Partner won’t put me on deeds to the house

Doesn't this mean though an ex spouse can claim half of 33% of each of the 3 houses? Seems good in principle but feel like thats dangerous

Only you can judge your situation, but, as described, this raises a few red flags for me.

You seem to be describing a relationship where you have no access to family finances, or a share in the security of the (new) house, where you are not allowed to work, and you also seem to be being prevented from building a pension entitlement. Those are all at least suggestive of controlling/coercive behaviour.

In addition, your partner doesn't seem to recognise that childcare and homemaking are a valuable contribution to family life.

I am blaming her, yes, because she was the one who allowed herself to get in this situation. She could have said no to any of it at any time or not agreed to having a child and being a SAHM on terms that meant she was vulnerable. I'm not saying he hasn't been shitty, but if we don't look out for ourselves then you can't rely on anyone else doing it for you. This sort of situation is not new, we read it all the time on here, no-one can plead ignorance to the fact that having zero legal protection, a child and no job is not a good place to be!

He won't even update his will or life insurance to make sure if he dies, his child and partner are cared for. Surely that is unreasonable of him and the fact he wants a second child, surely he should be thinking of their future
If he is the one who wants op to stay at home and birth his children then he needs to accept that this should come with providing financially if he is expecting her to sacrifice her financial stability for his wants. Even if he wasn't willing to give her 50% of the equity in his house, he could at least create a formal agreement where she is entitled to 50% of the equity that will be created following the birth of the children. E g if he had 40% equity now, he could create an agreement that the first 40% is ringing fenced and then the rest can be split 50/50

I voted Not being unreasonable to Am I expecting too much? because clearly there were discussions of some sort and you acted on what you thought were his intentions at the time.
"he said once we buy a house he wants to get married"
"doesn't want me me to go back to work until our child is 3"
But he is now clearly not the least bit concerned about your situation or the DC situation going forward.
" refuses to update his will or life insurance policy"
I would be insisting on marriage ASAP, doesn't have to be a big flash wedding. If he won't, then there's a clear indication of what and how he thinks of you and DC.
A lot of the other $$ advice is probably accurate depending on where you are.

Maybe I look at what words people say in the literal sense and what he says about his future doesn’t actually include you

he said once we buy a house he wants to get married

For a start these words make no sense given you won’t be on the deeds to the house so there is no “We” (ie you and him) buying anything (the “We” sounds like he is referring to someone else, maybe his parents?)

He also says he wants to get married (but he doesn’t actually say to you) Especially when you say you want to get married but he makes excuses.

Listen carefully to what he says and don’t jump to the conclusion that these future plans include you

You need to either get a marriage certificate or your name on the deeds to the current property or you need to be prepared to walk away. But before you do get your ducks in a row

It's not as simple as that thought is it. No one sets our to put themselves in these situations. It's like saying to someone why did you stay when they are in an abusive relationship it's not always as easy as just walking away.

Normally these situations grow over time, you don't wake up one day and decide to live that way.

You start a relationship, they say one say you'll be married, this seems reasonable, before you know it there is a child and now he's convinced you that he cares ever so much about that child that you should stay home and he will pay for this... Etc.

Before I was with my husband I was in a relationship with someone who before we bought out house together told me he wanted to marry me, we would have a child. The bills were all in my name and I paid them all. He contributed a small amount overall, and as his wages increased I didn't ask for anymore because we talked about him savings for our future. Was I naive, yes, but did I walk into that situation from day one, no, it grew over time.

Long story short he left,l for another women, luckily I managed to remortgage without him and buy him out. But it was hard because I had almost no savings as I had been paying for everything niavely on the basis he was the one with the savings for emergencies.

It's a form of emotional and financial abuse and it's easy to fall into without noticing until you are knees deep in it.

This is alarming. You need to sort it out before you're falling too far behind with your pension entitlements. Stop putting him first or you'll regret it forever.

Yes every great marriage starts with an ultimatum 🙄

Well if he got married to you and your relationship ended he may well end up finding himself homeless for a house he'd actually paid for. So not actually that surprising he is reluctant given what could happen. Especially with the cost of property being what it is and the fact that you have already said your relationship might not be that stable.

OTOH there is probably a fairer balance between where you are at the moment financially and where you should actually be, and if he was reasonable then he should understand that.

Probably best to sort out the finances before having the child.

Personally, I’d give him an ultimatum. Marriage or split up. You can work, claim top up benefits and child maintenance. When your little one is old enough work full time and buy your own place.

Why do you feel the need to blame the woman here and not the man financially exploiting the woman? Why have a child with someone who will be left vulnerable as a result. If he didn’t want to share finances, why didn’t he find a partner who owned her own home and had a good income? Presumably she wouldn’t have been up for being a SAHM for three years though so that given some of the reason why.

Of course! He's protecting his assests. You've got yourself in quite a pickle.

Yes but presumably then the partners role would also be reversed, he’d be the sole childcarer and have given up work to do so while the OP continued her career unimpeded.

I can't believe 3/4 of the votes think you are reasonable. You are not married, it was his house and you willingly put yourself in a position of vulnerability by not working and having a child with no legal protections. Why do women still continue to put themselves in these situations voluntarily?

Nope assumptions that, in any given couple, the man out earns the woman, perpetuates the gender pay gap.

It doesn’t sound like there is an allowance as she’s spent nearly all her savings in living during the day couple of years.

OP you’ve given up a job plus two years of work place pension contributions , two years of state pension and nearly all your savings.

This man does not love you OP. Get yourself back to work and get some savings behind you for when this goes tits up.

I will always scream from the rooftops that women need their own financial security, job, home. Marriage is so outdated and means nothing anymore. I feel embarrassed for women who think they need a man and place all their hopes and dreams and financial security on one! Yes he’s being unreasonable but I wouldn’t put anyone’s name on mine either. You really need to get yourself back to work regardless of what he wants and build your own life because one day when he wants you to move out you’ll be left with nothing. Marriage does not mean forever despite what the relationship is like at the beginning and how you feel. Strat building yourself up now before it’s too late.

You can work with a 2 years old child.

Would you put him on the deeds if it was the other way round?

You are - you claim it and he pays it back on his tax return! It provides your national insurance contributions and also means you have some of your own money. They are assuming that he is giving you an allowance every month - £300-500 min to cover all your extra expenses like hair cuts/colours and clothes and makeup and coffee out etc - if he’s NOT doing this while also not allowing you to claim child benefit then he is financially abusing you. You also need to claim child benefit to protect yourself and your pension!!!

This man is exploiting you, you should stop working for him for free.
I think your best bet is to stop engaging with him on the issue of his general unfairness and exploitative nature. Instead play nice, keep him sweet, but make a plan and then one day he'll come home to find you and his child gone.

Say you will not move till you are financially able to contribute and be a co owner x

I wonder if you thought about reversing the roles; if you were the mortgagee and homeowner and wage earner, how would you see it?
I have been a single parent and householder and would never put a partners name on the deeds unless I had the legal protection of marriage. Best wishes.

I would absolutely be leaving if he didn't change the deeds and get married.
It is for the security of your 2 year old above all. His answer is extremely concerning. From this I might even assume that he wants you in a vulnerable position deliberately and that was why he didn't want you back to work. It is better for your child for you to be at home 100%. This is a proven fact.