Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Wedding without marriage

289 replies

DelythBeautyQueen · 27/05/2024 13:37

My cousin who lives in North East England was supposed to be getting married next month.

Attending won't be cheap, but we were looking forward to celebrating Anna's and James' special day.

They will have all the trappings of an extravagant wedding. They are not wealthy and have taken out a large loan to pay for for it.

The bride and groom asked guests to give them money for their honeymoon in the Caribbean instead of gifts. We were happy to do that and sent them £300 a few weeks ago.

They originally intended to have the legal marriage ceremony in their local registry office a day or two before the wedding celebration and a non-legal humanist ceremony on the day. I know this is a fairly common thing nowadays and had no problem with it.

I found out last night Anna and James have decided to have the legal ceremony while on honeymoon, not before the "wedding". I wouldn't see this as too much of a problem if they were going straight on honeymoon from the wedding, but they are not.

It turns out that they haven't even booked the honeymoon yet and intend to go "sometime next year".

The "wedding" next month will go ahead exactly as planned. The bride and groom do not intend to tell guests that they won't actually be married. The only reason I know is because my aunt is very upset and told her sister (my mum).

I know that a few members of the family are stretching financially to attend this "wedding" for a couple that will not be married at the end of it and probably won't be married for as much as 18 months after it.

Am I being unreasonable for being angry about this. That we have been deceived into attending a sham wedding?

OP posts:
AliceMcK · 29/05/2024 17:35

YANBU

i agree a marriage is a legally binding contract, not just 2 people saying I love you in front of friends and family.

it dose sound like the groom may have cold feet, if that’s the case your cousin should make sure she’s covered if they do have children, in that if they break up she’s not left holding the baby with no financial support.

My DH and I almost had to have a non legal wedding. He (being a typical ADHD person) didn’t sort his divorce out when he said he had. We were a month away from the wedding when he confessed and only because I pushed him. We’d both been separated from our ex spouses a long time but neither of us got around to the divorce part. I got mine done, it was finalised about 6 months before the wedding. But because DH didn’t sort his out when he said he would we were cutting it pretty fine. Luckily it came through in time but we did discuss doing the wedding and secretly getting married at a later date. I felt there was no way I could tell our families, 99% of our guests were travelling to the wedding, both sets of parents and sibling were coming from overseas. I was mortified and angry at DH and thought we’d just do the ceremony without telling anyone the full story, because I was embarrassed too. As we didn’t get married in the uk and used a celebrant none of our families would have known whether it was legal or not.

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 17:17

fashionqueen0123 · 29/05/2024 16:51

Do you know why they aren’t doing it a few days before still? I wouldn’t have an issue with that.

Show quote history

No. According to my aunt, they have decided that they would like a private ceremony in the Caribbean. Apparently, the country they plan to go to conducts ceremonies that are legally recognised in the UK.

Like you, I would have no issue with them marrying a few days ahead of the wedding celebration. That seems a fairly common thing, especially when the wedding is being held in a venue that isn't licensed for marriage ceremonies.

It just seems ridiculous and dishonest to be "celebrating" something that hasn't happened and might not happen.

Whether the change of plan it is due to a romantic notion on the part of the bride and groom, or because one of them has cold feet, I don't know.

I doubt it was my cousin's idea to postpone. She was so excited about being married and keen to start a family that it would be a remarkable turnaround to decide to wait what could be as much as 18 months. I understand her fiance is keen to start a family too, although he has always been less excited to be married.

At the moment, I don't want to ask, because she doesn't know I know. When she is ready, I'm sure she will tell me.

OP posts:
Tagyoureit · 29/05/2024 17:11

I don't think you are being unreasonable at all.

I think lots of people would think this particular situation quite farcical, this one, not any in Scotland where the rules are obviously different according the many posts here or where others have actually got legally married in another small ceremony close to the date of the big wedding.

Seems as though your cousin is trying to save face with a big excessive wedding that is just a big, expensive party that she can't actually afford without a loan and she's not been very upfront about it.

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 17:01

Wolfpa · 29/05/2024 16:29

Great, the anger that you are feeling from the 3rd hand conversation that you have heard is the bit that is disrespectful.

she may need your support not your judgement.

Nothing about this situation is great. I think you might have misunderstood the point.

My cousin may very well need support and if she does, she can be confident that it will be forthcoming. From me and others.

The source of the information is her mother and her mother's sister (my mother). So the information is reliable and their concern in no way disrespectful.

My anger is less at my cousin, because I doubt this farce was her idea. But I am angry that they or anyone would hold an extravagant event that has the appearance of a traditional wedding with no intention of actually getting married. Especially as it looks like they don't want to be honest about it.

Some posters have suggested I should refuse to attend or that I should ask my cousin to return the contribution we've made to their honeymoon. I have never suggested that I will do either of those things.

As I have made clear in a previous post, we intend to go to the "wedding". It will still be an opportunity to meet and catch up with family. I'm sure it will be an enjoyable occasion if not a wedding and we have already paid (non-refundable) for accommodation.

Unless they decide not to go on "honeymoon" to get legally married, I won't be asking for our £300 to be refunded.

My point in starting this thread was ask if I am being unreasonable to be angry that guests are being misled into thinking they are attending a wedding at the end of which the couple will not be married and will have no immediate plan to be married.

The vast majority of responses suggest I am not unreasonable.

OP posts:
fashionqueen0123 · 29/05/2024 16:51

DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 16:17

Thank you for the reminder.

As I have said a few times, my cousin's wedding ceremony is not a legal ceremony. Neither bride nor groom have said it is.

On the wedding invitations they stated that they would have the legal ceremony in their local registry office a few days before the "wedding" (in England).

They have apparently decided since then to postpone their legal ceremony until next year when they go on their "honeymoon".

The "wedding" will go ahead as originally planned, but they will no more "married" after it that before. They do not intend to tell their guests that this is the new plan.

Show quote history

Do you know why they aren’t doing it a few days before still? I wouldn’t have an issue with that.

Wolfpa · 29/05/2024 16:29

Great, the anger that you are feeling from the 3rd hand conversation that you have heard is the bit that is disrespectful.

she may need your support not your judgement.

crenellations · 29/05/2024 16:28

shearwater2 · 29/05/2024 14:57

Married to another person for 30+ years.

But when you say "married" you mean they had an actual wedding where they became legally married?

And you are saying that because you recognise that being legally married means something different from informally committing to someone?

Because if you see the distinction then I don't know why you're disagreeing with OP to say the legal status is unimportant!

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 16:25

Wolfpa · 29/05/2024 16:23

@DelythBeautyQueen so you are not going to talk to your cousin to get the whole story?

Of course I will.

OP posts:
Wolfpa · 29/05/2024 16:23

@DelythBeautyQueen so you are not going to talk to your cousin to get the whole story?

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 16:18

innerdesign · 29/05/2024 16:11

OP has already clarified a few times that this is in England and it is not a legal ceremony. Her post you quoted is accurate, you do need to have a legally-recognised ceremony - it just so happens that in Scotland celebrants can do those.

Show quote history

Thank you. I didn't see your post before I posted mine.

OP posts:
Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 16:17

FlightwasfromNewark · 29/05/2024 16:03

Just a reminder that marriages conducted by a humanist celebrant are legal in Scotland. In England they are not. Don’t know about Wales or NI.

Show quote history

Thank you for the reminder.

As I have said a few times, my cousin's wedding ceremony is not a legal ceremony. Neither bride nor groom have said it is.

On the wedding invitations they stated that they would have the legal ceremony in their local registry office a few days before the "wedding" (in England).

They have apparently decided since then to postpone their legal ceremony until next year when they go on their "honeymoon".

The "wedding" will go ahead as originally planned, but they will no more "married" after it that before. They do not intend to tell their guests that this is the new plan.

OP posts:
innerdesign · 29/05/2024 16:11

FlightwasfromNewark · 29/05/2024 16:03

Just a reminder that marriages conducted by a humanist celebrant are legal in Scotland. In England they are not. Don’t know about Wales or NI.

Show quote history

OP has already clarified a few times that this is in England and it is not a legal ceremony. Her post you quoted is accurate, you do need to have a legally-recognised ceremony - it just so happens that in Scotland celebrants can do those.

FlightwasfromNewark · 29/05/2024 16:03

DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 10:23

To be properly married in the UK (where my cousin is having her "wedding") you have to have a legally recognised ceremony for it to be a marriage of any sort. They have no actual plan at the moment to have a legal ceremony.

So, to answer your question, the non-legal religious (or non religious) ceremonies that are not preceded or followed by a legal ceremony are not real marriages. They are sham marriages.

It is neither disrespectful nor incorrect to say so, it is a simple statement of fact.

I do not need to speak to my cousin to know that if she doesn't follow up her "wedding", or fancy party with a legal ceremony she won't be married. Her "marriage" won't even be a "worthless sham marriage" it won't be a marriage at all.

No fancy dresses, big party and declarations of love in front of friends and family will make them any more married than they were before the day.

Show quote history

Just a reminder that marriages conducted by a humanist celebrant are legal in Scotland. In England they are not. Don’t know about Wales or NI.

KM123456 · 29/05/2024 15:55

This sounds like one of them wants marriage and the other doesn't, and this bait and switch has been set up to "get married" but really avoid it. It's embarrassing and humiliating, but clever, because once it's done the person who wants to get married is not only left with nothing, but will be unable to publicly say they want to get married--because there was this public ceremony. I'm betting the woman wants it and he's avoiding it, which is why the aunt is so.upset. if I were the person wanting marriage, I'd cancel this ceremony and announce why.

thing47 · 29/05/2024 15:43

Next time I go to a wedding, I'm going to insist on verifying the legalities before handing over any gifts.

Well if you're going to the same one as OP @shearwater2, you don't need to concern yourself as it isn't actually a wedding at all 😉

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 15:16

shearwater2 · 29/05/2024 13:32

Next time I go to a wedding, I'm going to insist on verifying the legalities before handing over any gifts. I went to one six months ago and one of the couple had been married before. Dammit, I should have asked for a copy of his decree absolute first.

And if the couple get divorced I will ask for a refund.

Apparently that is the correct way to behave.

Utterly fucking batshit bonkers if you ask me, but hey, apparently it's the done thing.

You are quite right about one thing. What you are suggesting is completely batshit bonkers, so why would you do it?

Literally no one has suggested it's "the done thing"?

If that is what you have taken from this thread you either, haven't read it properly, or your powers of comprehension are very poor.

OP posts:
shearwater2 · 29/05/2024 14:57

Married to another person for 30+ years.

crenellations · 29/05/2024 14:20

I went to one six months ago and one of the couple had been married before.

Do you mean they had informally committed to each other before, or are you using "married" to describe a legal state?

crenellations · 29/05/2024 14:17

DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 12:28

The legal contract of marriage is the marriage. Without it, there is no marriage.

The definition of marriage is written in the law. It is not an opinion.

What you call my rigid definition of marriage is the actual definition of marriage. Honestly. I didn't make it up, I promise.

I like and love my cousin. Her definition of marriage is the same as mine (the actual definition of marriage). The same as the vast majority of people. The ceremony she will go through at her "wedding" is entirely invalid. She knows that. That's why they plan to have a legal ceremony next year.

Everyone except you seems to understand that.

Edited
Show quote history

Well said. I don't know what it is about weddings and marriages that have a small number of people utterly confused by what they mean but it's bizarre.
Of course anyone is free to feel love towards anyone and express that and promise to be with them, and that is fine, but it is an alternative to marriage. No less real, no less worthy, just a different thing.

Like the holding of a driving licence has no bearing on the quality of your actual driving compared to someone who hasn't passed their test but is competent - but you can't describe them as a legal driver.

Bingbangboom1 · 29/05/2024 13:56

YANBU. That is utterly ridiculous.

shearwater2 · 29/05/2024 13:32

Next time I go to a wedding, I'm going to insist on verifying the legalities before handing over any gifts. I went to one six months ago and one of the couple had been married before. Dammit, I should have asked for a copy of his decree absolute first.

And if the couple get divorced I will ask for a refund.

Apparently that is the correct way to behave.

Utterly fucking batshit bonkers if you ask me, but hey, apparently it's the done thing.

fashionqueen0123 · 29/05/2024 13:30

You can’t pretend to be married or draw up contracts to get around inheritance tax for spouses

shearwater2 · 29/05/2024 13:27

thing47 · 29/05/2024 11:38

But the OP already knows they are not doing the legal ceremony on the same day so presumably the other guests know as well (awaits drip feed). Where is the duplicity?

I don't think the other guests do know @C8H10N4O2. The OP has said: "The bride and groom do not intend to tell guests that they won't actually be married. The only reason I know is because my aunt is very upset and told her sister (my mum)".

I agree with you that if everyone was made aware, that would be more reasonable, but at the moment guests are making the decision whether to attend or not (and what to give as gifts) based on false information. So that's the duplicity.

If the hoo haa the information has caused on this thread is anything to go by, I'm not surprised they haven't told anyone. Why would you want that kind of ridiculous hassle?

Original poster
DelythBeautyQueen · 29/05/2024 12:28

C8H10N4O2 · 29/05/2024 11:16

You are completely focused on the legal contract and not the marriage.

It is possible to put in place legal contracts between people which provide everything that a state marriage contract provides (even covering a large chunk of the inheritance tax exemptions). People have done this since forever, the fact that you don't like your cousin who doesn't conform to your rigid definition of marriage doesn't make their commitment less valid.

Show quote history

The legal contract of marriage is the marriage. Without it, there is no marriage.

The definition of marriage is written in the law. It is not an opinion.

What you call my rigid definition of marriage is the actual definition of marriage. Honestly. I didn't make it up, I promise.

I like and love my cousin. Her definition of marriage is the same as mine (the actual definition of marriage). The same as the vast majority of people. The ceremony she will go through at her "wedding" is entirely invalid. She knows that. That's why they plan to have a legal ceremony next year.

Everyone except you seems to understand that.

OP posts:
TheBottomsOfMyTrousersAreRolled · 29/05/2024 11:50

CountingCrones · 29/05/2024 11:47

The legal contract is what makes it a marriage and not a relationship. 'Married' has a definition, legally and in society.

There are a myriad of ways of being together and that's great. The ones that are married are the ones that have made that legal contract.

Show quote history

This. Why are people in this day and age still trying to blur the line of what marriage is? You can have pretty much any relationship you want. If you dont want marriage dont pretend you are married. If you are with someone who doesnt want marriage, address it. Dont pretend like a child.