TY  - JOUR
A1  - Julian, Christopher
A1  - Kaufman, Gayle 
A1  - Compton, D'Lane
T1  - Partnership patterns and living arrangements of LGBTQ+ identifying US adults: Estimates from a probability-based survey
Y1  - 2026/02/17
JF  - Demographic Research
JO  - Demographic Research
SN  - 1435-9871
SP  - 351
EP  - 370
DO  - 10.4054/DemRes.2026.54.11
VL  - 54
IS  - 11
UR  - https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/11/
L1  - https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/11/54-11.pdf
L2  - https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/11/54-11.pdf
L3  - https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/11/files/readme.54-11.txt
L3  - https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/11/files/demographic-research.54-11.zip
N2  - Background: Most national surveys exclude sexual and gender identity (SOGI) measures or do not link them with household rosters and non-coresidential partnership questions, limiting demographic estimates of LGBTQ+ family life. 

Objective: We examine differences in relationship status and living arrangements between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ identifying US adults. Specifically, we compare the shares of those who live with a spouse, live with an unmarried partner, have a non-coresidential partner, or have no partner. We also assess household size and composition, including living alone, coresidence with children and/or other family, and living with unrelated roommates. 

Methods: Data come from the 2021 American Marriage Survey, a probability-based survey of 2,806 US adults recruited through the AmeriSpeak panel of the National Opinion Research Center. 

Results: LGBTQ+ identifying adults were less likely than non-LGBTQ+ identifying adults to be in a coresidential marital relationship but were more likely to report an unmarried cohabiting partner, a non-coresidential partner, or no partner. They were also more likely to live alone or with unrelated roommates and less likely to live with children. Consequently, LGBTQ+ identifying adults tend to live in smaller households, which may heighten social isolation risk. 

Conclusions: Findings underscore the need for national surveys to integrate SOGI questions with detailed measures of relationships and living arrangements to capture diverse family structures and inform policies supporting LGBTQ+ well-being. Conventional surveys often disproportionately undercount LGBTQ+ relationships by excluding non-coresidential partners. 

Contribution: This analysis provides nationally representative estimates of relationship status and household composition, revealing distinct partnership patterns and living arrangements among LGBTQ+ identifying adults compared to non-LGBTQ+ identifying adults. 

ER  -