My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Relationships

Why get married?

62 replies

glub · 18/09/2014 00:13

In a heterosexual marriage:

What are the advantages for men?
What are the advantages for women?

Ie why on earth bother? I've had a Google but not come up with much.
I'll say that so far I reckon that registering our coupledom would give us a few quid in tax advantages and for me recognise with his money if we were to split up my input into childcare and my restricted earning potential.
But for him? He sees it as a lose lose situation. Reckons his money would go straight to the kids anyway and would rather do without the probably minor tax benefits than go through a divorce and lose a lot more. And apparently hospitals now recognise partners as next of kin is that right?
Please help.
Ps don't mention love! Love exists without laws and contracts! Or is it a loving gift to the wife to trust her with his money making potential?
Equality...pah... Or is marriage and the associated divorce law the leveller? I guess that's another topic altogether though!

OP posts:
stargirl1701 · 18/09/2014 00:24

He gains life expectancy! Married men, on average, live longer. The reverse is not true though.

BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted · 18/09/2014 00:29

"Reckons his money would go straight to the kids anyway"

Meh, that's what they all say.

Annarose2014 · 18/09/2014 00:56

I'd make sure about the NOK thing. Unless you want his Mum to be the one deciding to pull the plug.

For us, we wanted to be tied together legally. It was not only practical, it was an expresion of our commitment. People say "its only a piece of paper" but actually its very much a declaration that "we are prepared to be one legal entity" if you know what I mean. That felt very significant to us. But it might not to other people.

We were also treated entirely different by other people after we got married. I don't agree with it, but we WERE. It was like we were invited to the grown ups table! My friend "N" bemoaned to me that despite living with her partner for 10 years, his family didn't seem to see the relationship as being permanent. When family events were mentioned "You can bring N if you want". It infuriated her!

(Though they had no kids unlike you I'm guessing)

callipygian00 · 18/09/2014 01:31

I agree with the pp point about people treating you differently.
I know you said don't mention love - this is linked but not quite the same thing. An unexpected thing happened after we got married, this will sound cheesy but I felt differently about us as soon as we walked out of the church - I felt like 1 person when I walked in the church but 1 of 2 people when I walked out? I suppose it's a feeling of permanency which I didn't expect. It's nice though. The legal aspect is comforting too. Although if he's factoring in divorce costs already that would unsettle me...

dollius · 18/09/2014 07:01

Well, when you have kids, it is not "his" money is it? And marriage formalises that. Otherwise a SAHP can get royally shafted on separation/death of the partner.

And unless he has a will, the money will not go straight to the kids. Intestacy laws are v complicated and only a portion will go to them. Nothing at all to unmarried partners.

AuntieStella · 18/09/2014 07:11

There are important legal differences between marriage/CP and cohabitation.

The differences are not sex specific, but may have a different impact if incomes are unequal (and very much so if one is suspended during the early child-rearing years). but if course, there's no guarantee that one person will always be the healthy and higher earning partner, is there?

Important things to consider other than who inherits in the event of intestacy (though you really should both get wills) is that only a spouse gets IHT (not much good expecting kids to get house if it immediately has to be sold to pay tax bill) and only a spouse gets state bereavement benefits.

Have you made wills, and is th ownership of all joint assets clear? And do remember that the pragmatic approach to NOK in many countries does not apply globally (if one of you has an accident whilst abroad) and can get squabbled over here as well (at exactly the time you don't want to be dealing with Stuff).

CogitoErgoSometimes · 18/09/2014 07:15

Why get married.... because it's a relatively easy way to make a legally binding contract that recognises all the members of your family as kin. It's a formal commitment that demonstrates continued intent to support in the event of separation or death. It puts both parties on a more equal and more secure footing.

There are other ways to achieve roughly the same thing, of course, and the most important thing you can both do is make sure you have formalised and up to date wills. If you have property that you jointly own, the terms of ownership should also be formalised. Were there original deposits that need to be protected? What happens if one of you wants to sell, for example? What happens if the partnership ended? If you have life insurance, who are the beneficiaries? Hospitals don't automatically recognise partners as next of kin

MoneyBox Live on R4 did a programme all about relationships and money yesterday. Listen Again here.

Then again, if you're dealing with a selfish person who doesn't want to share, maybe they're not the kind of person you want to be in a relationship with, full stop?

soundedbetterinmyhead · 18/09/2014 07:37

So love aside, the pragmatic reasons for getting married for me were that we wanted to have children in our lives. We wanted to share the care 50/50 but knew (14 years ago) that that was going to be unlikely.

There was NO WAY I was going to be getting pregnant without a signed contract to say that 1) these were his kids 2) I was due half of our assets if anything were to happen in the future, such as divorce or 3) if he died, I would be next of kin and get our assets (we hadn't made a will at that point) which would enable me to bring up our children not in poverty.

I think all these things can be assured by various legal contracts, but by the time you've paid the solicitor, I should imagine you may as well have got married.

I just can't understand women without a private income of their own who have babies without these safeguards. Giving birth is generally catastrophic in terms of earning power for women...far less so for men.

LynetteScavo · 18/09/2014 07:44

*Reckons his money would go straight to the kids anyway and would rather do without the probably minor tax benefits than go through a divorce and lose a lot more8

He sounds charming! I wouldn't want to marry him anyway!

chaseface · 18/09/2014 08:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LisaMed · 18/09/2014 08:04

If he were to die today and you were not married you would have no right to arrange his funeral.

Foolishlady · 18/09/2014 08:07

For the higher earner/one with more assets, marriage is a very risky business. There are advantages - I do feel like our relationship is more recognised - but not sure these outweigh the disadvantages for the higher earner. Obviously if you're the lower earner marriage is massively advantageous.

Chunderella · 18/09/2014 08:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Chunderella · 18/09/2014 08:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

drspouse · 18/09/2014 08:43

We wanted to stand up in front of all our friends and family and declare that we were going to be together "till death do us part". Of course, you could do that by having a big party and saying those words, but why not do the legal thing at the same time?

DH had a colleague who changed her name by deed poll to be the same as her partner/kids' dad. We didn't really see the point of that particular piece of paper when compared to a marriage certificate.

GnomeDePlume · 18/09/2014 08:58

Marriage makes it easy to formalise your relationship with your partner.

One of the good things, I think, about Britain is that on the whole the state doesnt peer in through your windows. There is no automatic assumption that the person who shares your bed also has to share your assets.

You can only be married to one person at a time. The spouse retains the rights of spouse until the marriage is formally over. Wills and other agreements can be unilaterally changed without the other partner knowing. It is far, far harder to unilaterally end a marriage.

Marriages are recognised internationally, living together arrangements are not so reliably and consistently recognised.

My advice to my own DCs (both DDs & DS) is to marry before they have children. That way they know exactly where they stand. Anything else leaves them dependent upon the goodwill of a partner at a time when goodwill may be thin on the ground.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 18/09/2014 09:07

I heard yesterday on the programme linked earlier that cohabitees are recognised under Scottish Law. To the extent that cohabitees from all kinds of places and all kinds of nationalities are petitioning their cases through the Scottish courts when things break down. You don't have to be Scottish or live in Scotland to do this, apparently. I didn't catch all the details about what defines cohabitees etc but it may be a distinction worth researching.

MehsMum · 18/09/2014 09:15

We did it partly to clarify legal issues (i.e. to benefit from the clarity of the law) and partly as a public statement of our commitment, so as to leave nobody in any doubt.

FragileBrittleStar · 18/09/2014 09:25

For the man- he gets parental rights without having to go to the registry.
errr - its is easier in terms of names- I get fed up of how to describe my partners mother/brothers etc- MIL /BIL would be easier!

I think the term wife/husband are more self explantory- when I describe DP as my boyfriend - people don't know what this means- ditto partner.

I do think the biggest advantage are to the poorer party- as well as the tax rights - you'd have rights to assets/support/property.

I am not married and support my partner - as long as we are together I am fine with this as although it is very good for him (he doesn't have to work etc has a good lifestyle ) it is beneficial to me (easier childcare, happier partner=happier life) - if we split up I don't want to have to support him in the lifestyle as it wouldn't benefit me in anyway

CogitoErgoSometimes · 18/09/2014 09:30

You might not want to support him if you break up FBS but what if you died? What would happen to him and your DCs then?

MsAnthropic · 18/09/2014 09:36

There are a lot of legal differences. If you have children and plan to be a SAHM and you do not jointly own your home, you'd be mad not be married. Having children when unmarried is for women who have their own assets and earn well - this is deeply unfair when pregnancies are accidental, but if you have a choice in it, really do not have children if you're not married and cannot support yourself and them without help.

Dukketeater · 18/09/2014 09:39

Personally, I hate when people talk about marriage and then subsequently divorce... They are not a pair, they do not come hand in hand...

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

MsAnthropic · 18/09/2014 09:44

Personally, I hate when people talk about marriage and then subsequently divorce... They are not a pair, they do not come hand in hand...
I know, but a good rule of thumb is not marry someone you would never want to divorce. By that I mean, imagining how someone would be in a divorce is not a bad indicator as to whether you should marry them.

MsAnthropic · 18/09/2014 09:45

IOW, someone who'd be a nasty twat during divorce, is not likely to make a good marriage partner either.

Stupidhead · 18/09/2014 09:46

Due to me and DP having stupid separate accidents lately we've seen our fair share of A&E and yes they ask you for your NOK and we both stated each other at the time. As for anything else I really don't think you have a leg to stand on.

We are getting married but not for god (both atheists), not for legal terms (not much to gain), not for the children (they're mine and I'm too old for more) and not for our families (his class me as DiL/SiL already, mine couldn't care less). But we want to make 'us' together properly. I can't explain it and he's pushing and organising more than me!

I do remember reading in 'He's Just Not That Into You' about marriage and if one partner wants it and the other doesn't then the other partner is JNTIY. Relationships are about compromise.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.