The importance of the family is pivotal as the ideological basis for the legislation. In particular, the family is cited for its central role in producing responsible, active new citizens, and as providing a counterbalance to rugged individualism and atomisation. Furthermore, the family is largely indistinguishable from the importance of ‘stable relationships’, which have empirically proven benefits to individuals and to society as a whole. These familial relationships are assumed to take a particular form based on a couple dyad, with or without children, and with little sense of extended familial relationships or alternative living arrangements. Although cohabitation is not a requirement of civil registration, there is an implicit assumption that registration and cohabitation will probably go hand in hand.
The benefits of this mode of living — assumed to be facilitated and enhanced by the Act — are far-reaching and, it is claimed, empirically grounded. These advantages of stable couplehood flow both to individuals and to society as a whole:
The availability of civil partnership status would encourage stable relationships, which are an important asset to the community as a whole. It would reduce the likelihood of relationship breakdown, which has a proven link to both physical and mental ill health. As the Government said in its 1998 consultation document Supporting Families, ‘Strong and stable families provide the best basis for raising children and for building strong and supportive communities’. Strengthening adult couple relationships not only benefits the couples themselves, but also other relatives they support and care for, and, in particular, their children as they grow up and become the couples, parents and carers of tomorrow.
Stable relationships also benefit the economy. It is expected that civil partners would share their resources and support each other financially, reducing demand for support from the State and, overall, consuming fewer resources. Increased stability would help to reduce the burden on the State in terms of family breakdown, which cost the taxpayer an estimated £5 billion in 1999.[124]
Thus, the stable couple form is good for the individual, for the couple, and for society as a whole (both socially and economically). Living outside of that form is inefficient and costly, and the breakdown of the relationship form is both unhealthy and socially expensive. As a consequence, long-term stable relationships become the socially preferred option for government.