures the targeted destruction of marriage itself. The marriage market is primarily about the fact that marriage – as many of us know it – is presented as a commodity among other shelf products. In practice, it is often presented as a media marriage of people between whom there is a large age difference, or as a marriage for the purpose of obtaining a desired reward (various current reality shows), etc. Closely related to the marriage market are marriage fraudsters. They are usually organized in "pimping" groups. Often these are prostitutes whom "pimps" induce or force to subdue rich men. After a while, these men succumb to their beauty and naively marry a prostitute. Within at least a month, at most six months, divorce occurs and the assets are reduced by at least half (not to mention the psychological trauma that the other party – the victim – experiences). Among other factors threatening the institution of marriage and family, we also include so-called prenuptial agreements. The term prenuptial agreement is known to the general public thanks to high popularity and media presentation. Briefly, it is an agreement between two people (fiancés or future spouses) which, in the narrowest sense, binds both participating parties to the content of this agreement. It often presents facts relating primarily to the amount and size of the assets that each party brings into the marriage. In practice, it most commonly works in such a way that when the fiancés marry and "bring" their share of property into the marriage through the marital agreement, if a divorce were to occur, this prenuptial agreement can guarantee that they will not lose the property with which they entered the marital union. Even if the prenuptial agreement is not unconstitutional, it is at least unethical in its very essence. This leads to the illogical philosophizing that the fiancés love each other so much that they already know they will not love each other very much (a prenuptial agreement that, even before marriage, offers both parties the option or possibility of separation, etc.). Probably the most promoted trend in today's society, despite other circumstances, remains so-called living in partnerships (concubinage, cohabitation). We have already written about this modern phenomenon above. Many young people do not want to commit themselves to a permanent relationship through marriage. They rather choose the option to live "just like that," jointly buy and acquire property, mostly do not plan children, and if a breakup occurs between them, they divide everything according to their merits, or through the course of jurisdiction. They usually justify their behavior with claims such as: we will not get married so that we do not have to get divorced later, we will not have children because having children in today's society is a luxury that we cannot afford (having a child is financially costly), we must enjoy ourselves before entering marriage, we need to know if we will "click" together, we want to build our careers and marriage would unnecessarily burden us (wife, children, meals, etc.), and other reasons. Living in partnerships, however, does not facilitate entry into the marital union. The claim that young people want to live together in order to get to know each other is not true at all. To a significant extent, it is mostly about satisfying their sexual appetite. If a partner fails in the sexual sphere, many partnerships are doomed to the atomization of their relationship. Not to mention the psychological and economic problems that such breakups bring with them. In connection with cohabitation, we are increasingly encountering claims of women entering a relationship with the goal of HAVING A CHILD, but NOT WANTING A MAN! It could be said that these are lobbyist and hedonistic motives of the woman. The opposite, however, is true. Women often choose this lifestyle because: firstly, they have not yet found anyone with whom to spend their lives together; secondly, after the experiences of many abused and divorced women, they want to avoid potential problems in this way; and thirdly, they want to emerge from this pragmatic trial relationship as winners who became pregnant. Moreover, many women sign a form of contract with men, in which the woman undertakes to the man that after the birth of the child she will not ask him to acknowledge paternity or for possible child support, commonly known as alimony. This way of creating families is often called single family, along with so-called mingle or patchwork families. A consumerist lifestyle is beginning to prevail in families. Positive life values are disappearing from it, traditional values are being minimized, egoism, competitiveness, and individualism are asserting themselves. The following table presents the main direction of changes in the forms of marriage and family.

Table 3: Family and its changes

Source: ONDREJKOVIČ, P. 2006. Rodina v novom miléniu. Nitra: Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa, Nitra, 2006. p. 49. "Sociological surveys point to several changes in the family, both in the area of the role of the elementary reference group and with regard to the functions it performs. The family, in its social, cultural, and moral conditions, reflects the disorder of the culture of macro-society. Within the transmission of values among the population, the family can either strengthen or disrupt this disorder. The significance of the cited statistical data points to the extent of the phenomenon of the family crisis. This does not mean, however, that the family has definitively lost its privileged position in society and that it is unable to resist the destruction of the socio-cultural order and actively participate in shaping public life." (Ondrejkovič, 2006, pp. 49-50).

4 Current Facts of the Addressed Issue – Challenges, Perspectives and Recommendations for Practice

In the following chapter, we will not only reflect on certain phenomena brought by the opposition between marriage and partnership, but we will also try to argue some facts and provide relevant evidence.

• states that have not yet legalized heterosexual/homosexual partnerships often face ridicule for backwardness and a certain traditionalism and conservatism. However, as Pastor (2012, p. 268) states in his research: "Not everything modern is also good and ethical."
• according to Swiss and German research (2010-2011), involving 20,000 homosexuals, up to 68% of homosexuals are BISEXUAL(1)... however, according to R. Uzel, a Czech sexologist, bisexuality does not exist, it is just a certain kind of peculiar behavior... The question arises, then, what homosexuality actually is and what stance to take towards it?!
• not the family, but marriage is in crisis. Young people are not getting married, not entering into or concluding marriage, the result of which is often "single, mingle, patchwork, or homosexual families" (Tománek, 2012b, pp. 44-63).
• if A, then also B: countries where homosexual partnership is legalized (e.g., in the Netherlands for more than 12 years) are currently addressing the question of what to do with children raised by homosexual partners? Up to 57% of children from homosexual families have psychological and social problems. Why? Do children from heterosexual relationships not have similar problems? The answer is yes, but in great disproportion. In heterosexual relationships, a greater crisis occurs, often leading to divorce between the 5th and 7th year of married life, but in homosexual relationships it is between 1.5 and 3.5 years of living together (Pastor, 2012). This means that in homosexual relationships, turnover occurs 2 to 3 times earlier than in heterosexual relationships. Not to mention the fact of the upbringing of children themselves (by biological or adoptive means), who, through these frequent breakups of their "parents," lose the stability of any relationship... (this concerns e.g., the Netherlands, Australia, the United Kingdom,
• every minority group that comes "to the market" (e.g., new religion, sect, alternative to marriage...?) must present something by which it is beneficial to society. What does heterosexual/homosexual partnership bring?
• the question of concubinage (cohabitation): concubine means companion, prostitute. It is an older term for heterosexual cohabitation of partners. The term concubinage derives from this word. Pastor (2012, pp. 265-268) cites German research from 2008, which states that "marriages that arose after previous cohabitation end in divorce within 10 years after the conclusion of the marriage."

The contemporary family is threatened by several external and internal factors, which are (Kovačič, 2002, p. 48): "social influences, trends, attitudes and intentions; business and market environment; insufficient measures on the part of society; modernization and liberalization of society; reduced favorable influence of religion and religiosity; debasement of culture; destruction of family relationships; instability of marriages; unpreparedness to start a family; consumerist lifestyle and others." Thanks to these aspects, we often encounter the view that the contemporary family and the associated family education are in crisis. But the truth lies somewhere much earlier, with marriage. Today's people seek other alternatives to marital coexistence (e.g., cohabitation, homosexual unions, etc.), which in their very essence cannot fulfill the essence of marriage and, last but not least, of the family, namely the procreation of children. Every day the world offers information about the disintegration of ethical norms of society, about the disintegration of marriages, families, brutality, violence... Society is gradually losing control over its emotions, falling into loneliness and a kind of emotional numbness and ruthlessness not only in family but often also in work relationships. The family is becoming a priority interest of the market, exposed to a virtual world whose representative is a virtual hero, fearless, "aggressive, but also unbalanced and emotionally unstable" (Gálik, 2003, p. 16).

Some Recommendations for Practice

From the previous chapters we can propose the following points of a preventive system within families or family education:

• include more space in the curriculum for family and media education so that students learn about proper behavior towards parents and other people,
• make proper use of free time: limit the computer only to school obligations; do more sports, play a musical instrument, draw, or engage in visual and dramatic arts,
• intensify premarital preparation: education for marriage and parenthood (lectures, presentations, discussions), as well as education for responsible sexuality. Sexuality has an important place in education. The attitude towards sexuality cannot be overlooked, neglected, or ignored, or permanently suppressed. It is, after all, part of the entire human personality.
• emphasize the family, marriage, procreation and raising of children within the curriculum of religious, ethical, or civic education,
• submit complaints against inappropriate programs: e.g., to the Arbitration Commission of the Council for Advertising - www.rpr.sk,
• present positive role models (not celebrities, etc.).

Conclusion

Despite this information, the study remains an open and unresolved dilemma. We wish to emphasize that despite the effort to reflect the facts about the phenomenon of marriage and registered partnership as objectively as possible, our study still leaves room for further newly acquired information from these areas, also thanks to the significant presentation of multiculturalism and multireligiosity in our environment. The study presents the results and information obtained so far about marriage and registered partnership, which should help to better reflect on these "forms" of living together. The marital union cannot be equated with homosexual or even heterosexual, albeit legalized, partnership or cohabitation. There is no alternative to marriage, no imitation, because marriage has always been defined in human history as an equal union of a man and a woman.

Author: PaedDr. et Mgr. Pavol Tománek, PhD. Faculty of Education, Comenius University in Bratislava, Department of Pedagogy and Social Pedagogy References:

DREXLEROVÁ, B. 2011. Sociálno – ekonomické problémy súčasnej rodiny. In Sociálna patológia rodiny. Zborník z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie. Bratislava: Vysoká škola zdravotníctva a sociálnej práce sv. Alžbety, 2011. ISBN 978-80-8132-000-2, s. 72 – 80. FERRERO, B. 2007. Vychovávej jako Don Bosco. Praha : Portál, 2007. 143 s. ISBN 978-80-7367-294-2. FEŠKOVÁ, Š. 2009. Rodina – najrizikovejší faktor vzniku porúch správania u žiakov? In Školský psycholog a kvalita školy. Nitra : UKF, 2009. s. 191-199. ISBN 978-80-8094-507-7. FRÝDKOVÁ, E. 2010.Rodičia ako edukační partneri školy. Trnava : Univerzita sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave, 2010. 174 s. - ISBN 978-80-8105-200-2. GÁLIK, S. 2003. Kultúra, globalizácia a médiá. In Médiá na prahu 3. tisícročia. Trnava : UCM, 2003. 190 s. ISBN 80-8903-434-9. GABURA, J. 2006. Sociálna práca s rodinou. 1. vyd. Bratislava: OZ sociálna práca, 2006. 59 s. GAŠPARÍKOVÁ, D. 2009. Súčasná rodina v sociálnej a ekonomickej núdzi. In Sociálna a ekonomická núdza – bezpečnosť jedinca a spoločnosti. Bratislava: Vysoká škola zdravotníctva a sociálnej práce sv. Alžbety, 2009. ISBN 978-80-89271-63-4, s. 115 – 123. HARDY, M. – DUDÁŠOVÁ, T. – VRANKOVÁ, E. – HRAŠKOVÁ, A. 2011. Sociálna patológia rodiny. Zborník z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie. Bratislava : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety. 365 s. ISBN 978-80-8132-000-2. KOVAČIČ, V. 2002. Model funkčnej rodiny a formovanie osobnosti podľa princípov SVD a SJ. Vrútky : Pro Konzult, 2002. 216 s. ISBN 80-8875-409-7. KOSTRUB, D. 2008. Dieťa/žiak/študent - učivo - učiteľ, didaktický alebo bermudský trojuholník ? 1. vyd. Prešov : Rokus, 2008. s. 171 ISBN 978-80-89055-87-6 KOSTRUB, D. - TÓTHOVÁ, R. - SEVERINI, E. - SCHERHAUFEROVÁ, M. 2013. nvestigation of students concepts about learning and teaching process from aspect of learning theories. In Edukacja w kreowaniu współczesnej rzeczywistości : możliwości i ograniczenia 2, Siedlce : Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny, 2013 s. 205-215. ISBN 978-83-936635-1-4 KURUC, M. 2013. Poruchy správanie u detí a adolescentov a ich pedagogická diagnostika. Bratislava : UK, 2013. 65 s. ISBN 978-80-223-3512-6. MATOUŠEK, O. 1997. Rodina jako instituce a vztahová síť. Praha: SLON. 1997. 144 s. ISBN 80-85850-24-9. ONDREJKOVIČ, P. 2006. Rodina v novom miléniu. Nitra : Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa, Nitra, 2006. 168 s. ISBN 80-8050-982-4. PASTOR, K. 2012. Demografické faktory stability manželstva. Bratislava : Teologická fakulta Katolíckej univerzity v Ružomberku. Inštitút Jána Pavla II. v Bratislave. In Rodina v treťom tisícročí – Familiaris consortio –nádej pre súčasnú rodinu, 2012. s. 262-268. ISBN 978-80-971162-8-6. RAO SAHIB, P., GU, X. 2001. As good as married : a model of long-term cohabitation, learning and marriage. Department of Economics, University of Toronto. Department of International Economics and Bussines, Faculty of Economics, University of Groningen. RAO SAHIB, P., GU, X. 2001. Risk Cohabitation and Marriage. Department of Economics, University of Toronto. SOM Research School and Population Research Centre, University of Groningen, 2001. TAMÁŠOVÁ, V. 2007. Teória a prax rodinnej edukácie. Ivanka pri Dunaji : Axima, 2007. 210 s. ISBN 978-80-969178-3-9. TIRPÁK, P. 2010. Rodinná výchova. Prešov : Prešovská univerzita, GKTF, 2010. 146 s. ISBN 978-80-555-0142-0. TOMÁNEK, P. – TOMÁNKOVÁ, M. 2012a. Manželstvo, rodina a legalizované partnerstvá v EÚ. Bratislava : Teologická fakulta Katolíckej univerzity v Ružomberku. Inštitút Jána Pavla II. v Bratislave. In Rodina v treťom tisícročí – Familiaris consortio –nádej pre súčasnú rodinu, 2012. s. 294-313. ISBN 978-80-971162-8-6. TOMÁNEK, P. 2012b. Nové podoby rodiny. In Lifelong learning, roč. 2, č. 3, s. 44-63. ISSN1804-526X. TOMÁNEK, P. 2012c. Teoretické východiská rodinnej výchovy. Brno : Tribun. 165 s. ISBN 978-80-263-0233-9. ZÁKON č. 154/1994 Z.z. NR SR o matrikách, druhá časť - paragrafy § 27-30. ZÁKON č. 40/1964. Občiansky zákonník. Bezpodielové spoluvlastníctvo manželov, § 143-151. ŽILÍNEK, M. 1997. Éthos a utváranie mravnej identity osobnosti. Bratislava : Iris, 1997. s. 34-35. ISBN 8088778603.

Registrované partnerstvo už aj v Čechách: http://www.euractiv.sk/rovnost-sanci/clanok/registrovane-partnerstvo-uz-aj-v-cechach (cited 16.3.2012) Euroinfo: http://www.euroinfo.gov.sk/index/go.php?id=1418 (cited 16.3.2012) Euroinfo: http://www.euroinfo.gov.sk/index/go.php?id=1528 (cited 16.3.2012) Ganymedes: http://www.ganymedes.info/archiv2006/rok2006.asp?intClanek=6 (cited 16.3.2012) Registrované partnerstvo: http://www.pramen.info/c/386/registrovane-partnerstvo-v-sr-htm (cited 16.3.2012) Adoptive couple vs. Baby girl: http://www.law.ufl.edu/academics/centers/childlaw/ (cited 4.6.2013) Registeried partnership: http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/journals/#j0 (cited 4.6.2013) The negative effects of same sex marriages: http://christocentric.com/main/?p=992 (cited 4.6.2013) Gay family?: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/...78/gay-family-parents-lgbt.html.csp (cited 4.6.2013) Protect the children: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/10/protect-the-children (cited 4.6.2013)

(1) Protect the children: www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/10/protect-the-children (cited 4.6.2013)