Study: Gay civil unions may last longer

Five years after Vermont approved gay civil unions, researchers say legally recognized same-sex couples may be longer-lasting than those without legal status.

The study was a 3-year follow-up of 65 male and 138 female same-sex couples who had civil unions in Vermont during the 1st year of that legislation. These couples were compared with 23 male and 61 female same-sex couples in their friendship circles who did not have civil unions and with 55 heterosexual married couples (1 member of each was a sibling to a member of a civil union couple).

Despite the legalized nature of their relationships, civil union couples did not differ on any measure from same-sex couples who were not in civil unions. However, same-sex couples not in civil unions were more likely to have ended their relationships than same-sex civil union or heterosexual married couples. Compared with heterosexual married participants, both types of same-sex couples reported greater relationship quality, compatibility, and intimacy and lower levels of conflict. Longitudinal predictors of relationship quality at Time 2 included less conflict, greater level of outness, and a shorter relationship length for men in same-sex relationships and included less conflict and more frequent sex for women in same-sex relationships.

more

Read full story from gaynewsblog.net

[ElPasoGuy]

REAL link to article: http://tinyurl.com/GayMarriageSurvey

[Deningrad]

Ok will you should read this CAREFULY!

[Thomas Jackson]

ElPasoGuy wrote:

REAL link to article: http://tinyurl.com/GayMarriageSurvey

Actually, El Pahttp://tinyurl.com/648wqzso Guy, my post includes both a link to all of the story at your "real link" as well as a summary by the authors of the study.

So by going to your "real link," people will find less "real news."

[George Funk]

I suppose we all would have guess relationships last longer with legal support, but it's important to have empirical evidence.

[LI Watch]

Sorry, a 3 year study is not really indicative of anything. It's barely a statistical blip on the radar. What about a 15 year study? Or a 30 year study? Something for people with relationships that are a bit lengthier? 3 years is a very short time-frame when it comes to cultural analysis. It barely spans a few percent of a generation.

[Ralph]

LI Watch wrote:

Sorry, a 3 year study is not really indicative of anything. It's barely a statistical blip on the radar. What about a 15 year study? Or a 30 year study? Something for people with relationships that are a bit lengthier? 3 years is a very short time-frame when it comes to cultural analysis. It barely spans a few percent of a generation.

I am quite sure that same-sex marriage has not been available for 15 years. How would you go about a 15 year study on something that has not existed that long? I imagine that someone, somewhere will most probably have a study like that come out at the appropriate time, however, for the time being, we will have to make do with what IS available. The folks against same-sex marriage constantly deride us because history has shown that same-sex couples seldom make it long-term. I believe I read somewhere the figure is something like 13% make it over 15 years. Now, when we do have some evidence to support the need for same-sex marriage, you immediately whant to shoot it down because it is not a long enough study? In other words, "we will let you have it if you prove it will work, but you can't have it until you prove it will work for over 15 years"?

[LI Watch]

Ralph wrote:

<quoted text>
I am quite sure that same-sex marriage has not been available for 15 years. How would you go about a 15 year study on something that has not existed that long? I imagine that someone, somewhere will most probably have a study like that come out at the appropriate time, however, for the time being, we will have to make do with what IS available. The folks against same-sex marriage constantly deride us because history has shown that same-sex couples seldom make it long-term. I believe I read somewhere the figure is something like 13% make it over 15 years. Now, when we do have some evidence to support the need for same-sex marriage, you immediately whant to shoot it down because it is not a long enough study? In other words, "we will let you have it if you prove it will work, but you can't have it until you prove it will work for over 15 years"?

Nice try, I want citations with your numbers because the APA released findings that homosexual couples were just as stable, not more stable, than heterosexual couples. And yes, I'm saying that 3 years is, statistically, too short a timeframe to work with. Just making do with what you have is a just a lame excuse for poor evaluations. To quote my statistics professor, do the job right or don't do it at all.

[ElPasoGuy]

Thomas this is your posted link as it shows up on my Mac:

Full Story: gaynewsblog.net

All your doing is driving clicks to your site instead of directly to the article. Read your profile it's all there. Then we can talk about honesty.

Beyond that the data provided by the article could just as well have been put together by a Swiss cheese maker.