Sister pregnant but not engaged, should I be worried?

[Dohraymefar]

My Dsis has just announced her first pregnancy. I am happy for her but worried about her situation.

6 months ago she moved in with her DP of a year and told us she was expecting he’d propose very shortly. Marriage is important to her (he knows this) and we thought they’d get engaged this summer. He hasn’t done so, and now this planned pregnancy announcement but no hint of engagement/wedding. She just looked sad when I brought it up so I quickly changed the subject.

I can’t help worrying that he’s not fully committed to her. He seems to have everything on his own terms. Please tell me I’m wrong and this will all be fine.

💯 agree with this

To me that shows being main character for the day is more important than a marriage.
If OPs sister wants marriage that badly she would arrange a registry office

Having a proper wedding is a perfectly normal desire, it doesn’t mean she’s more invested in herself than anything else. Even if it did, so what? It’s only OP here complaining, the pregnant woman has made her own choices.

Can she not propose? Maybe she’s not that bothered by marriage if she’s not asked him?

Marriage or wedding?

She's taking a huge risk. My friend had 2 children with a man who had no intention of marrying her, and when he got bored, kicked her out of his home and slammed the door shut behind her. She was homeless, and penniless as she'd given her career up to be a SAHM/house keeper for him. It took her years to get back on her feet again.

I would gently guide her towards getting some legal advice as to where she stands if the relationship ends. The sad reality is that this relationship is all on his terms and none of hers.

She's made a choice though and willingly given up her best bargaining power if she's keen on marriage and he isn't.

He gets the baby (I bet she agrees to it having his surname), the wife services but no reason to bother with marriage. If she goes PT he doesn't have to worry about sharing his pension and savings if they split up. All he has to do is ignore the "sad face" now and again.

She's made sure she can have a family first. Now to pop down to the local registry office. Only take ten minutes to get married.

How is that not a ‘proper’ wedding?

They come in all different styles and each and every one is ‘proper’.

Marriage is only important if she is the lower wage earner and/or will make herself financially dependent by having a child.

I chose not to marry but I was never reliant on a man financially, didn't need help buying a house, and could afford ds' childcare by myself (although it was a bit tight on occasions).

Financially, and in terms of security, future pension etc, I am far better off having remained unmarried.

Does your dsis have qualifications & a profession?

You know exactly what I mean - I’m clearly referring to more than a ‘registry office and a pub’ wedding. Don’t be obtuse. It’s perfectly normal for people to want a wedding that also involves guests and a party that costs a bit of money, and maybe even includes getting married in a church for example if religious…. That does not make them a self obsessed person who doesn’t care about marriage.

Yes, it's fine if she is financially independent and plans to stay that way.

It's monumental stupid if she isn't.

Ok 🤷‍♀️

We were engaged after dating for 6 months and married just before 18 months. I think with each couple it’s very individual and there are no hard rules as to if it has to be quick or lengthy but it’s the children on a timeline that are important and she has messed up getting PG, was it a contraception failure or deliberate?

I would gently encourage her to aim for a quick and quiet registry office wedding prior to baby's birth. Subsequent marriage will mean they will need to get a new birth certificate anyway. Get that legal security asap. They can keep it quiet and have a big "wedding" in a few years if they want, I have seen that happen in the past.

Surely if marriage was that important they wouldn't of planned a pregnancy?

Presumably she knows exactly what she’s doing? I wouldn’t get involved personally, it’s really none of your business what she’s doing.

Why would they need a new birth certificate?

It's a legal thing that any children born before a couple marries need to be re-registered after a marriage takes place.
It's not really enforced and really it's only relevant if there's likely to be huge inheritance issues.
Technically a baby born out of wedlock is "illegitimate" and any children born after are legitimate so if there was a family title or something to be handed down the eldest child wouldn't be able to inherit.
Obviously for Mr and Mrs Average things like this don't really apply but you are supposed to re-register.
"It is very old-fashioned but no ones changed the rules" the Registrar said when we did our daughter's replacement birth certificate.

Thanks for the explanation. Shows it’s very unlikely they’d need a new birth certificate

You're right to be concerned but there's absolutely nothing useful you can do with your feelings.

Speaking from my own experience I am friends with several couples who have chosen to have children without ever marrying, and in all of my acquaintances the fathers are devoted, attentive, involved, supportive etc and their relationships are strong. Obviously that's anecdotal and I think the evidence is that unmarried couples are more likely to separate (but potentially because it's simpler for them to do so rather than because their relationships are worse). All I'm trying to say is, it could work out as a non issue.

Having said that, not marrying before children is imo a mistake and more often unfair on the female partner. When I've spoken to people who don't want to marry, it seems that they are thinking of the expense of a wedding and that being a waste, without really understanding or consideration the legal protections of marriage, which can take place without a wedding. But often, in my experience, the partner who wants to marry is also primarily focused on the wedding, and would be unwilling or unhappy to have a marriage without a wedding. So it boils down to a disagreement about the wedding/party element which ends up leading to the lack of a wedding and of a marriage sort of by default.

It's an important layer of protection for women who have made unilateral financial sacrifices to bear children, should the relationship end. Hopefully your sister doesn't end up needing it. But yeah, nothing you can do unfortunately.

^ I should add that in every single instance of my lovely friends, the woman has taken the traditional role of maternity leave, part time work, much lower earner and would still be absolutely buggered if the relationship ended. So lovely as their partners have been (so far), they remain absolutely at their mercy. I could never be in a relationship with that kind of power imbalance personally.

Your sister should really insist on either marriage, or a strict division of labour 50:50 when it comes to parental leave, childcare, and domestic labour. Eg we can get married, or we can each have 6 months off work after the baby is born and then both work the same %.

If she is the higher earner and will continue to be regardless, that's the only situation where marriage would matter less for hee (but still has big implications in the event of unexpected premature death of one partner).

If it's something that's important to her, it's really unfortunate she's moved in wth him before at least getting engaged (ie he's getting everything he wants without any commitment!) and now in this stuation as I guess ideally she'd have done it the traditional way, marriage then a child. Is there any chance she's deliberately got pregnant? If so, that wouldn't help if he's got any doubts about the relationship.

I know every relationship is different, but it was mentioned further up thread that 18 months wasn't very long to go out before making a commitment. However, it can work. DH were 28/30 when we met (and absolute last time in my life I wanted to meet anyone). Within a couple of months he'd proposed, he moved in with me six months later so we could rent his flat out and save for wedding and house. We were married at 18 months, just celebrated our 30th wedding anniversary.

I'm glad someone mentioned surnames.

OP I'd be advising her to make sure baby has her surname. Legally it's the decision of solely the mother when unmarried, he'd have to get a court order to change that. Men often feel strongly that their kids should have their surnames, so any pregnant woman who wants to be married but isn't should make sure he knows choosing the surname is a husband privilege.

If you want me to be obtuse, I'll take this as you admitting you were mistaken about small weddings not being 'proper' and that you should've worded it better.