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?

"Yanbu. Your being a Twat."

And so it begins.

YABU

The importance or otherwise of marriage is a personal issue and not for others to pass judgment on. Some people don't believe in it.

Why do you even care?

What QueenGigantaur said.

And for the record I'm happily married and was prior to having kids.

Here's what I don't understand. Statistics show that co habiting couples who then get married have a 1:3 chance of getting divorced, or thereabouts. Please don't ask for a link because I can't remember where I read this. Am happy to be wrong etc.

But apparently marriage is supposed to make a stronger bond.

Could someone explain to me why then co habiting couples should get married if statistically they would be worse off than if they stayed co habiting?

surely if they have a 1 in 3 chance of getting divorced, they've a 2 in 3 chance of staying together though.

In any case, statistics are just generalised abstractions; they don't actually say anything directly about anyone's personal circumstances.

Gooftroop - Ok so it's point 3 of RockInSockBunnies points then.

Can you or RockInSockBunnies reference the studies you are referring to? I am not aware of any that show that MARRIAGE is a critical component of providing two parents who have low-conflict relationships.

I am also happily married and was when DS came along.

My mum wasn't married to my dad when I came along. They're still togetehr now, which is more than I can say for most of my mate's married parents who are now making up the divorce statistics.

OP is talking bollocks.

YABVU...
It's none of anyone's business if they are married or not.
DP and i are 25 years in January,we have three well grounded,lovely children(young adults).
Our business.

This is interesting:
Previous commentators have concluded that children born to cohabiting parents have worse outcomes than those born to married couples. It is also widely acknowledged, however, that cohabiting parents differ systematically from married parents in many ways aside from their formal marital status; typically they are less educated, younger and have a lower household income, than married parents. They may also differ in less easily observable ways, for example in their relationship quality, stability and commitment to their partner even before the birth of their child. Once these factors are accounted for, there may be smaller or no differences in their children's outcomes.

www.ifs.org.uk/projects/318

I can't get married, thanks. So what do you make of that? If I was Prime Minister, or DP was, we couldn't - I repeat couldn't - get married.
No, civil partnerships are not the same. Don't be conned into thinking they are.

Aye - how rich you are is a better indicator of how well your children will do that how married you are.

YOU, Gay40, are to be consigned to the bin of rejects of life.

If OP's jurassic attitude is anything to go by.

Ah yes,these studies that say co-habiting parents tend to be less well educated and that their children do less well at school.
Not so in my experience.
I met DP when we were both doing our Nurse training,we are both qualified (registered)Nurses.
DP has since re trained to become an electrician.
DD works in a bank,DS1 is doing an apprenticeship to become a marine electrician and DS2 is currently doing science A levels.

No one ever asks us when they're doing their 'studies'

Gay40 - You CAN get married though. Just not to the person you are in a relationship with.

An MP had sex with a woman who is not his wife?

So what's new?

MoralDefective: that's the problem with large-scale quantitative research; it doesn't deal with particulars. All is points to are general trends (and indicates the strength and sometimes directions of relationships between variables, which are more or less reliably approximated in something you can measure).

Just because co-habiting couples might generally tend to be younger/less educated/like sausages more than burgers/whatever else you want to compare, it doesn't mean that those you know are/do any of those things.

So let's see
The rich children of celebrities do well?
The rich children of the upper classes do well?
Not all of them do.
Money doesn't always buy stability,or even brains.

Perhape he is desperate to get married.
Perhaps he has no intention of getting married ever.

Either way, what marriage means to him is almost certainly not what it means to you or to me. Therefore, his marital status is not something we can reasonably pass judgement on. If you don't want an unmarried PM, don't vote for him (though if that is your most important criteria in a politician, that would be quite strange).

Gay40 as you say, you can't. Fine. You could do a civil partnership if you feel like it but who cares, up to you.

Ed Miliband doesn't have that restriction. He's just a bit busy apparently and 'hasn't got round to it'. So I should add that in addition to be indecisive and wishy washy he's a real charmer with the ladies.

I like him fine otherwise.

MoralDefective - It's mot about what all of them do. It's about what most of them do.

The children of the richest people are more likely to be rich than the children of the poorest people.

DamselDefective - That's not the problem with large-scale quantitative research. That is the great strength of large-scale quantitative research.

I'm currently imagining the OP peering out through her nets taking notes on which of her neighbours have failed to open their curtains this morning. And tutting.

I agree DamselinDisgrace,however it does sometimes get a little tiresome to have people passing comment on other people's marital status,and passing judgement on their childrens prospects.

Most of our children's friends have parents who are divorced.
DD and i counted through her friends with parents who are still together.She can count them one one hand.

well it is the problem with it if people are going to look at it and say, but II don't fit that so it can;t be true.

It's a great strength in many respects. For example, its useful for policy-makers who have to work on large scale trends in society. But it's not a good way to discuss or assess the particular experiences of individual families.

And no one replied to my earlier point about what if he had 4 girlfriends at once, all aged 21, and they all lived together with their 15 babies. It would be none of my business ... but presumably it would be permissible for me to have an opinion on it? Or not?