The emergence of marriage has been extensively depicted in our epics. In Mahabharata, it has been mentioned that formerly "women were unconfined, and roved about their pleasure; however, Swetaseku, son of Rishi Uddalaka, could not bear this tradition and established the rule. As per the rule, wives should remain faithful to their husbands and husbands to their wives" (Cited from The History of Human Marriage by Edward, Westermarck). Before the institution of marriage, children often never knew their father but their mothers. However, with the advent of this institution, things changed, such as solemnized marriage and legitimate children being given respect within society.

Traditional tribal societies existed in "promiscuous horde", where there were no precincts on sexual relationships. One can establish sexual relationships with more than one partner without long-term pair bonding (Coontz 2005). In hunting societies, people usually lived in small groups. During this time, men were not regarded as protectors, hence men used to hunt.

On the contrary, women tended to take care of the children, and in return for food, women gave sexual favours. Thus, there was short-lived companionship between men and women, which might have lasted for some days or weeks (Fisher 2011). However, the invention of the plough has modified our interactions. The emergence of the division of labour and private ownership of land gave rise to polygamous marriage as the men got women to provide free labour both in fields and at home. Over time the polygamous form of marriage was changed into monogamy.

Despite having different forms of mate selection, marriage is one of the important social institutions in all societies. The institution of marriage legitimates the union of males and females to establish a household and procreation and provide care to the children (Majumder, 1977). Scholars have defined marriage in numerous ways; for instance, Max Weber defined marriage as a "stable sexual relationship". Further, the larger kin group legitimized such relationships and established rules about children's property rights (R. Collins, 1986).

Kapadia (1966), on the other hand, stated three principles of marriage as "Dharma, Praja and Rati," which means "religious duties, progeny and pleasure" as per the Smritis. Therefore, chiefly, marriage was solemnized to fulfil one's religious commitments and family welfare. The religious texts stated that it is essential to get married to participate in the sacrament because unmarried people are considered unholy and incomplete in the texts.

In the Hindu religion during the Vedic period, marriage was regarded as an eternal thing which could not be dissolved by humans (Devasthali, G. V. (1971). Furthermore, Manu also mentioned about remarriage in case the husband is a drunkard, rebellious, diseased, mischievous Manu further stated that woman must not be blamed for abandoning husband who is impotent, insane, or suffering from an incurable or contagious disease (Altekar, 1962).

Changing trend of marriage in India: Increasing divorce rate

There are several reasons worldwide for the breaking up of marriage. Families become nuclear with the advent of industrialization and urbanization. Further, to fulfil the family's needs and aspirations, both partners had to find paid employment, which resulted in increased female workforce participation around the globe. Literature reflects that this directly or indirectly impacted the institution of marriage.

Globally, many women, especially after World War II, enjoyed their new economic freedom and decided to end unhappy marriages. Social scientists from several countries have concluded on divorce and its causes. Garrison (2007) noted a dramatic change in the institution of marriage, especially during the 1960s and 1970s. In the early eighties, the concept that "a couple should stay together for children" plunged from eighty per cent to fifty per cent. As a result, in the 1970s, divorce rates in Western countries rose and ultimately stabilized at a high average (Bernardes, 2002).

After urbanization in India, many people migrated from their native villages and towns for a secure future. Thus, modern living conditions have changed the family structure. The control of the family over its members has loosened. Ahmad (2003) reports that divorced women cited various reasons for divorce, including the wife's barrenness, incurable illness of the spouse, dowry demands, wife's or husband's bad looks, and an extramarital affair. Divorce in the family reflects a gap in the family. It not only affects husband and wife but also has a huge impact on the children, family residence, and source of income.

Further, researchers have observed an enormous impact on children's well-being. Marital separation is perceived as more traumatic for women than men (Albrecht, 1980). Divorce made a huge impact long and short-term impact on the health and well-being of the children (Friendman et al., 1995).

As compared to Western countries, it is assumed that India still has lower marital dissolution rates. However, a sudden increase has been noticed in the last few years. In order to regulate civil marriage, a number of laws have been enacted. These acts have been framed in order to regulate the marriage of people belonging to different religious communities, such as the Divorce Act 1869, the Hindu Marriages Act 1955, and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939.

However, being a sociologist with a fair knowledge of laws, I wonder if this is a solution. I do agree and understand that some marriages are irretrievable. However, my ten years of research experience still advocate that, in many cases, divorces were neither required nor relevant. Wonders what is the right approach to reflect on the marriage institution? Grounds such as the insanity of the partner and communicable diseases are psychological and physiological issues which cannot be corrected.

However, the social aspects, such as growing extramarital affairs and violence by the partners, are the social and moral things which need to be addressed. A traditional approach to marriage is now considered as a loss of privacy and liberty, lack of individual growth, dissatisfaction with spouse, problem with in-laws, etc. The lack of commitment, disrespect for social bonds, and lack of patience in relationships have given rise to divorce. The younger generation does not acknowledge the differences. No one is flawless; no matter how well-intentioned the person is, they will make mistakes.

Love, loyalty, longevity and legal changes

Growth in relationships often comes from the ability to forgive, understand, and evolve together. A zero-tolerance approach limits this growth in the relationship. Another aspect, i.e., infidelity, must be addressed by instilling morality and patience in children from an early age through the process of socialization. Parents and caregivers can become role models and teach moral behaviour consistently, exhibiting values like honesty, accountability, sensitization and empathy in their own lives.

If these young minds see you reacting calmly to stressful situations, they are more likely to replicate this behaviour. Teachers and educators can also play a vital role in fostering moral behaviour and patience in the classroom by encouraging patience in the school.

One cannot deny that social institutions need to be changed or modified with the changing needs of social groups. Henceforth, divorce cases which are beyond repair; one must consider separation without any guilt and social pressure. Separation laws must be framed in response to the changing needs of the time. One of the major criticisms is the lack of uniformity in divorce laws in India. India is a diverse nation which follows different personal laws.

For instance, the Hindu Marriage Act provides divorce on explicit grounds, while Muslim laws (under the Shariat) permit divorce through a process called "talaq." There is always a debate, and policymakers suggest that there should be a uniform civil code (UCC) for divorce to ensure fairness for all citizens. While India has provisions for "no-fault" divorce, where couples can separate without accusing each other of wrongdoing, fault-based divorces still dominate.

Furthermore, divorce proceedings in India under the Hindu Marriage Act and Muslim Personal Law are complex, financially burdensome and lengthy. Cases may drag on for years, leading to financial and emotional exhaustion for both parties. With social change, new identities along with complexities are emerging, for instance, third gender, same-sex marriage, etc. Henceforth, the inclusion of new identities must be incorporated into the law to recognize the rights of LGBTQ+ people.

References:

• Ahmad, R. (2003). Benefit segmentation. International Journal of Market Research, 45(3), 1-13.
• Albrecht, S. L., & Kunz, P. R. (1980). The decision to divorce: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Divorce, 3(4), 319–337.
• Altekar, A. S. (1962). The Vedic age. Motilal Banarsidass.
• Bernardes, J. (2002). Family studies: An introduction (pp. 1-24). Routledge.
• Collins, R. (1986). Weberian sociological theory. Cambridge University Press.
• Coontz, S. (2006). Marriage: A history. Penguin.
• Devasthali, G. V. (1971). Review of India in the Vedic age by P. L. Bhargava. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 52(1/4), 287-290.
• Fischer, M. M., & Wang, J. (2011). Spatial data analysis: Models, methods, and techniques. Springer.
• Friedman, H. S., Tucker, J. S., Schwartz, J. E., Martin, L. R., Tomlinson-Keasey, C., Wingard, D. L., & Criqui, M. H. (1995). Childhood conscientiousness and longevity: Health behaviors and cause of death. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 696–703.
• Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 157-172.
• Kapadia, K. M. (1966). Marriage and family in India (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Majumdar, R. C. (1977). Ancient India. Orient Book Distributors.
• Westermarck, E. (1894). The history of human marriage. Macmillan.