Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 12 13 14 15 16 17

Original poster

to not understand the benefits of getting married?

409 replies

RitaMorgan · 12/11/2011 18:15

Putting aside the romantic and religious reasons or the big party/lots of presents (lovely as that would be).

What exactly are the benefits of legally being married over just cohabiting, for a woman with children?

DP very definitely doesn't want to get married, I would quite like a big party/lots of presents but am not sure if there is any point to it beyond that.

AIBU? Should I be insisting on a trip to the Register Office?

OP posts:

usualsuspect · 13/11/2011 18:39

I can assure you after 30 years together we won't change our minds

TandB · 13/11/2011 18:44

Ah, just wait until it is 31 years - then you will suddenly wake up and realise that all you have ever wanted is to be Mrs Usual Suspect.

Because no-one ever really means it when they say they aren't bothered, do they?

BigBoobiedBertha · 13/11/2011 18:44

My great grandparents didn't get married until there were in their 70's and obviously they lived in an age when 'living in sin' was highly unusual and deeply frowned up - never say never.

Wamster · 13/11/2011 18:45

It's better because marriage is tailor-made for those wishing to bring up children in a long-term relationship; she can take some time off work and even if the man buggers off, she can present a certificate saying that they intended to be a couple for life and that certificate has weight giving her legal entitlements.
That's what it's all about from my (admittedly cynical) viewpoint.

The marriage certificate is shorthand for 'committed relationship' and the authorities recognise this as such.

I've no axe to grind at all over any nonsense about how morally sanctified marriage is, but, from a pragmatical viewpoint, it is a damned good option for the lesser (or non-earning) parent.

LineRunnerSaturnalia · 13/11/2011 19:19

Wamster, you said 'even if the man buggers off, she can present a certificate saying that they intended to be a couple for life and that certificate has weight giving her legal entitlements.'

All I got a man who refused to see his own children except when it suited him, a bill for half of my modest money and assets, and a divorce bill.

katz · 13/11/2011 19:29

I have to disagree with those saying I'm a higher earner so protecting myself by not getting married but saying to those who's partner is should get married to protect themselves. In the age of equality it is wrong to say its ok for men to support women if the marriage breaks down but not the other way round.

supadupapupascupa · 13/11/2011 19:32

just an interesting addition to the debate. I was chatting to my husband about how he feels about his 'status' since we have been married and it was quite interesting. He runs his own company and has noticed that other married men definitely treat him now as more of a 'sure bet' since getting married. I would like to add that neither of us could care less what other people want or don't want to do in their lives with regard to marriage, but he has been very surprised that this has been the case. He gets more 'respect' it seems now that he has settled down.... a very old fashioned situation but real non the less.

and actually, i think i am treated a bit different sometimes too, although i'm not sure if it is my imagination or if i just 'feel' different since getting married.

being married for me definitely means more permanence, commitment etc and i wanted to be married before having kids. I also think that our parents are all pleased we were married before having kids and actually that does carry some weight. on the other hand, what other people do is their business isn't it?

supadupapupascupa · 13/11/2011 19:38

oh, and i read recently that there are issues with regards to pensions that many of us are not aware of. some pensions are only valid until that person dies and does not pay out to a surviving spouse, and many people are not aware of it. they are called single annuity pensions.

here is an article

so even being married doesn't guarantee getting a pension

CheerfulYank · 13/11/2011 19:44

I just wanted to be married. I wanted to have a big party and all that, and I wanted to have the same last name as my DH and children.

What other people do is their business.

motherinferior · 13/11/2011 19:49

Oh, I like parties. And being surrounded by people telling me how fabulous I look, and the excuse to buy a new frock. I get slightly irritated by the patronising posts that point out it's 'not about the wedding' and that I could nip down to the registry office in my lunch hour.

It's the marriage, not the wedding, that I don't fancy .

jasper · 13/11/2011 23:28

it's great if you split up and you are the lesser earning one.
WHy the more earning one does not spot this in advance more often is beyond me.
I'd never marry again

KouklaMoo · 14/11/2011 00:17

It's funny because it was the marriage that I fancied, not the wedding . The wedding made me tear my hair out with stress - but hey, we're married now and that's what counts to us.

LineRunnerSaturnalia · 14/11/2011 00:38

Katz, my point is that there should be equality in marriage breakdown but there isn't when the woman is left with the children to bring up on her own.

exoticfruits · 14/11/2011 07:45

That is why none married people ought to get it all worked out in advance jasper so that the lesser earning one isn't left in a mess. Too many people just live together in the first flush of romance and don't consult a solicitor first and know their rights.

jasper · 14/11/2011 09:35

exotic, why then would/does the higher earning one agree to marry?

KouklaMoo · 14/11/2011 09:57

jasper, in my case my husband married me to commit to me and our children for life. He has always been the higher earner, but together we made the decision for me to be a SAHM, so I am now not earning at all. As art of that deal I have 'the piece of paper' because I'm sure as hell not giving up my own earning power to look after the children without that security. My husband is not unreasonable and understands that.

We got married for the reasons of being legally committed to each other - and to be each other's next of kin. It made sense to us. Nobody is trying to persuade posters like usualsuspect to get married as far as I can see, but the OP did ask the question - she's getting her answers.

To hint that the higher earner shouldn't get married because it might all go wrong and you'll need a divorce settlement is cynical - I hope if myself and my dh ever do split, he won't be too upset that the Law makes provision for his children. linerunner, sounds like you married a horrible man.

exoticfruits · 14/11/2011 10:18

Because they love them jasper. If people have DCs and give up their place on the career ladder to allow a partner to be a high earner then they should have a safeguard.
I take it you are a high earner?-something you couldn't do if you were on call if your DCs were ill, had to cook a meal every night, do playdates. get to cubs etc etc. I think that you had better remain single because anyonw would be foolish to live with you without making quite sure they are financially protected if things go wrong.

marriedinwhite · 14/11/2011 10:37

Marriage has nothing to do with who earns the most - in the same way that couples who live together can make sure all the legal stuff is sorted so too can those who get married. It's called a pre-nup.

DH and I are conformists, we met, we fell in love, we wanted to get married so we did. For 21 years we have loved and supported each other - we have had our ups and our downs and don't regret getting married for a minute and DH wants to do it all over again in 4 years time to celebrate our silver wedding.

exoticfruits · 14/11/2011 18:03

Same here mariedinwhite, but 2 years longer. I have every expectation that we will grow old together. If we hadn't married I would certainly have checked out my position before we moved in together. I wouldn't just assume and hope for the best.

Rocky12 · 14/11/2011 18:23

Feel much much more stable and committed being married (and I have lived before with someone) Your 'partner' could be someone you met a couple of weeks ago. I also dont understand those people who dont want to marry but have children. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but do couples who choose to have children and not marry have more of a chance of breaking up then people who choose to marry.

Its not all a big party and presents. Its the committment that someone makes to you. And of course there are the legal protections that come with being married.

Original poster

RitaMorgan · 14/11/2011 19:35

I doubt it's getting married that makes you less likely to break up - more that couples that are unlikely to break up get married.

OP posts:

KouklaMoo · 14/11/2011 19:40

Rita, has your dp said why he doesn't want to get married? Apologies if you've already said and I've missed it.

jasper · 15/11/2011 00:13

the cynical bit is that people in the lesser financial position use exactly this argument ( "in case we split") to get married as protection. I am asking why their richer partner does not consider the very same facts and conclude NOT marrying makes sense.
Love is a distraction. Of course we all think we are marrying for love but it is just a legal arrangement as you will find out of you have the misfortune to spllt up.

KouklaMoo · 15/11/2011 00:47

Well it's because he loves me I suppose, and wants to share his life with me, and make sure the children are secure and looked after in the event of either our deaths. fwiw, in my case we knew each other as skint students, so I'm pretty sure he knew then I was not a golddigger

We do both have life insurance - he needs it in the event of my death too, he would need to either give up work to look after the children or pay a nanny to do it. If either of us dies we have a policy that will pay off the mortgage balance as well - and there will be no complications due to next of kin queries either.

If we did split then I'm sure I would be the resident parent and he would have to pay maintenance. I hope he would be ok with this, since he is a very caring father. But I have given up all my own financial independence in order to look after the children - at our joint agreement - so I need some financial security.

exoticfruits · 15/11/2011 07:42

I am asking why their richer partner does not consider the very same facts and conclude NOT marrying makes sense.

You can of course stay relationshipless on your own and keep your money. However you would be missing out-you can't take it with you when you die.

Flip

1 2 ··· 12 13 14 15 16 17

Swipe left for the next trending thread