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 3

Original poster

To think that maybe marriage is more important than I thought?

73 replies

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 10:09

I've always thought that buying a property together or having a child was a far bigger, more important commitment than getting married. And obviously, loads of people have long, successful relationships without being married, when neither partner is interested in marriage. BUT there seems to be so many people who have a child together and buy a house together, and then one of them wants to get married but the other drags their feet and they eventually decide they don't want to be together after all. It seems like marriage is the only commitment where you are actually committing to each other, not to a child or to a financial investment, and so maybe marriage is quite a good proof that both partners are committed to staying together.

I know this ignores the fact that a few people get married knowing its the wrong thing to do, and people do change and marriages break up. I'm just saying, I've only just realised that maybe I was wrong to think that children and property are proof of a commitment to the person you're doing them with.

OP posts:

CogitOCrapNotMoreSprouts · 07/12/2012 12:50

"I was wrong to think that children and property are proof of a commitment to the person you're doing them with. "

YANBU. When a relationship is going well it doesn't really matter. But what many people find to their cost is that, in the event of a split, the only real commitment that was worth having was the legal one. Joint ownership is a good start. Children can attract maintenance payments. But as an unmarried former partner, your rights are notoriously poor....

CogitOCrapNotMoreSprouts · 07/12/2012 12:53

"Marriage is only available to straight people"

A civil partnership is marriage. Having just attended one it was referred to throughout as a 'marriage'. The rights and responsibilities conferred are exactly the same The only thing missing is a church service. What's in a name?

Original poster

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 12:55

This is a massively ignorant question I know but - I got married in a registry office and we weren't allowed to have any religious aspects to the ceremony. Does that mean I have a civil partnership, rather than a marriage? Is marriage technically the religious union between a man and a woman for the purposes of having children?

Yes, I seem to have started a thread advocating marriage without knowing exactly what it is. I mean, I thought gay couples in a civil partnership were married..

OP posts:

Original poster

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 12:56

X post cogito!!

OP posts:

Sparkleandshine · 07/12/2012 12:56

you have two separate issues here

is marriage 'better' than cohabitation
Marriage - should it be extended to same sex

Best to keep them separate as they are different debates.

I think the op is right - what marriage does is weed out the uncommitted prior to having children. Many many people have kids without the personal commitment.
I personally believe marriage should be between two adults not just man/woman.

Thinking the 1st bit is right doesn't make me homophobic!

LRDtheFeministDude · 07/12/2012 12:57

I do think there's a difference between marriage and civil partnership, especially when we're discussing something as abstract as 'committment' and value.

CogitOCrapNotMoreSprouts · 07/12/2012 13:00

"I thought gay couples in a civil partnership were married"

My experience is that gay couples think exactly the same thing. My friends announced it as 'a marriage' sent invitations to their 'wedding' and their FB pages are full of pictures of 'our wedding day'. The words 'civil partnership' were notable by their absence.

NamingOfParts · 07/12/2012 13:02

IMO one of the huge benefits of marriage and civil partnership (and I really do wish that we had only the one term for a long-term, ongoing, publicly declared howsyourfather) is that it defines both when the arrangement started and when it stops (by death or divorce). I think that is so important.

Having children isnt a commitment except to the child - pregnancy can happen without intent on either side. Apart from the odd drunken popstar I dont think anyone 'accidentally' gets married.

The only commitment when buying a house is to the mortgage. It is very easy to walk out of a house.

While I agree it is possible to make a lot of the commitments of marriage/civil partnership by going to the solicitor you do have to remember to undo these if the relationship ends. Failing to do so can have unexpected consequences.

The thing about marriage/civil partnership is that it is a public declaration. The state doesnt peer in through your windows to ask you what your relationship is with this other person. Unless you make a public declaration the only rights you generally have are the ones you actually signed up to (name on the deeds etc).

Original poster

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 13:03

What's the difference between the two then LRD? My marriage had nothing to do with religion or starting a family, it was just a formal, legal commitment.

OP posts:

AmberSocks · 07/12/2012 13:04

Its not really a commitment though because you can get divorced so easily now.Children tie you together more i think.

DontmindifIdo · 07/12/2012 13:05

OP - no, you have a civil marriage, as it is a legal marriage in the UK, all other countries will recognise it. However a civil partnership is not recognised outside the UK. One of the big reasons to push for gay marriage.

LRDtheFeministDude · 07/12/2012 13:06

The difference between them is one's called 'marriage' and can be performed in the state churches if you so wish, and the other's called civil partnership, and can't be.

I'm aware these aren't differences that matter to many married/civilly partnershipped people, but the fact we don't have the same situation for both is a bit of an issue.

I take the point that it's best to discuss this separately from how you value marriage versus having children/buying a house - I probably should have brought it up as an issue to be separated out, but was thinking it through as I posted.

chrismissymoomoomee · 07/12/2012 13:07

There is a massive difference between marriage and civil partnerships for the simple reason that each one is an option for a couple based solely on their sexuality. Both should be availble to every couple. (although I still view it as a legal piece of paper rather than a sign of commitment)

Original poster

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 13:08

Ah I see dontmindifido and lrd, thanks :)

OP posts:

10storeylovesong · 07/12/2012 13:14

This reply has been withdrawn

Withdrawn at poster's request

Original poster

FeuDeSnowyRussie · 07/12/2012 14:14

That's how I feel too 10storey. I went from being worried that marriage would change things for the worse, to thinking it wouldn't make any difference to our relationship apart from legally binding us, to being shocked at how lovely it felt once we'd actually done it!

OP posts:

ChaoticforlifenotjustChristmas · 07/12/2012 15:53

I think you make a good point OP.

Having a child is making a committment to that child, not the person you conceive the child with.

When buying a house you are committing to 'owning' property. It is possible to buy a house with a friend, that doesn't mean you're making a committment to that friend.

Getting married does mean you are making a legal committment to the person you marry. I was going to just say making a committment at first but some people who live together as if married are committed to their partner in all but the legal sense.

Seabird72 · 07/12/2012 16:39

I've known a few people who claim "it's just a peice of paper" - several have then decided to get married - sometimes I feel it's just a way of running down marriage to say it's just abit of paper. The question though is why are people happy to be with someone, have shared assets and raise a family but then just refuse to get married when their partner decides that actually they'd quite like to be married? Why do so many people have an issue with marriage?? It can't be because that's it for life because there is a get out - you can get divorced. It's a horrible experience most of the time but enough people do it and survive. If neither person wants to get married then fine - although if they have children would it not be nice to ask the children when they're old enough how they feel about mum and dad just living together and not actually being married. I watched a few minutes of that show 15 kids and counting and there was a couple who decided to get married after years together and I think the kids were over the moon about it - obviously both parents wanted to get married as well! I do have a friend who has 4 kids with partner - been together about 20 years and she wants to get married but he doesnt - another friend was with her husband for about 10 years (and had 2 kids) before he agreed they could get married. It would really be interesting to hear the views of the people who are the ones in the relationship who don't want to get married.

NamingOfParts · 07/12/2012 17:51

I think that it is very easy for people to stumble into a relationship with or without children only to find out further down the line that one person was far more committed than the other. For one person this was 'it', for the other this was 'it for now'.

Now obviously people go into marriage with different levels of emotional commitment. The key though is that the legal commitment is the same level.

badguider · 07/12/2012 18:05

A birth certificate is 'just a bit of paper' as well but life is a whole lot easier if you have it - you are registered as a legal person in the country of your birth with all that entitles you to.

My marriage certificate is 'just a piece of paper' which tells the world (our friends and family, the government, the health-care system, banks etc. etc.) that we are a partnership, our assets are joint, we are each others' next of kin and we always intend to be and if we ever were to divorce then we'd do that legally too.

DontmindifIdo · 07/12/2012 18:07

IME - alot of men who think marriage is "just a peice of paper", actually know full well it's not - they are 'protecting' their financial situation, they want the option to leave and keep the financial upper hand. It is usually a woman who's career and finances suffer with having DCs, being unmarried means that a man only has to worry about his partner being dependant on him as long as he wants her to be, of course the DCs will have a right to his money in CM, but the exP won't have any claim on assets built up in their time together.

A lot of men who aren't keen on marriage aren't saying they want the option of leaving in an easy and clean way now, but they want it to remain easy, and while divorce is easier to get now, it still usually is a bad financial move for a man.

TwitchyTail · 07/12/2012 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheElfOnThePanopticon · 07/12/2012 20:48

Seabird, I didn't want to get married because of my family history. In my family for the last couple of generations, the couples who got married in their twenties before having kids ended up getting divorced, usually very acrimonious. The couples who had happy long-term relationships were the ones who lived together and had kids without getting married, but got married when their kids were around 9 and they headed towards their 40s and started thinking about retirement plans. Our eldest child is 6, so I don't think we are quite there yet, but I'd probably agree to get married in a year or two if DP was interested.

Flip

1 2 3