Marriage symbol important for those who do and don’t tie knot

Q: What are your feelings about "commitment ceremonies" -- would love to have some down-to-earth ideas. In today's world there are a lot of couples living together without the benefit of marriage. I am in my late 60s and living with a man whom I truly love. We have decided not to get married because we both have children and money, etc., and we both have gone through a divorce and don't want another trip down that road. So I brought up the subject of a "commitment ceremony" and he almost had a heart attack. He says that I'm in his will but keeps his papers locked away in the bank and hasn't given me a copy. Both of us are not young and in the best of health. I work full time, come home, cook all the meals and clean, etc. I'm beginning to feel like a fool for staying with him. -- A.H., Las Vegas

A: I'm happy to give you my feelings and ideas about commitment ceremonies, but first, wow, let's talk about your feelings and ideas. Because, frankly, when we do, my input might become virtually irrelevant.

You say lots of modern couples live together "without the benefit of marriage." According to you, then, you and your man are absent something you see as beneficial.

Yet, you tolerate (at least up until now) this missing benefit because, together, you and your man agreed on a rationale for not getting married. The first part of your argument says the two of you agreed the benefit was unnecessary. You didn't need it, you agreed, because you already had children and independently assembled estates (money).

You believe, then, that the benefits of marriage can and do include the provision of a social structure for growing an estate (mutual security) and raising children. And of course that's right. Historically, that is part of how marriage has functioned. Yet you also note that people making commitments in midlife might well reason they have no need for these two benefits of marriage.

You've got a lot of company, actually, and not just mid-to-later lifers. Today, most women are raised to prepare for an independent and self-sustaining career path, and social mores have long since stopped condemning couples who raise children out of wedlock. More and more people have a divested interest in these two aspects of the marriage symbol.

But the marriage symbol for you two is, according to you, more than merely unnecessary: "We both have gone through a divorce and don't want another trip down that road." So, then, the second part of your argument for not marrying is that, simply put, marriage involves a risk you are not willing to take.

I'm not being the least critical of you, just inviting you to look at something. The marriage symbol is still very much alive for you. And I know that because it has the power to make you intentional about avoiding the consequences of its failure (divorce). Here's how I say it in my own life: The reason I don't want to marry again is not because I don't believe in marriage, but precisely because I do.

So, the first part of your argument is objective and sociological and reasonable. The second part of your argument reveals a deeply human need. To wit: We human beings require living symbols to realize and enjoy what it means to be human. There are no exceptions to this universal observation, no matter what any "modern" tries to tell you.

People in love tend, over time, to offer increasing levels of vulnerability to each other -- emotional, spiritual, psychological, social and economic vulnerability. And as the level of vulnerability and interdependence rises, they begin to reach for symbols, consciously or unconsciously, traditionally or spontaneously. Some propose marriage. Others buy a house together. I'm here to tell you that even introducing the new mate to our children implies a fiduciary bond for which couples are obliged to be responsible.

Having said "no" to marriage, your psyche reached for an alternative symbol: the commitment ceremony. And your man "almost had a heart attack." (Feel the power of symbols here?) And your suggestion, coupled with his "heart attack," causes you to be concerned about a last will and testament (another symbol) that you've never seen, and to defend your own manifest commitment (work, cooking and cleaning have symbolic value), and how all that is beginning to add up to the possibility that you are a fool.

What do I think of commitment ceremonies? I think you are utterly human, and thus are hungry for a symbol that will enable you to claim and realize the love you want to grow with this man.

Steven Kalas is a behavioral health consultant and counselor at Clear View Counseling Wellness Center in Las Vegas and the author of "Human Matters: Wise and Witty Counsel on Relationships, Parenting, Grief and Doing the Right Thing" (Stephens Press). His columns appear on Tuesdays and Sundays. Questions for the Asking Human Matters column or comments can be e-mailed to skalas@reviewjournal.com.