to think Ed Milliband should have married his partner before having their 2nd child?

[Gooftroop]

One child, fine. Maybe it was a surprise, these things happen, marriage is so yesterday, no problem. But to go on building a family without legally committing himself to his partner ... I am unimpressed. AIBU?

TIFFANY - I'd be happy if a single parent became prime minister - what on earth is there to be shocked about? I'd be happy if a partner in a gay couple became prime minister. And I'd be happy for Ed Miliband to be prime minister (if he wasn't so wishy washy, organisationally challenged and indecisive ). I'm just saying IMO they should have got married before expanding their family all things being equal.

OP, are you Justine's mum? Come on, out yerself. We know the truth.

but why on earth was it ok to have one out of wedlock but not more?

haven't you heard of 'shotgun weddings'?

Doesn't affect me in any way, so I don't care.

I don't care about any of the choices other people make that don't affect me. (abuse etc excepted, obviously!)

Justine is a lovely girl and I won't have her used this way! Sniff sniff

"Im quite happy he isnt married, he is representing a huge section of our population and doing it quite well"

Fair point, but not representing people who are married perhaps, a much maligned minority as this thread shows.

I'm with the OP on this one. I had DD out of wedlock (got pregnant at 18). I now live with DP (not DD's father). He has a child from his previous relationship (they weren't married).

I think there are important reasons to get married.

1. Legal position: I'm a lawyer and marriage remains the most watertight protection for the family unit. Few cohabiting couples adequately protect themselves legally in the event that their relationship breaks down. I speak from experience here, with DP's horrendous legal battles with his ex when they broke up.

2. Two people can commit to raising a family together without being married. But, marrying someone is making a committment to that person, that you love, respect and value them and want to build your lives together. It's a way of making a statement, as are the vows that one makes.

3. Studies continue to show that the best environment in which to raise children is that where the parents are married (whether heterosexual or not). Cohabitees are statistically more likely to have their relationship fail than those who marry.

I'm adamant that if I have more children, I'll get married before doing so.

Studies also show how many marriages end in divorce!!!!!!

Am sure someone can provide the figures, but I know it's HIGH

well i am expecting baby no 5, dp and i had no 1 when we were at uni, 12yrs later we are still together, have a mortgage and 4 kids, no5 due in a fortnight but we havent got married we have sorted out a will etc to make sure the kids are covered should anything happen to either of us, but dont see any need to get married, it wouldnt change our relationship and doesnt mean anything to either of us.

so we must be REALLY unreasonable to have 5 planned children out of wedlock

honestly it is nobodies business but theirs, who cares if they are married or not?!

Ms THornton does not need Mr Miliband's protection financially, and maybe she doesn't want to marry him?

Actually, the horribly retrograde concentration on party leaders' spouses which has increased massively over the last decade or so makes me feel glad that Ed-M and his partner aren't married. Every step away from Stepford is to be welcomed if it undermines the possibility of the next Labour leader have some beautified PR tickbox at his side. I hope Justine gets tattoos and starts smoking and swearing at journalists, just to be on the safe side.

RockinSockBunnies - Re:3(b) All that shows is that the kind of people who get married are more likely to stay together than those who co-habit. For this to be a point in favour of marriage, you need to show that a marriage itself increases the chances of the couple staying together.

re:3(a) Citation needed - That the best environment is one with two parents seems plausible - that married as opposed to cohabiting makes a difference seems unlikely, so I'd like to see what studies state this. Unless this is just a factor of more cohabiting parents splitting up in which case see above.

I actually think that having dcs together IS more commitment than being married because you will (in an ideal scenario and certainly in mine) be in touch with that person no matter what happens in your relationship.

If you are married and dont have dc then you can walk away and never see eachother again if you divorce. Ever.

Hasnt it be shown in places like Iceland (the country not the frozen food emporium) that its the way you parent and model relationships - apart or together that matters and not your marital status?

I actually cant believe that people care about this nowadays.

RockinSocks - You're not allowed to say something like that on mumsnet. It's only ok to have five children without being married and ridicule people who think marriage might not be a horrible idea.

when you compare all cohabiting relationships with married relationships you aren't comparing like with like. 'Cohabitation' comes in lots of different forms, from the temporary young or uncommitted boyfriend/girlfriend situation where an accidental pregnancy occurs to middleaged, middleclass professionals who buy a house together and plan their children with the same dullness as a regular married couple, a la the Milibands. If you take this type of cohabitee I would guess the outcomes in terms of longevity of relationship and wellbeing of children would work out pretty much the same, and I speak as a married person.

YABVU - apart from the fact we don't live in the dark ages, its none of you business.

gooftroop: I think you'll find that plenty of the people saying you're unreasonable (and passing around cubes of cheese on cocktail sticks) actually are married. It's not necessarily some conspiracy against marriage.

If you include cohabitees of all types with married people then you really aren't comparing like with like! I lived with a couple of boyfriends, but never ever intended the relationship to be lifelong. It was a convenience/financial decision. I wouldn't have got married to those boyfriends - it was a totally different kind of relationship. My friends who are long term cohabitee parents have the same kind of relationship I have. Indeed I lived with my husband before I got married, but knew from the start that I intended this relationship to last.

Gooftroop - Why do YOU think they should have got married? AS far as I can tell you think it makes him look bad, but you don't explain why.

I'm married and I think Gooftroop is BU.

C'mon, it could be a Spartacus moment

I got married because I wanted to. EM and JT apparently don't. No-one else's business either way, however many net curtains get twitched.

1) Legal position: I'm a lawyer and marriage remains the most watertight protection for the family unit. Few cohabiting couples adequately protect themselves legally in the event that their relationship breaks down.

But the fact that some 'few' do (although I would like statistics, please, and indeed a definition of 'adequately') demonstrates that it is possible. And once again, we point to the fact that the laydee in question is really quite legally competent and presumably has, you know, other lawyer friends who can help out in those areas in which she does not personally specialise...

2) Two people can commit to raising a family together without being married. But, marrying someone is making a committment to that person, that you love, respect and value them and want to build your lives together. It's a way of making a statement, as are the vows that one makes.

That's purely your opinion. And in any case that is not the only reason people get married. They get married because they 'ought' to. They get married because someone else is putting pressure on them. They get married because they want a demonstration that their partner loves them, and think this is the best way.

3) Studies continue to show that the best environment in which to raise children is that where the parents are married (whether heterosexual or not). Cohabitees are statistically more likely to have their relationship fail than those who marry.
Which studies? How many and who conducted them? And the point about cohabitees is made above. (I would query, as well, the use of the term 'fail' - yes, some relationships, including ones that have produced children, finish. This is not in all cases a Bad Thing.)

Yabu

TheCoalitionNeedsYou thank you for asking. Ready? You're going to love this.

Ideally I think people should be married before they have children. Outrageous, I know.

That's ideally. Of course it won't be right for tons of people, won't be possible for others, won't be desireable for some etc. That's all fine. Marriages aren't perfect, far from it, but they are the building blocks of our society and have been for thousands of years. Most
studies support the notion that, on
average, children do best when raised by
two married parents who have low-conflict relationships.

And I think it's nice for the kids too to know their parents have made that commitment, especially if your dad happens to be prime minister.

Yanbu. Your being a Twat.

the especially if your dad happens top want to be prime minister bit still makes no sense, OP. None at all.

My DH would love to be in the top 100 geometry wars players in the world. I don't think this has anything to do with his level of commitment to me, or the level of commitment he demonstrates to me for the kids.