Letter: Saying 'I do' for the wrong reason

DANI Garavelli (Insight, 13 February) suggested that the massive difference in relational stability between marriage and cohabitation is caused by differences in circumstance, not marital status.

She is no doubt partly right, but marriages following cohabitations are also less stable than those between couples moving in together from their wedding day. The evidence is clear that marriages between couples who have not had sex with each other or anyone else, and do not cohabit before marriage, are most likely to succeed; in other words, the traditional Christian view of marriage provides a society with the best framework for facilitating stable families.

Unfortunately, this understanding is widely derided. To suggest that these facts be included in children's education would, in many schools, be seen as akin to starting a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan.

But comparing the staying power of married couples to those who cohabit is none the less fatuous. Only a small proportion of those who live together - and Ed Miliband may be among them - have chosen lifelong commitment without the ceremony on a point of principle. Some will have moved in together for practical reasons; some will be trying to make a go of things after an unplanned pregnancy; others will be road-testing their relationship to see if they're really suited. As a result, they are self-evidently more likely to break up. To incentivise marriage - in other words to offer these swithering, uncertain couples a financial carrot to take the plunge - can only lead to more heartache.

Richard Lucas, Edinburgh