China sends over 1000 single men and women on overnight train journey to find love

China sends over 1000 single men and women on overnight train journey to find love
The train, which is called “Y999” and also known as “Love-Pursuit,” is specially designed to help

young people fall in love.
IT-S-VIRAL Updated: Aug 31, 2019 14:37 IST
Trisha Sengupta
Trisha Sengupta
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
Single people taking a trip on Love-Pursuit train in China.
Single people taking a trip on Love-Pursuit train in China. (Twitter/@thandojo)





In China, there are over 200 million singletons. It means, most of these single people need to find a

way to meet their significant others. Let’s admit, for many, that’s not an easy job. Probably that’s the

reason, the youth wing of the country’s ruling party decided to intervene and make things easier for

the single men and women. And, they did so in the most unusual way possible – by introducing a

“love train.”

The train, which is called “Y999” and also known as “Love-Pursuit,” is specially designed to help

young people fall in love, reports Insider. This overnight train project started about three years ago.

Though it has only been on three journeys till now, thousands of people trying to find love have

already taken the trip.

This year too, on August 10, the train departed from Chongqing North station with Qianjiang as its

destination, reports Insider. The purpose of the two-day journey was to help the passengers on-

board to get to know each other better – and eventually spark a love connection.

The love train departed from Chongqing North station with Qianjiang as its destination.
The love train departed from Chongqing North station with Qianjiang as its destination.
“These activities are more creative than matchmaking. The train is like a bridge, bringing people

from different places together, to get to know each other during the journey,” one of the participants

Huang Song told Insider. “Even if you don’t find the right one for you, you can still make a lot of

friends on the train,” Song added.

This unusual approach is actually working in reality as it has brought hundreds of people together,

reports Dailymail. Further, 10 couples also got married after they took a ride on Love-Pursuit train.

If given a chance, would you like to take a ride?


'Jab They Met': Single Men and Women are Boarding China's Special Train to 'Find' Love
'The train is like a magpie bridge, bringing people from different places together to get to know each

other during the journey,' one of the participants said.
Trending DeskUpdated:August 31, 2019, 12:09 PM ISTfacebookTwitterskype
'Jab They Met': Single Men and Women are Boarding China's Special Train to 'Find' LoveImage for

representation purpose only / AFP.

Laser Hair Treatment Costs In Hyderabad May Surprise You
laser-hair-removal

Laser Hair Removal Might Be Easier And Cheaper Than You Think
laser-hair-removal
Over a 1,000 young men and women travelled aboard a special train in the hopes of finding the

perfect partner earlier this month in China as the country tries to close a huge gender gap that has

been in the making since the implementation of the “one-child policy” during the 1970s.

The two-day and one night journey from Chongqing North Station to Qianjiang Station began on

August 10, Asia One reported.

The 10-carriage Y999 'Love-Pursuit Train' was launched three years ago as a roving matchmaking

service for the country's 200 million single people, Daily Mail UK reported.

Since then, more than 3,000 youngsters have undertaken the journey with 10 couples getting

married after meeting each other on the train.

“Such activities are more creative than matchmaking. The train is like a magpie bridge, bringing

people from different places together to get to know each other during the journey,” one of the

participants, Huang Song, was quoted as saying. “Even if you don't find the right one for you, you

can still make a lot of friends on the train.”

Besides various games and dining options, passengers also stopped over at the ancient water town

of Zhuo Shui to watch traditional performances and enjoy a 1,000-people banquet. Yang Huan said

she already found herself a boyfriend while travelling on the 'Love-Pursuit Train'. “We only got to

know each other on the return trip and realised we had matching values,” she told news website

youth.cn.

“We realised that we both wanted the kind of love that is depicted in poem "To the Oak Tree" when

both sides admire each other but remain independent. We enjoyed being together. [It felt] nature,

easy and not coy,” she was quoted as saying.

Some 30 million Chinese men are estimated to be “wifeless over the next 30 years” due to the

one-child policy, which was abolished in 2016, and led to many couples deciding to abort unborn

girls in order for a chance to have a boy.

With only 7.2 people out of every 1,000 getting hitched in the country in 2018, China's marriage rate

hit a decade low last year.

The mandatory one-child policy was launched in the late 1970s amid a soaring population due to a

post-war baby boom encouraged by Chairman Mao. The rule was aimed at keeping the Chinese

population under 1.2 billion by the end of the 20th century.

In urban areas, women were asked to abort second pregnancies and couples were imposed fines,

usually three times their annual income, in case they decided to have a second child.

China Sends More Than 1,000 Single People On 'Love Train' To Find Their Other Half
 Priyanshi Mathur Updated: Aug 29, 2019, 13:15 IST3.3K SHARES
FACEBOOK

TWITTER

REDDIT

SAVE

If you've ever dreamed of finding love on a train journey, then this might be just the thing for you.

If sources are to be believed, you can now head to China and find your Mr Right, and all it'll take is a special train. According to reports, China has started a special train service that has been designed to take the country’s 200 million single people to a destination called amour.

More than 1,000 men and women were on the overnight ‘romantic’ train journey last week, hoping to find their Mr and Ms Right among like-minded fellow travellers. The carriage train, known as the Y999 ‘Love Pursuit Train,’ was launched three years ago as a creative platform for youngsters to meet new people.


love train

DAILY MAIL

More than 3,000 young people have ridden the train on its three annual trips and 10 couples have got married finding each other here.

DON'T MISS
The match-making service was initiated by the railway authority of Chengdu together with the Communist Youth League of Chongqing. The organisers also designed various games and dining options to help the participants get to know each other.

A woman, Yang Huan, said that she has already found a boyfriend. “We only got to know each other on the return trip and realised we had matching values,” she told youth.cn, a news website affiliated to the Communist Youth League of China.

love train

DAILY MAIL

She added, “We realised that we both wanted the kind of love that is depicted in poem ‘To the Oak Tree’ when both sides admire each other but remain independent. We enjoyed being together. [It felt] natural, easy and not coy.”

The train should run in India too, what do you think?

Adult couple can live together without marriage: Supreme Court

Adult couple can live together without marriage: Supreme Court
The observations came while the top court was hearing a plea filed by Nandakumar against a Kerala High Court order annulling his marriage with Thushara on the ground that he had not attained the legal age of marriage.
INDIA Updated: May 06, 2018 21:11 IST

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/adult-couple-can-live-together-without-marriage-supreme-court/story-78VUJpqqqLVlLm7EqSfeBK.html

Press Trust of India, New Delhi
The Supreme Court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The Supreme Court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. (HT File Photo)





An adult couple has a right to live together without marriage, the Supreme Court said, while asserting that a 20-year-old Kerala woman, whose marriage had been annulled, could choose whom she wanted to live with.

The top court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

The observations came while the apex court was hearing a plea filed by one Nandakumar against a Kerala High Court order annulling his marriage with Thushara on the ground that he had not attained the legal age of marriage.

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act states that a girl can’t marry before the age of 18, and a boy before 21.


Nandakumar, who had approached the top court, will turn 21 on May 30 this year.

The high court had also granted the custody of Thushara to her father after noting that she was not Nandakumar’s “lawfully wedded” wife.

A bench of justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said their marriage could not said to be “null and void” merely because Nandakumar was less than 21 years of age at the time of marriage.

“Appellant no 1 as well as Thushara are Hindus. Such a marriage is not a void marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and as per the provisions of section 12, which can be attracted in such a case, at the most, the marriage would be a voidable marriage...

“It is sufficient to note that both appellant no 1 and Thushara are major. Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have right to live together even outside wedlock,” the bench said.

While setting aside the order of the high court granting custody of woman to her father, the apex court said that “we make it clear that the freedom of choice would be of Thushara as to with whom she wants to live”.

It also referred to a recent case involving a woman from Kerala, Hadiya, where it had restored her marriage with Shafin Jahan on the ground that it was a marriage between two consenting adults.

The apex court had also clarified that a court cannot interfere in the marriage of two consenting adult and cannot annul the marriage in a habeas corpus (a writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, for securing the person’s release) petition.

Adults don't have to marry, can stay in a live-in relationship

Adults don't have to marry, can stay in a live-in relationship: Laws you should know
In light of the recently updated law that de-criminalizes live-in relationships, the bench ruled that 'marriageable age is not a relevant factor for living together by two adults'. Read to know the live-in relationship laws in India and the recent judgment.

https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/you-could-be-too-young-for-marriage-but-old-enough-for-a-live-in-relationship-reminds-supreme-court-laws-you-should-know-1228325-2018-05-07


Tanya Saihgal
New Delhi
May 7, 2018UPDATED: May 7, 2018 18:43 IST
A still from the movie Cocktail. (Representational image)
A still from the movie Cocktail. (Representational image)
Two adults have the right to live together even if they have not attained marriageable age, the Supreme Court has said. The ruling came in a recent Kerala case of a father filing a plea for his daughter eloping with an 'underage' boy.

Hence, according to the law, if you are an adult you can live in with another adult. In India, a person becomes an adult when s/he turns 18 years.

The Kerala case
A father filed a missing person report after his 19-year-old daughter had allegedly eloped and married a boy of under 21 years of age
Since the girl was of marriageable age but the boy wasn't, the Kerala High Court entrusted the custody of the girl to her father
The boy approached the apex court contending that since the girl is admittedly a major, she has the right to live wherever she wants to or move as per her choice and the high court could not have entrusted the girl to her father
The bench of Justice AK Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan agreed with these contentions, and observed:
Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have the right to live together even outside wedlock. It would not be out of place to mention that 'live-in relationship' is now recognised by the legislature itself which has found its place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Adding that:
"The daughter is entitled to enjoy her freedom as the law permits and the court should not assume the role of a super guardian being moved by any kind of sentiment of the mother or the egotism of the father."

ADVERTISEMENT

Here is the best part:
We make it clear that the freedom of choice would be of Thushara (the girl) as to with whom she wants to live
- the bench said while allowing the appeal
Live-in relationships were declared as an acceptable custom in Indian society by the Supreme Court on July 23, 2015. Here is how.

A woman aged 29, who has been in a live-in relationship with her partner for three years, thinks that "however free couples living-in together are according to the law in our country, society does not accept them in the same way. The judiciary has come along way in decriminalising and criminalising a lot of things, but the problem lies in the people, their mindsets, their thinking".

Quoting an incident she faced being in a live-in with her partner, she told us:
When we [she and her partner] were looking for a place to stay, we were rejected by about 20 landlords before we finally were accepted at the one we have been living in since. It was a hard time...
Protection of women and child rights in live-in relationships
Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been provided to give a legal right of maintenance to lady partners in or out of a marriage
As per Section 2 (f) of the Domestic Violence Act not only applies to a married couple, but also to a 'relationship in nature of marriage'
Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, provides the legal status of legitimacy even to illegitimate children (those born out of marriage) for the sole purpose of inheritance. Therefore, inheritance rights have been granted to children born out of a live-in relationship. These rights are available in both ancestral and self-bought properties

Cohabitation

Cohabitation
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Live-in+relationship

A living arrangement in which an unmarried couple lives together in a long-term relationship that

resembles a marriage.

Couples cohabit, rather than marry, for a variety of reasons. They may want to test their compatibility

before they commit to a legal union. They may want to maintain their single status for financial

reasons. In some cases, such as those involving gay or lesbian couples, or individuals already

married to another person, the law does not allow them to marry. In other cases, the partners may

feel that marriage is unnecessary. Whatever the reasons, between 1970 and 1990, the number of

couples living together outside of marriage quadrupled, from 523,000 to nearly 3 million. These

couples face some of the same legal issues as married couples, as well as some issues that their

married friends need never consider.

In most places, it is legal for unmarried people to live together, although some Zoning laws prohibit

more than three unrelated people from inhabiting a house or apartment. A few states still prohibit

fornication, or sexual relations between an unmarried man and woman, but such laws are no

longer enforced. Even in the early twenty-first century, some states continue to prohibit Sodomy,

which includes sexual relations between people of the same sex. Although these laws are rarely

enforced, the U. S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these sodomy statutes as applied

to same-sex couples in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 106 S. Ct. 2841, 92 L. Ed. 2d 140

(1986). The Court reconsidered the same issue 17 years later, however, and decided that a Texas

sodomy law that applied specifically to homosexual conduct violated the due process clause of the

Fourteenth Amendment (lawrence v. texas, 539 U.S. ___, 123 S. Ct. 2472,156 L. Ed. 2d 508

[2003]). Advocates of Gay and Lesbian Rights viewed the case as a victory for their cause.

The law traditionally has been biased in favor of marriage. Public policy supports marriage as

necessary to the stability of the family, the basic societal unit. To preserve and encourage marriage,

the law reserves many rights and privileges to married persons. Cohabitation carries none of those

rights and privileges. It has been said that cohabitation has all of the headaches of marriage without

any of the benefits. Cohabiting couples have little guidance as to their legal rights in such areas as

property ownership, responsibility for debts, custody, access to health care and other benefits, and

survivorship.

Family Law experts advise cohabiting couples to address these and other issues in a written

cohabitation agreement, similar to a Premarital Agreement. The contract should outline how the

couple will divide expenses and own property, whether they will maintain joint or separate bank

accounts, and how their assets will be distributed if one partner dies or leaves the relationship.

Property acquired during cohabitation, such as real estate, home furnishings, antiques, artwork,

china, silver, tools, and sports equipment, may be contested if partners separate or if one of them

dies. To avoid this, the agreement should clearly outline who is entitled to what.

When cohabiting couples separate, division of assets often becomes a contentious issue. In the

past, courts refused to enforce agreements between unmarried couples to share income or assets,

holding that such agreements were against public policy. In 1976, the California Supreme Court

decided Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal. 3d 660, 134 Cal. Rptr. 815, 557 P.2d 106, holding that

agreements between cohabiting couples to share income received during the time they live together

can be legally binding and enforceable. The highly publicized suit between actor Lee Marvin and his

live-in companion, Michelle Triola Marvin, was the first of a series of "palimony" suits that have

become more numerous since the 1980s. The plaintiff in a palimony suit must prove that the

agreement of financial support is not a meretricious agreement, that is, one made in exchange for a

promise of sexual relations. Courts refuse to enforce meretricious contracts because of their

similarity to contracts for prostitution.

The only way to guarantee that a valid agreement of support or division of property exists is to have

it in writing. In the Marvin case, the plaintiff, who asked for $1.6 million, was awarded only $104,000.

An appeals court revoked that amount and found that the plaintiff had failed to show that she and

the defendant had an agreement (Marvin v. Marvin, 122 Cal. App. 3d 871, 176 Cal. Rptr. 555 [Cal.

Ct. App. 1981]). Conversely, when tennis star Martina Navratilova separated from live-in lover Judy

Nelson in 1993, Nelson filed a $16 million palimony suit, claiming that Navratilova reneged on a

promise to share whatever the couple accumulated during their relationship. A signed and

videotaped 1986 cohabitation agreement supported Nelson's claim, and Navratilova settled out of

court for an undisclosed amount.

Cohabiting parents may face legal difficulties if they separate without a written parenting agreement.

An unmarried father must acknowledge Paternity by filing an Affidavit with the state legitimating his

child and establishing his parental relationship. Likewise, both parents must actively participate in

the raising of the child in order to have a legitimate claim to custody or visitation. By legitimating their

child and being involved in the child's upbringing, unmarried parents establish their right to seek

custody or visitation if the family breaks up. Legitimation is also important for inheritance purposes. If

an unmarried father dies without a will, his legitimated child can freely inherit his estate (see Trimble

v. Gordon, 430 U.S. 762, 97 S. Ct. 1459, 52 L. Ed. 2d 31 [1977], which held that a signed statement

establishing paternity of a child born out of wedlock is adequate protection of the child's inheritance

rights). Of course, the best way to guarantee the distribution of assets to children is through a

written will.

Cohabiting couples may face difficulties when one of them becomes ill and requires hospitalization

or long-term care. The case of Sharon Kowalski and Karen Thompson illustrates this problem.

Kowalski and Thompson lived together for four years before Kowalski sustained serious head

injuries in a 1983 automobile accident. She was left paralyzed and seriously brain damaged, but

able to communicate. Kowalski's parents refused to allow Thompson to see her or to participate in

decisions about her treatment. In 1984, Kowalski's father was awarded guardianship of Kowalski

(In re Kowalski, 382 N.W.2d 861 [Minn. Ct. App. 1986] and the family continued to frustrate

Thompson's efforts to see or assist Kowalski. In 1991, Kowalski's father voluntarily gave up his

guardianship for medical reasons, and a Minnesota trial court awarded guardianship to Karen

Tomberlin, a family friend whom the court considered a "neutral third party." The Minnesota Court of

Appeals reversed the trial court, and after a seven-year battle, Thompson was finally granted

guardianship of Kowalski (In re Kowalski, 478 N.W.2d 790 [Minn. Ct. App. 1991]). The court held

that Kowalski had "sufficient capacity" to express her preference as to a guardian and that she had

consistently said she wanted to be with Thompson. The court also noted the duration of the

couple's relationship as well as the fact that they had exchanged rings and named each other as

insurance beneficiaries before Kowalski's accident.

Cohabiting couples can avoid such conflicts by executing certain documents, including a durable

Power of Attorney and a medical power of attorney. A durable power of attorney grants an

unmarried partner the necessary authority to make decisions in the event of physical or mental

disability of the other partner. It goes further than a general power of attorney in that it specifically

allows one partner to continue making decisions even if the other partner becomes incapacitated. A

medical power of attorney allows one partner to make decisions regarding medical treatment for the

other. If the partners have specific instructions about funeral arrangements, these too should be put

in writing. In addition, a written will or trust allows partners to specify the distribution of their property,

including life insurance benefits, IRAs, and bank accounts. Partners may also name their preferred

trustee or executor.

Many cohabiting heterosexual couples believe that the law will recognize their relation-ship as a

Common-Law Marriage with the legal protections and financial benefits of marriage. However, only

Alabama, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Ohio,

Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah recognize common-law

marriage. In those states, a man and woman who live together and represent themselves as

married may be given common-law recognition. Once a common-law marriage has been

established, it must be dissolved through Divorce. Cohabiting couples who live in a state that

recognizes common-law marriage and do not wish to be married should execute a statement that

they are not married in order to avoid a later finding that a common-law marriage existed.

In the 1990s, a few courts began to recognize the familial ties of unmarried couples. In Braschi v.

Stahl Associates, 74 N.Y.2d 201, 543 N.E.2d 49, 544 N.Y.S.2d 784 (1989), New York State's

highest court found that a homosexual man and his deceased life partner had constituted a family

for purposes of New York City's rent control ordinance. The court found that in this case, the term

family should be construed broadly and should encompass contemporary realities, including

unmarried adult partners in a long-term, committed relationship that shows mutual sharing of the

mundane tasks of everyday life. Similarly, in Dunphy v. Gregor, 261 N.J. Super. 110, 617 A.2d 1248

(N.J. 1992), the court found that a woman who had witnessed the events leading to her fiancé's

death had standing to sue for the emotional damage she suffered as a result. Previously, suits such

as this (called bystander liability suits) were limited to those who were married or had blood ties to

the victim. However, the court in Dunphy found that the plaintiff met the requirement of "intimate

familial relationship," noting that the plaintiff and her fiancé had lived together for several years, that

there was a high degree of mutual dependence in their relationship, and that they contributed to and

shared a common life.

Since the 1980s, a growing number of states and municipalities have passed laws allowing

unmarried couples, both heterosexual and homosexual, to register as domestic partners. Some

cities have established a domestic partner registry, while others extend certain benefits to domestic

partners even if the city does not provide a registry. The state of California leads the nation in the

number of cities and counties that provide benefits to domestic partners, offer domestic partner

registries, or both. Cities providing domestic partner benefits include New York City, Los Angeles,

Chicago, Boston, and Philadelphia. The ordinances and statues in these cities allow couples to

register as domestic partners, and to dissolve their partnerships if they separate.

Two 1995 court decisions declared particular domestic partner ordinances invalid. In Lilly v. City of

Minneapolis, 527 N.W. 2d 107, the Minnesota Court of Appeals struck down a Minneapolis city

council resolution authorizing reimbursement to city employees for health care insurance costs for

same-sex domestic partners and for blood relatives not classified as dependents under state law.

The court held that the resolution was beyond the scope of the council's authority and lacked legal

force. Likewise, in City of Atlanta v. McKinney, 265 Ga. 161, 454 S.E.2d 517, the Supreme Court of

Georgia held that the city of Atlanta had exceeded its authority when it had extended employee

benefits to persons who did not qualify as dependents under state law.

Some same-sex cohabitants face other types of legal challenges. In Garcia v. Garcia, 60 P.3d 1174

(Utah Ct. App. 2002), the Utah Court of Appeals held that an ex-wife's involvement in a same-sex

relationship constituted cohabitation for the purpose of determining whether the exhusband's

Alimony payments should be terminated. Under Utah law, a court's order requiring alimony

payments from one spouse to the other terminates upon proof that the spouse receiving alimony is

cohabiting with another person. The ex-wife allegedly maintained a long-term relationship with

another woman, during which time she shared a common residency and had sexual contact. The

trial court held that the statute's definition of cohabitation applied only to relationships between

members of the opposite sex. The appeals court disagreed, holding that the term "sexual contact" in

the statute also included such contact between members of the same sex, and reversed the trial

court's decision.

Further readings
American Bar Association. 1994. Family Legal Guide. New York: Random House.

Dailey, Patricia A. 1994. "Domestic Partnerships in the Nineties." Delaware Lawyer (summer).

Duff, Johnette, and George G. Truitt. 1992. The Spousal Equivalent Handbook: A Legal and

Financial Guide to Living Together. New York: Penguin, NAL/Dutton.

Ihara, Toni, Robin Leonard, and Ralph Warner. 1994. The Living Together Kit. 7th ed. Berkeley,

Calif.: Nolo Press.

Richardson, David G. 1993. "Family Rights for Unmarried Couples." Kansas Journal of Law and

Public Policy (spring).

Samuels, M. Dee. 1995. "You Don't Have to Be Married to Be Legal." Compleat Lawyer (winter).

Wallman, Lester. 1994. Cupid, Couples, and Contracts: A Guide to Living Together, Prenuptial

Agreements, and Divorce. New York: MasterMedia.

Cross-references
Parent and Child.

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights

reserved.
cohabitation
n. living together in the same residence, generally either as husband and wife or for an extended

period of time as if the parties were married. Cohabitation implies that the parties are having sexual

intercourse while living together, but the definition would not apply to a casual sexual encounter.

Legal tests have been filed to determine whether cohabitation would refer to same sex partners,

which is important to those involved since "cohabitation" is the basis of certain rights and privileges

under various laws, regulations and contracts. The findings of the courts vary on this question, but

the trend is to include long-standing homosexual relationships as cohabitation.

Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.
cohabitation(Living together), noun abiding tooether, act of dwelling together, alliance, living

together in sexual intimacy, lodging together, lodging together as hussand and wife, occupying the

same domicile, residing tooether, rooming together
Associated concepts: cohabiting in a state of adultery, illicit cohabitation, lewd and lascivious

cohabitation
Foreign phrases: Nuptias non concubitus sed consensus facit.Not cohabitation but consent makes

the valid marriage.
cohabitation(Married state), noun act of living tooether as husband and wife, act of pairing, bond of

matriiony, conjugal bliss, conjugality, connubiality, coverture, domestication, legal relation of

spouses to each other, legal union of a man and a woman, marriage, married status, matrimony,

nuptial bond, nuptial tie, state of matrimony, union, vinculo matrimonii, wedded state, wedded status,

wedlock
Associated concepts: bigamous cohabitation, cohabiting in a state of adultery, matrimonial

cohabitation, polygamous cohabitation
Foreign phrases: Nuptias non concubitus sed consensus facit.Not cohabitation but consent makes

the marriage.
See also: marriage, matrimony
Burton's Legal Thesaurus, 4E. Copyright © 2007 by William C. Burton. Used with permission of The

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
COHABITATION. Living together.
     2. The law presumes that husband and wife cohabit, even after a voluntary separation has taken

place between them; but where there has been a divorce a mensa et thoro, or a sentence of

separation, the presumption then arises that they have obeyed the sentence or decree, and do not

live together.
     3. A criminal cohabitation will not be presumed by the proof of a single act of criminal intercourse

between a man and woman not married. 10 Mass. R. 153.
     4. When a woman is proved to cohabit with a man and to assume his name with his consent, he

will generally be responsible for her debts as if she had been his wife; 2 Esp. R. 637; 1 Campb. R.

245; this being presumptive evidence of marriage; B. N. P. 114; but this liability will continue only

while they live together, unless she is actually his were. 4 Campb. R. 215.
     5. In civil actions for criminal conversation with the plaintiff's wife, after the husband and wife

have separated, the plaintiff will not in general be entitled to recover. 1 Esp. R. 16; S. C. 5 T. R. 357;

Peake's Cas. 7, 39; sed vide 6 East, 248; 4 Esp. 39.

A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier.

Published 1856.

Oklahoma Marriage Initiative Fails to Halt Rising Divorce Rates

Oklahoma Marriage Initiative Fails to Halt Rising Divorce Rates
By Clifton Adcock | November 27, 2013

https://oklahomawatch.org/2013/11/27/marriage-story/

Oklahoma government and groups have spent more than $70 million in federal money on a program originally aimed at reducing the state’s high divorce rate in hopes of fighting poverty.

But there is little hard evidence that the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative is succeeding in a broad sense.

News9 Video Image

News9 Video on Marriage Initiative, in Partnership With Oklahoma Watch
Over the past dozen years, the rates of divorce, unmarried cohabitation and single-parent families have increased in Oklahoma while the percentage of households with married couples has declined, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. That reflects a national trend.

Poverty rates in Oklahoma have climbed during that period, from about 13 percent to more than 17 percent, the data shows.

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter
email address

Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.

More than fourth-fifths of the $70 million spent during the dozen years came from federal welfare funds that the state has discretion to spend on various social-welfare purposes.

The trends have helped fuel questions among some leaders about whether the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative is effective in boosting marriage and lowering divorce, and whether taxpayers should be funding such marriage-improvement programs.

The marriage initiative, launched in 1999 by Gov. Frank Keating with a goal of cutting divorce rates by a third by 2010, is led by an Oklahoma City public-relations firm that has provided workshops and outreach to several hundred thousand people.

In 2002, initiative leaders abandoned the goal of reducing divorce rates by a third within a decade, saying it was unattainable. The initiative now focuses on encouraging healthy marriages and families, with many participants saying they have benefited.

Yet the marriage and divorce trends indicate how difficult it is to quantify the success of marriage-promotion programs.

Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.

“While these grants are well-intentioned, they oftentimes fail to reach measureable goals and instead send precious tax dollars to well-connected companies that thrive off of government contracts,” U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn said in a recent statement to Oklahoma Watch. “The best way for the federal government to promote marriage is to respect the institution and the rights of parents to care for their children.”

The Oklahoma Marriage Initiative retains strong support among state Republican leaders.

Last session, lawmakers introduced various bills intended to promote marriage and discourage divorce. One, authored by House Speaker T.W. Shannon and approved, will use discretionary welfare funds to pay for public-service announcements promoting the benefits of marriage. Those PSAs will be developed in mid to late 2014.

Interactive: Marriage and Divorce, by State
The marriage push may carry over into next session. In October, Shannon held an interim-study hearing at which experts and state agency officials testified about how marriage can produce economic benefits for individuals and communities.

“We must change the conversation on poverty to focus on stronger families, which in turn will not only produce a more stable and healthy economy, but also improve overall well-being for all Oklahomans,” Shannon said.

At an August appearance, while praising the initiative, Shannon added, “The problem is that it’s been in the micro level, not the macro level. We need to take it out to the macro level because, yes, I think they have seen some successes.”

Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.

Initiative Begins

In fiscal 1999, the Department of Human Services was given approval to spend $10 million in discretionary welfare funds as start-up costs for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. The program began picking up speed in 2002.

From 2002 to 2013, five groups received more than $70 million in federal funds for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. That included $58 million in discretionary Temporary Assistance to Needy Families money provided by the Oklahoma Department of Human Services and around $13 million in direct grants from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Public Strategies, the public relations firm that runs the marriage initiative, got more than 90 percent of the money to implement the program. The company also received an additional $15 million in direct federal grants to produce materials for use by other marriage groups nationwide.

Oklahoma’s was the first marriage program in the nation to use discretionary welfare funds. The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 allowed some welfare funds to be spent on other social-welfare purposes. Later, under the Bush and Obama administrations, federal grants were created specifically for healthy marriage and relationship initiatives.

On a per capita basis, Oklahoma has gotten more federal money than any other state since 2000 to promote healthy relationships and marriage, according to Alan J. Hawkins, a member of the initiative’s research advisory group and author of the book “The Forever Initiative.” Oklahoma has the third highest amount overall, behind California and Texas.

Four other organizations received Oklahoma Marriage Initiative funds: Oklahoma State University, the University of Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Association of Youth Services and Prep Inc., which provides curriculum.

Last fiscal year, the state human services department spent $8 million in welfare funds on the initiative.

Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.

Public Strategies Inc. was founded in 1990 by Mary Myrick, a political consultant for Republicans. The firm drew controversy in the program’s early years because it had won various  sole-source contracts from the DHS and other agencies headed by then-Secretary Jerry Regier and had billed for expenses questioned by some lawmakers. No wrongdoing was found.

Asked about Coburn’s statement on well-connected companies, Myrick told Oklahoma Watch that most organizations that have gotten federal marriage grants, including hers, are not winning them based on inappropriate political influence and that strict safeguards are in place.

“Most of the people who do this work or direct service work … are just trying to serve families,” she said.

Public Strategies’ staff has grown to about 150 and the firm runs various projects. Those include training in relationships and communication skills, couples retreats and training for couples expecting a baby, said Kendy Cox, who directs the marriage initiative for the company.

All of the programs are free, with many led by volunteers. Participants include married couples, unmarried people, families with an incarcerated parent, high school and college students, parents of foster and adopted children, low-income couples, Spanish-speaking couples and African-American couples, Cox said.

Since 2000, about 350,000 people have taken Oklahoma Marriage Initiative courses or training, Cox said, with most reporting high rates of satisfaction.

Jeff and Ellen White
Jeff and Ellen White

Jeff and Ellen White of Oklahoma City, who have been married for nearly nine years, are among the participants.

The Whites, who are foster parents, have attended a few of the initiative’s retreats and reunions and said they successfully applied its techniques to their marriage and their relationship with foster children and others.

“The people were fun, the training sessions are good, and there’s not a time we haven’t walked out with something,” Jeff White said.

“I think every person who has a family should go to these retreats,” Ellen said. “They give so many things to work with and they’re such a great organization.”

Measuring Success

In 2002, the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, working with university researchers, conducted a survey on various factors about marriage. The purpose was to gauge current attitudes toward marriage and set a baseline for measuring the program’s effects.

The survey found high rates of marriage and divorce and trends such as couples getting married at a younger age than the national average, as well as high shares of married people previously divorced.

No follow-up survey has been done.

“We have not had the money or the right design to do a comprehensive evaluation on the entire range of the initiative services,” Cox said.

A 2002 story in the Washington Times quoted an OSU researcher as saying the baseline survey cost $150,000.

After the survey, the initiative’s research team concluded that Keating’s goal of reducing divorce by a third in a decade was unattainable.

“That was more of a policy statement than it was an actual research-based statement to make,” Cox said, adding that Keating was seeking funding.

“We’re not just trying to reduce divorce,” Cox said. “Our mission is to provide relationship education and skills to the public.”

The Department of Human Services oversees the initiative. Public Strategies files an annual independent audit with DHS, and there are yearly meetings between the company and DHS to discuss finances and performance, Cox said.

Marriage and Prosperity

In 1998, before the initiative began, OU and OSU economists produced a report on factors that would allow the state to become more prosperous. Among those was lowering the rates of divorce, out-of-wedlock births and child abuse.

Q&A: Marriage in Oklahoma
Gov. Keating then formed the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative with the stated goal of lowering divorce rates.

Scientific studies on the broader successes of marriage initiatives have been mixed. Some found significant positive effects while others found no effect. An evaluation in 2010 found positive results from the Oklahoma initiative’s Family Expectations program, which targets couples expecting a baby, although among seven sites, only Oklahoma City’s results were statistically significant.

Meanwhile, divorce rates have risen and marriage rates have declined. Experts debate which cause-effect dynamic is greater: lower marriage rates worsening poverty or higher poverty lowering marriage rates.

Census Bureau data from 2000 to 2012 shows that while married households in Oklahoma still make up the vast majority of “coupled households,” the percentage of married households has fallen, from 54 percent to 49 percent, reflecting a national trend.

The rates of people over age 15 who are divorced, of unmarried cohabitating couples and of single-mother households have increased in Oklahoma.

In 2012, Oklahoma had the third highest divorce rate in the country, measured by the Census Bureau as the percentage of people aged 15 and over who are currently divorced. Nevada and Maine had the highest shares, over 14 percent; Oklahoma’s was 13.5 percent.

Cox said the mission of reducing divorce is still a worthy one, but the goal has proven more difficult and complex than expected.

She said the tools offered through the marriage initiative not only help strengthen marriage and families, but have positive social and economic benefits for the state.

Myrick said the initiative’s programs have been shown to be effective for participants.

“Everybody that comes through from all over the country talks about how it’s the most promising thing happening for particularly low-income families,” she said.

It will take time to see the full results of the marriage initiative, Cox said, because it is confronting large social trends and stigmas about seeking marriage help.

“I believe that will happen for us in the future and I believe we’ll be shown to be effective,” Cox said. “We believe all things are on trend to go onward and upward.”

"A Woman In Live-In Like Concubine": Rajasthan Rights Body Calls For Ban

"A Woman In Live-In Like Concubine": Rajasthan Rights Body Calls For Ban

As a High Court judge, the Rajasthan Human Rights chief Justice (Retired) Mahesh Chandra Sharma had made headlines with his "peacocks don't have sex" remark.
All India | Edited by Anindita Sanyal | 
Updated: September 05, 2019 07:45 IST

Rajasthan Human Rights Commission said it was the government's "duty" to ban live-in relationships.


JAIPUR: Live-in relationships should be prohibited and women in such relationships are "akin to concubines", said the chief of Rajasthan Human Rights commission, who, as a High Court judge, made headlines with his "peacocks don't have sex" remark. Quoting various decisions of the Supreme Court on live-in relationships, Justice (Retired) Mahesh Chandra Sharma on Wednesday said such "animalistic lives are against the basic rights enshrined in constitution and against their (women's) human rights".
There is urgent need of prohibiting such relations and it the duty of governments at the centre and states to discourage such relationships, he said in an order issued jointly with Justice Prakash Tantia.

Calling it "an extremely retrograde judgment, which needs to be condemned" rights activist Kavita Srivastav said they can challenge it in the Rajasthan High Court. "He is asking the government to make a law against live-in relationships and to challenge the 'in the nature of marriage' clause of the Domestic Violence Act," she added.

In several judgments, the Supreme Court not only said adult couples can have live-in relationships, it also brought such relationships under the ambit of the law on domestic violence. In a judgment in May last year, the court had noted that the legislature had also recognised "live-in relationships" which have been covered under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.

In another judgement, the court said parliament has to bring in proper legislation so the women and the children born out of such kinds of relationships be protected.

The top court had also identified the conditions that would make a relationship "in the nature of marriage". The list includes the man and the women being unmarried, being of a legal age to marry and who "hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses".

Three years ago, Justice Sharma had made headlines when on his retirement day from Rajasthan High Court, with his bizzare remark that peacocks use their tears to fertilize eggs.

"The peacock is a lifelong brahmachari (celibate). It never has sex with the peahen. The peahen gets pregnant after swallowing the tears of the peacock," he said, while recommending cows be given the status of the national animal.

Comparing a cow to the national bird, he described both the species as "pious".

జగతి కోసం...

జగతి కోసం...
05-09-2019 00:49:03

కవి, వ్యాసకర్త, కాలమిస్ట్, సాహిత్య కార్యకర్త, ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్ సాహిత్య అకాడెమీ సభ్యురాలు, మిత్రురాలు అయిన జగద్ధాత్రి విషాద మరణం మనకందరికీ తెలిసిన విషయమే. ఈ సందర్భంలో ఆమె గురించి మేం పంచుకున్న కొన్ని ఆలోచనలు, ఇపుడు అందరితో మాట్లాడుతున్నాం. సాహిత్యాన్ని విస్తృతంగా చదవడం, రాయడం, నలుగురిలోకి తీసుకు పోవడం ఊపిరిగా జీవించిన ఒక మనిషి నిష్క్రమణం ఆ మేరకు పూడ్చుకోలేని వెలితిని కలిగిస్తుంది. వర్తమాన సాహిత్యంలో కొత్త స్వరాలను గుర్తించడం, నలుగురికీ పరిచయం చేయడంకోసం సమీక్షా వ్యాసాలు రాయడం ఆమె నిరంతర వ్యాసంగం.

ఆధునిక సాహిత్య ప్రారంభంనుంచి ఇప్పటివరకూ ఎంతోమంది సాహిత్యకారుల కృషిని ఆమె అలుపులేని అధ్యయనం ద్వారా చర్చలలో నిలబెడుతూ ఉండేవారు. బుద్ధికి పదును పెట్టే విమర్శని ఒకవైపు నడుపుతూ మరోవైపు తన హృదయ కల్లోల వ్యక్తీకరణకి కవిత్వాన్ని ఆలంబన చేసుకున్నారు. అనేక పుస్తకాల ఆవిష్కరణలను తన చేతుల మీదుగా నిర్వహించిన జగద్ధాత్రి వందలాది సాహిత్య వ్యాసాలను ఇంతవరకూ ఒకచోట చేర్చనే లేదు. పుస్తకరూపంలో వచ్చిన ఆ ఒక్క కవితా ‘సహచరణం’ కూడా అనేక ఒత్తిడుల మధ్య ప్రచురించుకున్నారు. మగవారికి, లేదా ఆధిపత్య వర్గాలకి మాత్రమే పరిమితమైన సాహిత్య కార్యనిర్వహణ రంగంలో జగద్ధాత్రి అవిశ్రాంతంగా పని చేసారు. విశాఖపట్నం కేంద్రంగా మొజాయిక్ సంస్థ నుంచి అనేక సాహిత్య కార్యక్రమాలు చేపట్టారు. మంచి వక్తగా వందలాది సభలలో ప్రసంగించారు. తన చుట్టూ మనుషులతో స్నేహపూర్వకంగా మెలిగేవారు. సాహిత్య సృజన, కార్యాచరణలో ఆమె సహచరుడు రామతీర్థ తనకి చేదోడు వాదోడుగా నిలిచారు.

సహచరుని మరణపు దుఃఖం నుంచి కోలుకోకుండానే జగద్ధాత్రి కూడా జీవితాన్ని చాలించారు. ఈ విషాదం నుంచి సమాజం గ్రహించవలసింది చాలానే ఉంటుంది. అయితే ఆ గ్రహింపు, ఆమె వ్యక్తిగత జీవితంలోని అన్ని విషయాలను పట్టుకుని వ్యాఖ్యానించడం కాదని నమ్ముతున్నాం. గుట్టుగా దాచుకుని, రహస్యంగా మాట్లాడుకునే అనేక విషయాలు బహిరంగంగా మాట్లాడుకోవ డానికి జగద్ధాత్రి జీవితం ఒక సందర్భం కావాలి తప్ప, ఆమె జీవితంలోని ప్రతి ఘటనను తవ్వి తీసి చర్చకి పెట్టడం, తప్పొప్పుల తీర్పులు ప్రకటించడం సబబు కాదు. వైవాహికేతర సంబంధాలు, స్వేచ్ఛాయుత స్త్రీ పురుష సంబంధాలు, వీటికి ఉండే పలు సామాజిక, రాజకీయ ఆర్థిక, సాంస్కృతిక కోణాలు చర్చకి రావాలి. ఆ చర్చ ఏ ఒక్కరి వ్యక్తిగత జీవితాన్నో ఉదాహరణగా చూపేది కాకూడదు. ఇలాంటి పలు ఘటనల సారాంశంగా మన గ్రహింపులోకి వచ్చిన విషయాలను చర్చిద్దాం. ఈ దిశగా జగతి మిత్రులం సెప్టెంబర్ 8, ఆదివారం, విశాఖ పౌర గ్రంథాలయంలో సాయంత్రం 5 గంటలకి - ఒక చర్చా కార్యక్రమం నిర్వహించబోతున్నాం.

జగతి మరణం సందర్భంగా సామాజిక మాధ్యమాల్లో వందలాదిమంది ఆవేదన ప్రకటనలు ఇచ్చారు, పోస్టులు రాసారు, దుఃఖపడ్డారు, సంతాపం తెలిపారు, ఆగ్రహించారు, ఆరోపణలు చేసారు, నిస్సహాయ ఆక్రోశాన్ని వ్యక్తం చేసారు. ఇవన్నీ చూసినపుడు జీవితాన్ని ఇలా ముగించిన జగతి మనలో చాలామందిని కలవరపెట్టారని అనిపించింది. వందలాది మంది చూపిన ఈ చైతన్యం కనీసం ఒక్క పని కోసమయినా ఏకీకృతం కావాలని కోరుతున్నాం. జగతి సాహిత్య వ్యాసాలను ఆమె కుటుంబ సభ్యుల అనుమతితో ప్రచురిద్దాం. ఈ పనిలో మీరంతా తోడు నిలవాలని కోరుతున్నాం. మన మాటలు మాటలుగానే కాక నిర్మాణాత్మక ఆచరణలోకి దారి తీయడానికి అందరం కృషి చేద్దాం.

- కత్తి పద్మ, కె.ఎన్. మల్లీశ్వరి, సాయిపద్మ, విజయభాను కోటే, ఉమా నూతక్కి, మాటూరి శ్రీనివాస్, వివినమూర్తి, అట్టాడ అప్పలనాయుడు, గంటేడ గౌరునాయుడు, రమణమూర్తి (లీడర్ పత్రిక), ఎం. లక్ష్మి, కె. అనురాధ, నారాయణ వేణు, సుధ(hrf), రఘు(clc), జి,ఎస్. చలం, బాల సుధాకర మౌళి, బమ్మిడి జగదీశ్వరరావు, డి. లలిత, ఎ. అరుణ, అరణ్య కృష్ణ, రమాసుందరి, ఎస్.జె. కళ్యాణి, ఊడుగుల జరీన.