Why why why do people have kids without marriage

That's exactly how I read it too. OP is always composed as bait, wide-eyed faux concern... and on come the guillotine brigade; smug and self-righteous with the blame placed firmly at women for their poor choices.

Like catnip this thread is. I think there are lots of posters who enjoy reading about other women's fallouts.

The discussion should be women having the expectation, and indeed demanding, equality in partnerships and the workplace bringing huge societal benefits for all.

Yes.

Having children and sacrificing your career (to whatever extent) for a partner without any kind of legal or financial protection is not fine.

What I see around me is so many women raising children on their own, without any/much financial or other support from their useless partner or ex, who has contributed fuck all apart from some jizz and his surname. That's not progress. That's a brilliant con trick on the part of the patriarchy.

Yes again.

Have you heard of the Gender Pay Gap?

Hell yeah. And the glass ceiling. Thing is, we need to challenge these rather than retreat to marriage to 'protect' us.

I suppose the point is that it's freely made but possibly uninformed, if someone genuinely doesn't understand the benefits and risks to marriage pre or post children. An awful lot of people sleepwalk into a bad situation without realising, because they're not aware of the legal implications, or they mistakenly believe we have common law marriage in the UK.

But why why why why why do you care, OP?

I cgaf what other women choose to do or not do wrt marital status; I find it curious to be hand-wringingly upset over other women's freely-made choices.

Shocker, chat forum attracts a range of views ;)

That’s ridiculous though! You can leave a marriage for any reason you wish. Thank god we’re no longer in the time where someone else gets to decide whether you’re allowed to leave a marriage or not.

It's only one aspect of this situation but I find it interesting that on another active thread people are arguing that it is unacceptable to leave a marriage because you've subsequently found out your spouse cannot have children, and at the same time there is such a strong narrative that you mustn't have children (thus discovering your fertility) before getting married.

Bit of a catch 22 for people for whom having children is more important than getting married.

So women need to stop letting men abdicate from their responsibilities and avoid the commitment of marriage. Once upon a time it was expected that men would make a commitment to a woman with whom he had a child. We can normalise that again.

You had children with a man you don't love?

This is really lovely to hear, and you are very blessed.

in terms of legal and proven societal benefits, marriage really isn't just a piece of paper

Personally, I do not see the reason to get married after having children. For me, having my children after getting married made it so much more special. I suppose it makes me traditional, but it's how my family will always be! 😊

Yes, hence why I added you can do the ceremony for a couple hundred. We spent an added £200 on a dress and rings, which are optional.

We’re talking about why people don’t marry before kids though, not after.

Plenty of people want children. Its quite a normal and common thing for people to want and a pretty strong animal instinct for many. Not everyone can get someone to marry them or find someone who they want to marry.
Plenty of married people still get left.
Also, people do accidentally get pregnant too, and we dont force abortions or adoptions on unmarried mothers anymore thankfully

I also don't see the point in marriage. It is entirely financial benefit to the lower earner and I aren't subsidising somebody else's lifestyle. Half of marriages fail, I think I have 4 planned for this year yet I know two on average will lie to a room full of people about promising to be together through sickness and health and as long as they both shall live. And when they do separate the one that breaks the promise/contract will get no penalty like any other contract (where penalty/exit costs are outlined).

And I wonder how many of these children were a surprise or the man agreed to or were 'accidental' contraceptive failure. I bet children being born out of wedlock would reduce massively if the sexist provision of contraceptive was sorted (the female contraceptive is free on the nhs) and there is a variety of choice men don't have any choice it's condoms (they have to pay for) or nothing as no hormonal contraceptives are available.

We got married a few years back and it cost £400

£400 is a lot of money to many people who struggle to feed their children.

Some people can’t afford to get married. I don’t mean a big fancy pants wedding with bells on, I just mean the basic fees from actually legally marrying. Some people simply can’t afford that and perhaps their children were unplanned. I’d imagine most women trust and love their partner’s too so don’t think they will shit on them.

Some good partners turn into utter wankers

This.

When your relationship is good and the man is good and considerate and helpful, many women simply cannot imagine that this man, with whom they are soulmates and best friends, will utterly do them over. I think most women don't realise that a lot of men's decency to them is dependent on them actually liking you and liking having you in their life. Once they no longer like you, or want you in their life, they are looking after themselves.

So when things are good, they mistake the man's decency to them as him being a decent man.

And lets face it, few of us are fair and good to people will do not like.

But all that seems unimaginable at the time when you are best mates in love.

And whilst this is a familiar pattern to those who hang out on Mumsnet boards, it not necessarily common knowledge to other people, who may never have known a single person this has happened to. I'm 50 and don't know anyone in real life this has happened to! So it just won't be a real and present danger to most women, especially when they are at the age of starting families, as everyone they know will also be at the start of their family life, not the age of disintegration of families.

Also, people still believe in common law marriage.

To be fair to those who are saying weddings are expensive: that's an absolute choice if you want to make your wedding an expensive one. We got married a few years back and it cost £400 including the rings, dress, ceremony. You can spent as much or as little as you like but if you want to actually be married and that's your goal you can do it for a couple hundred, just check out register office fees.

It's a shame people don't realise that getting married can be affordable, we were put off getting married because of the cost until we looked into it and it clicked that actually what makes a wedding expensive is the unnecessary trappings. A register office ceremony is a couple hundred and you're just as married at the end of it.

Some people like the freedom of being unmarried, and they think if it doesn't work out down the line it'll be easier to separate without having to go through a divorce at the same time. Or they worry about the cost of divorce. Or they mistakenly believe living together is practically the same as marriage. Or they just don't consider marriage as an option because it's the norm now to go without or to have kids with partners. Or they're getting older and want kids and think they're better off having them and hoping to marry later than splitting and finding someone who wants to marry them and then TTC. Or they believe with a baby on the scene they're more likely to be proposed to.

Personally, I get it. I got pregnant at 31, engaged and married during the pregnancy. We always planned to get married at that age regardless of whether we'd been successful at trying or not. I didn't want to waste any time delaying TTC due to health issues and would rather have gambled and had a baby unmarried than not at all. I suppose I could have gotten pregnant and then my partner make excuses and not proposed after all, it happens, but I was willing to take that chance.

Marriage to me is far more important before buying a house, there's a range of legal protections buying as a married couple that you don't have buying as partners, so being married was a prerequisite for me to buying a home with DH.

Weddings are expensive. Some couples I have known have had children because they want them, and have seen the change in status as a sign of their commitment. The wedding, four years or so later, and when they can afford it, has been the icing on the cake, and a mark of how well they are doing financially.

Also, there are historical precedents for this and attitudes around the status of partners which have boded well for the longevity and seriousness of a non-matrimonial union. I have been reading Henry Mayhew's ' London Labour and the London Poor'. It was written in the 1840s. He notes that most costermongers of the time do not get married, but that their unions are regarded as solemn and binding and their children are not viewed by married costermongers as any less legitimate. They stayed with their partners, often for life. If it is in the family going back, and seen as morally respectable, and then in the mid 20th Century, couples maybe married, sometimes after the children are born, then there will be a sense of security and doing the accepted thing - perhaps. If you know you have supportive parents to help you out or go to live with, then a split maybe holds less fear. Perhaps it depends on whether you are buying property, it being the case that marriage secures property rights.

Because far too many are so obsessed with having children they don't really consider what their partner is really like.

Nope, never heard of it 🙄

Not sure what point you are trying to make, yes there are discrepancies in pay for some women doing the same job as men- female dominated sectors also have ridiculously low pay. That doesn't mean that there aren't women who have jobs that pay more than men, do you really think that's the case? Pretty sad if so!

@AProperStinging rather than marriage as a blanket though, surely teaching daughters to remain financially independent and to not rely on men is far better than to teach them about marriage.

@Efortyjive
Pretty sexist to assume women are always better off by getting married, plenty of women have more assets and earn a higher wage than men- therefore getting married isn't actually beneficial, its likely to cost you.

Have you heard of the Gender Pay Gap?
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/06/uk-gender-pay-gap-women-paid-90p-for-1-earned-by-men

@Efortyjive
Yes let's put women back in their place and teach them that marriage is a priority, finding a man who wants to get married is the most important thing and moving on if the relationship isn't for you is the worst thing ever. Yay progress!

I'm teaching my daughter (and my son) that:

Not getting married is absolutely fine.

Not finding a man or woman is absolutely fine.

Moving on is absolutely fine.

Having children and sacrificing your career (to whatever extent) for a partner without any kind of legal or financial protection is not fine.

What I see around me is so many women raising children on their own, without any/much financial or other support from their useless partner or ex, who has contributed fuck all apart from some jizz and his surname. That's not progress. That's a brilliant con trick on the part of the patriarchy.