A good friend now goes by her partner's surname on Facebook and, although they are unmarried, uses the title of Mrs, which made even her sister wonder whether she had missed something. Another acquaintance is having a party to celebrate their tenth anniversary, although they have only been cohabiting all this time. What, I have been wondering, does such pseudo-marriage tell us about what is going on in society and what consequences might it have - or, put another way, does is make any difference to anything? Are such trends an adequate modern substitute for getting formally married?

At one level, it probably indicates that a good proportion of people who are cohabiting would in fact prefer to be married, but perhaps their partners feel unable to make what they still recognise should be a lifelong commitment, or unable to pay for what they believe should be an expensive occasion. To the couples themselves, it probably involves greater uncertainty and resulting anxiety - another friend who got married after living with their partner-now-spouse for many years commented that they now feel more sure of each other.

Of course, the biblical model for marriage is of a 'one flesh' union, creating a lifelong bond. Those with a secular worldview might argue that this inner security is the only real difference between formal marriage and cohabitation. However, even on such a worldview, I suggest that there are wider social implications. A public wedding ceremony brings together not just two individuals but two extended family networks and communities of friends who enter into a new level of commitment towards the newly-wed couple. As one parent-in-law observed in Just Sex, the act of marriage enables the new family member to enjoy closer and deeper relationships with those who previously had no way of knowing whether the former cohabitation was going to last.

Equally, when a relationship becomes difficult, not only does the married couple enjoy a greater pool of relational support but, in the event that they decide to separate, they must do so in a public way by going through the formal process of applying for a divorce. Once again, this enables both parties to accept the decision and their social networks to become informed of the change in status. In contrast, those who simply pretend that they are married can find themselves in an awkward position if and when the relationship ends.

Take the admittedly extreme case of 26-year-old Hayley Jones, who changed her Facebook status from 'married' to 'single' - a simple switch involving no lawyers, no courts, no cost, and no public shame. Her partner of 13 years was so 'frustrated, angry and hurt' that he stabbed and strangled her and left her to be found by their four children. He is now serving at least 14 years for murder.

Some have insisted that this is a consequence of poor use of privacy controls on social networking sites. However, the social grapevine has always meant news spreads more quickly than we can often imagine. Within minutes of informing one person in my Dad's village of the death of my Mum two weeks ago [see The Kindest Thing], cards were dropping through the letterbox from other neighbours expressing their condolences.

Yes, as one Wall Street Journal columnist recently observed, although online social networking can bring us all closer - I have been encouraged by dozens of friends from around the world posting comments on Facebook in response to news about my Mum - it also has its own set of problems: 'Amidst all this heightened chatter, we're not saying much that's interesting, folks. Rather, we're breaking a cardinal rule of companionship: Thou Shalt Not Bore Thy Friends.' Moreover, some people 'seem different online ... displaying sides of their personalities you have never seen before' or writing 'things you wouldn't say out loud in conversation ... because you're sitting behind a computer screen.' But these problems are a simple breach of basic netiquette - the digital medium is no more at fault than is the oral medium when people start fighting face-to-face.

In conclusion, as we have noted previously, social networking offers us another communication tool. However, we should not treat it as though it offers us an alternative structure or operates by different rules to existing society. As in real life, we constantly need to improve our interactions. We need to think about our own behaviour, asking ourselves before we write or say anything: 'Is this something I'd want someone to tell me?' To quote Dr Wallace, a psychologist at Johns Hopkins University and author of The Psychology of the Internet, 'Run it by that focus group of one.'

As for marriage, there would seem to be good reason why common law marriages have not been recognised in England and Wales since 1754 (and even in the USA are only legally recognised in but a handful of states).

• 
• Share