to not understand the benefits of getting married?

[RitaMorgan]

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?

That CAB link earlier on says that married people cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse in criminal proceedings. Co-habiting couples can be compelled to do so.

As linked above "nearest relative" is defined in some laws in UK, and there is no unified NHS practice on who will be treated as NOK. If the organisation you are dealing with does not recognise a non-marital/CP partner as NOK, you would have no legal right to insist.

And it can get much trickier abroad.

"Unmarried parents are three times more likely to split up before the child is 5 than married parents. (Millennium Cohort Study)"

The Millenium Cohort Study also discounted couples who got married after they had children which I think distorted things greatly.

I don't want to get married, and I know DP doesn't think that it's due to a lack of love for him or commitment to him. We also have a disabled dd so we're beating even greater odds by still being together.

We have wills (including living wills) detailing everything, our house is jointly owned and we don't have pensions to worry about at the moment.

I would actually hate the thought that DP was with me purely because we were married and he would have left me otherwise.

Trope - I stand corrected on the registering thing, I never realised that. I don't really know the legal ins and outs but I remember that the ICU staff that said that they would sometimes come across conflicting opinions between next of kin and partners and should the next of kin decide the partner shouldnt be there, they had to try and honour that. Anyhow, I guess I was just trying to say that being married made my life easier at the point my husband died. I'm sure there would have been other avenues to go down re financial stuff etc but the marriage certificate certainly fast-tracked it all.

However, I don't think I we should have had to get to married in order for that to be case and at the time we married, it did feel like a bit of a cop out. Being married wasn't important to us but I understand that is is the case for other people. To each their own. I would have preferred it if there was a legal document that we could have signed ( without incurring mega legal fees) that afforded the same rights as marriage did.

I think society attaches stays to a wife that is not afforded to a partner and that pisses me off a bit. Actually, pisses me off quite a lot if I think about it too much.

Don't assume a DP's reluctance to get married belies lack of commitment. That wasn't how I felt, but I held out against marriage for 20 years. We found ways to give each other the same rights as spouses (pensions, parental responsibility etc) with the exception of the inheritence tax benefits. A bit of me rather liked the commitment that was demonstrated on both sides by our having to find our way through this rather than just letting a standard commitment take care of everything. In the end, though, I went for that easy option to stop us having to stay so on our toes with it all as life got busier. It was a very quiet and cheap affair as befitted what it really meant (and didn't) to us.

Not stays ( isn't that a type of undergarment?) . I meant status.

Looking at rules around nearest relative online I discovered this page which suggests that as DP and I have lived together for over 5 years I would be deemed his "nearest relative" under an amendment to the Mental Health Act. (Obviously it's a wikipedia link so exercise caution - and I'm not spending my Saturday night reading the mental health act for myself - x factor is on, I know my priorities! )

To quote though:

"Section 26(7) says that someone who has 'ordinarily' resided with the patient for over 5 years is designated as the 'nearest relative"

I understand that the NHS doesn't have clear guidelines on who to consider next of kin, however it is now widely accepted that long term partners are treated as such within the NHS, particularly since the introduction of civil partnerships for gay couples and I would be very surprised in this day and age to come across an NHS organisation that doesn't recognise me as DPs closest relative/next of kin. (Of course with the upcoming changes to the NHS / stealth privatisation that could all change - if religious organisations start to take over medical providers as in the USA we could well have a problem - but that's a whole other discussion). Not least as every medical form we have filled out for over 10 years clearly states that I am his next of kin and him mine. And I'm listed as his next of kin/partner on all work paperwork/mortgage/insurance etc etc And all of our families know this and respect this. If one of them randomly decided to challenge it I very much doubt they would be successful given all of this evidence to support our choices and in the unlikely event of this happening I would instruct solicitors and fight them tooth and nail.

I make an effort to be on friendly terms with DPs family because as his partner they are also my family. Likewise him with mine. I don't do it as insurance in case he dies or gets sick.

mamseul "We found ways to give each other the same rights as spouses (pensions, parental responsibility etc) with the exception of the inheritence tax benefits. A bit of me rather liked the commitment that was demonstrated on both sides by our having to find our way through this rather than just letting a standard commitment take care of everything."

I can totally see what you mean with this - it's something DP and I agree on and I feel that our shared efforts to make our little family work within our own set of morals/beliefs shows our shared values and commitment to one another.

No shame in getting married if things change / that's what works for you. If the time comes when it isn't practical for DP and I to protect our family without getting married then I shall grit my teeth and do it. But I do know our mothers would be very (very very very) hurt if they ever found out we'd married without them there, so we'd prefer to avoid it if we can.

doowop I think I can safely say I agree with everything you just said!

I'm not married because it a religious ceremony and I am an atheist. And yes, I am perfectly aware you can have a civil wedding, much like you can spend a couple of months pay to celebrate CHRISTmas despite never have been inside a church.

As a very recent newly wed (not smug, just content), I can honestly say that we got married because we wanted to. Not because I became his next of kin or get half his pension but because we love each other and thought getting that documented was worthwhile.

If you decide not to get married then fair enough, but it's a great feeling knowing you are part of an exclusive (just the 2 of you) team.

To me I wouldn't want my DC born out of wedlock. I know this may seem out of date.

Also why should the man have his cake and eat it. If he wants to be with me then he can marry me. It gives me financial security and more rights than co habiting.

empirebiscuit I am part of an exclusive team, DP and I don't have to be married to feel like that. Happy for you that you do, but please don't assume that your experience is the same as other peoples! You're only going to feel that getting married changed things (like feeling like an exclusive team, as in your example above) if you believe that getting married changes things - iyswim.

Congratulations btw - sounds like you got married for lovely reasons - glad you are so happy! :)

alemci it's entirely up to you whether you want to have kids in or outside of wedlock - that's fine. But your second paragraph makes it sound like you're with him for financial security and you see yourself as some kind of "prize" that he gets for providing for you. I don't see relationships that way; DP and I are together because we love each other and want to spend the rest of our lives together. We provide for each other. We're a team and we're together because we want to be together. I genuinely cannot understand the "have his cake and eat it" attitude. I find that far more dated than your concern about not having a child out of wedlock.

"I think society attaches status to a wife that is not afforded to a partner"

Maybe older members of society. I have plenty of friends who are very happily cohabiting and have children. I don't think any less of them than those who are married.

Like EmpireBiscuits we got married because we wanted to. It was a public sign of our commitment to each other.

bunbaker sadly for every nice person like you who doesn't make judgements, there is another who does. I've lost track of the number of times married "friends" have told me how "one day i'll understand" and want to marry DP and have a "serious" relationship, or who have implied that my relationship is somehow less than theirs as we aren't married (particularly grating when they've met and married in a couple of years flat and DP are approaching our 14th anniversary) or that we should get married before having children as it's wrong not to. I wish more people felt the way you did.

I'm going to take the 'smug married' label and embrace it

Smug smug smuggety smug.

OK - I asked for a controversial thread tonight. I have much sympathy for Troisgarcons (and she and I do not usually agree about very much at all) and for Pink4Ever.

In 1959 my mother got pg and had a shotgun wedding to prevent me from being illegitimate and for ther sake of her family's respectability. My parents hated each other but that was better than when they separated when I was 12 due to each having public affairs. Both got married again on the rebound and both marriages were short lived. Mother met someone else by the time I was 16 and fortunately I went to boarding school for 6th form. Father not until I was in my late thirties. Throughout my childhood I was subjected to snide comments. In my first week at school the HT said "well we'll see if you grow with more substance than your mother"; the night before my wedding I went to see the local GP for a pill prescription because I had forgotten to pack them "oh you're a little more cautious than your mother then". Those sort of comments cut you to the core and damage your entire sense of well being and self esteem. I grew up absolutely knowing that my biggest ambition was to have children and my second ambition was that those children would never be exposed to similar comments.

I met my DH in 1989 and we married for love, because we wanted to be together forever and because we both have a strong christian faith. We never doubted that marriage was part of a permanent relationship and have done our very best to honour our vows "the avoidance of sin, the procreation of children, and for our mutual comfort". We have been true and dear to each other in spite of various ups and downs for almost 21 years of marriage.

I love being Mrs DH, I love my engagement, eternity and wedding rings and have never taken my wedding ring off from the day it went on. I love the togetherness and security our relationship has given our family. All that said, I had a great deal more money when we married and having watched my parents' messy divorces it didn't stop me having a prenup.

I simply don't understand how one can decide to buy a home together, and to have children together if one doesn't have the commitment to enter into a binding legal agreement about the relationship. Marriage is not about the party and the big dress and all the other accompaniments, it is about love and commitment and legality and a bond that it is difficult to break.

Whether anyone agree or not is entirely up to them but that's my case and I have stated it. You can lump it or like it but my view is thus. Interestingly most of our friends are married (actually I can't think of any couples we know who aren't) and they have stayed married. Very few of the children's friends are from divorced families or from families where the parents are single or unmarried couples. Perhaps it's a age thing - I suspect nowadays it might also be a class thing and expect to flamed mightily for that but when I was growing up divorce was still just about the prerogative of the privileged - now marriage seems to be.

marriedinwhite Surely your parents second marriages - both short lived - only serve to show that getting married is not the same thing as being committed?

"I simply don't understand how one can decide to buy a home together, and to have children together if one doesn't have the commitment to enter into a binding legal agreement about the relationship"

DP and I not getting married has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of commitment. As I've stated upthread, one persons perspective/experience is not necessarily the same as other peoples, so whilst marriage may be about commitment to you - that doesn't mean that other people see it the same way! DP and I are committed, I'm not going to go into all the shit we've faced together (and overcome) during the time we've been together, but I will be spending the rest of my days with him and he feels the same about me.

But thankyou for illustrating so beautifully my comments to bunbaker above about people not respecting unmarried couples.

GrendelsMum Can I be a smug unmarried then? Or a smug "living in sin"-er?

I got married in anticipation of having children. It was mostly about being sure of our level of commitment to each other and our (hoped-for) family.

Also my own family are very traditional and don't really think of you as a fully paid-up "couple" until you are married. I only just scraped by with a civil ceremony. Was funny being "allowed" to share a room under my parents' roof for the first time at 35! Sometimes now we would rather have separate rooms when visiting [owl and lark] but are forced to share one!

Let's all just be smug that we have something we consider worth being smug over (don't tell him I said that though....)

I suppose what I am trying to say is that to me a marriage and the decision to get married if made for the right reasons (unlike my parents) is a huge and binding commitment and not just something that happens by default.

marriedinwhite I can agree with that - if you are going to get married then it should be something you do after considerable thought and because you want to spend the rest of your lives together. Look, we found common ground! :)

"I simply don't understand how one can decide to buy a home together, and to have children together if one doesn't have the commitment to enter into a binding legal agreement about the relationship." Because I don't place any value on being married so it wouldn't change our relationship. The fact that I have no desire to get married is not because I'm not committed to DP, but that I don't believe being married would make me any difference to us.