to not get married?

[TheMidnightHour]

When I was small someone said to me 'you shouldn't get married until you, really, really want to.' It stuck, and I've gone with that, despite increasing pressure from everyone apart from DP: neither of us want to get married, so we haven't.

However, I'm starting to wonder if I'm not seeing some major benefit? After all, if everyone you know jumps off a bridge, you should at least look around to see if it's on fire before you make a decision.

So: here's the status. We are both 30-ish. Not much in the bank, no real assets (no house/car worth anything/heirlooms/trust fund (I wish)), no debt/mortgage. No pensions (I know, I know). No major illnesses. No visa issues. Have wills. We do own a business together, and have a kid on the way (woo!). Both atheists. No religion on my side of the family; DP's parents are very religious and regularly read us a sermon about Living In Sin, which if anything makes it sound quite attractive!

We already have a 'marriage', effectively, as we're as committed as can be and have weathered a decade of storms. I don't want a wedding (large or small, not even a registry office do, gives me the heebs). DP is anti-officially-tying-the-knot for various reasons.

So can I pootle along like this, or is it like going shark feeding without a cage, as one of my friends recently suggested?

(She didn't elaborate on WHAT exactly is out their to eat us, and actually I quite like sharks, always exciting to see one while diving, although they're so quick to vanish they're hard to spot...)

I have been happily unmarried to my DP for 15 years and we have 2 DC'S and house etc

it really annoys me when filling a firm out and there is no option for cohabiting , being unmarried and with kids should not be seen as something wrong imo.

Fringe thank you for that - the point about unilateral changes is important, particularly since we're talking 'insurance'

sausage no, not at all! It's interesting you put it like that, as for me there's no difference. I've had relationships before that (like you) were going nowhere (some where I knew it, one where I didn't realise for a while). With DP, I know this is 'it', the forever thing, but I don't really understand how (from an emotional rather than legal point of view) getting married would change what we've got.

I know this sounds harsh but you come across as very immature. Deciding not to legally protect your family because your birth family will be annoyed about how you do it is frankly ridiculous. Again, a wedding is neither here nor there, it's just one day and not essential - you just have to have the ceremony say the words and bang you're done. You're family, under the law. If your own family object to that, so what?

It's also very odd not to get married because other people have had bad marriages. Other people have also had bad cohabiting situations, but that hasn't stopped you so far has it?

The fact is, if you don't get married you are leaving yourself and your child legally vulnerable. If you're ok with that, fine.

Marriage is not an emotional thing.

It is a legal thing.

Jackie Yes, they would. I love the idea that people are rational about stuff like this. Can I Spockize our relatives, please?

cail why isn't marriage an emotional thing? it's not just a legal thing, surely?

I appreciate that marriage offers certain legal protections, and this thread has been useful to help me figure out if I need that particular 'insurance' but there must be more to it than that, or we'd do it online like buying travel insurance half an hour before leaving for the airport.

crazy yes, that. Drives me nuts too.

Crazy - being unmarried with kids is not seen as 'wrong.' The fact is, until you specifically ask to be legally recognised as a family by getting married you can't claim to be connected. Otherwise a housemate or lodger could claim to be cohabiting with you. You have to ask for recognition, you don't get I automatically.

I was in an unmarried relationship and we had a child. We split and honestly, it was fine. There is no arguing about money/houses/possessions. We just got on with it. Not sure why it was so easy

Ending a relationship doesn't always go completely tits up

Do you think there's an emotional difference between a married couple and a cohabiting couple Midnight?

There was a long thread a while back about this. it worked out the cost in legal fees and time to achieve what marriage affords. Don't remember the numbers but it is considrable. look it up. Twas a great thread.

puds true! I've had that, too, no kid though.

cail I'm skeptical but lots of other people clearly do think that. There's also a lot of emotional stuff around it.

I'm also a bit at the 'can't claim to be connected' cohabiting has a legal definition - housemates are not it, lodgers are not it - and lots of places (job centre, e.g.) really care about the difference.

popular yes, that sounds good. On this board? Relationships? I can't think of a way to skim out all the 'cost of a wedding dress' posts

No Midnight, they care about the money coming into the household and how that money is shared. Cohabiting does not have legal status.

What emotional stuff is there around being married Midnight? You seem to have a very specific view of marriage that I'm not sure is very accurate, that's why I ask.

My mum and stepdad got married for the legal protection it offered. They got married on a Thursday morning at the registry office with two witnesses and me then retired to a pub for lunch.

My mum kept her name, it's been 20 years now and they still haven't told their respective families.

Personally I think you are taking a very uninformed and childish view on marriage. That's the difference see: A wedding is just a party. A marriage is the legal commitments and obligations that come after it. Look, if you don't want to get married, then don't, but no matter how much you pretend that the legal benefits of marriage don't exist, they aren't actually going anywhere.

Marriage doesn't make anyone more or less likely to be faithful to their partners, or make the relationship any more or less likely to succeed. What it DOES do, is provide safeguards for both parties involved if it doesn't work out. It also tells society at large that you are legally joined with that person, and they are able to make decisions on your behalf. Again, unless you specify on a case by case basis, with every single institution you could possibly need to come into contact with, that you are each other's next of kin, then it will default to your families. Getting married is a way of bypassing all that.

In my views, marriage is something people can give or take, up until kids come along. At that point, it's a game changer.

You went on about the "bad" points, many of which were utterly fictional.

• prefer to keep finances independent (e.g. have grown up children and assets)

You aren't suddenly legally obliged to merge all your accounts when you get married. You are perfectly entitled to keep separate bank accounts. Although the majority of even unmarried couples have a shared account for household expenses, so not sure what you are getting at

• done it before, don't want to do it again

Done it before means knowing first hand that marriage is there to ensure that assets are distributed in accordance to what a person deserves in proportion to what they have sacrificed/contributed over the marriage. This applies equally to BOTH people involved

• religious conflict

Since when is marriage exclusively religious? Civil marriages don't even allow mentions of religion

• bad experience of relationships, e.g. due to parents divorce

Yes, divorce is shit. You know what is also shit? Parents of children who break up with animosity at any point, regardless of whether or not there is a ring on anyone's finger. Do you think a ten year old can distinguish between their parents hating each other and slitting up unmarried, or splitting up married?

• bad experience of marriage, e.g. due to religion

Again, so what? Civil marriage IS A THING

• feminism/gay rights/other activist reasons

Gay rights? Gay marriage exists now. Feminism? Jesus girl, all feminists should push for women to get married when there are children involved, as the vast majority of the time it's the WOMAN who gets UTTERLY fucked over in the event of a breakdown if the couple are unmarried. What proportion of women do you think have to make career sacrifices when children come along, as compared to men?

• wants a wedding they can't afford right now

*If you can't afford a wedding, then how the hell can you afford kids? Lots of people get the legalities tied for comparative pittance, and then have a big "wedding party" a few years down the line when they can afford it.

• waiting for family to accept the relationship

Sure. So again, if you already have kids and your family don't accept the relationship, why do you even still give a fuck? You're already tied to that person for life

• will be financially worse off if married (e.g. due to existing pensions)

Pretty much no-one ever, aside from millionaires who marry gold diggers, come out of marriage worse off. At least, certainly no worse off than if they were unmarried at the time of the split after a LTR

• visa issues

I'm not an immigration lawyer, but I don't believe that anything COMPELS a person to change to a spouse visa when they have an alternative visa in place. In fact, I believe the reason almost everybody does, is because you get far more generous rights under a spousal visa than any other type.

You also mention it being harder to leave a marriage if your partner becomes abusive, which I thought was frankly insulting. Abusive relationships are difficult to leave because of the mental dependence on the abuser, which takes a long time to happen. In fact, being UNMARRIED would make it much harder to leave, because you wouldn't be entitled to ANYTHING. Not any of the family money, not the home, nothing.

From the CAB:

Legal status

Living together

Although there is no legal definition of living together, it generally means to live together as a couple without being married.

You can formalise aspects of your status with a partner by drawing up a legal agreement called a cohabitation contract or living together agreement. A living together agreement outlines the rights and obligations of each partner towards each other. It is not clear whether living together agreements are legally enforceable but they can be useful to remind a couple of their original intentions. In practice, instead of a living together agreement, or as well as, it's possible to make a series of legally enforceable agreements on specific matters, for example, how a jointly-owned house is shared. If you want to do this, you will need legal advice.

The help of a solicitor experienced in family law will be necessary. A Citizens Advice Bureau may be able to give details of suitable solicitors. To search for details of your nearest CAB, including those that can give advice by e-mail, click on nearest CAB.

In England and Wales, for more information about living together agreements, see Living Together Agreements on the Advicenow website at www.advicenow.org.uk.

Common-law spouses

Although the terms common-law wife or husband are frequently used to describe a couple who live together, these relationships do not have legal recognition.

Crazy co-habitant isn't "wrong" it's just not a legally or formally recognised relationship; hence why it's not on forms etc.

If you want a relationship that's recognised on legal forms etc, get married

We gave specific examples as people can understand them easier than wooley "what if something happens"

"One of the problems I have with getting married is, well, getting married. I don't really like any of the options available to me, and this is partly (mainly!) due to our families. So:

• big wedding = approval from all sides, I would hate it, we can't afford it
• small wedding (which I would probably hate) or 'registry office lunch hour do' (more me) = disapproval from 100 people (yes, literally); 20 years of aggro; pressure to upscale from everyone; BUT DP's parents would be relieved
• do it and keep it secret = I don't like this at all: seems dishonest plus spiteful not to tell outlaws; everyone upset when it inevitably comes out (yes, someone in the family tried this)"

all i read here is "doing it for someone else"
Surely if you are going to married, you're doing it because you want to be linked to your OH -

FFS, do it if you want to or dont do it, but dont expect sympathy if a (non specific) disaster happens and you cannot access funds/switch off life support machine because you are not NOK

OP did you take the legal advice before you were pregnant or after?

I don't think I can do justice to all this.

I am really, really surprised and kind of disappointed that the only value in marriage is seen to be as insurance in case something goes wrong. Is that how it is? I was hoping (expecting!) that people would have more reasons to get married than pensions, end-of-life care, asset splitting in divorce. Is there really, as cail says, no emotion in it?

doge Bit harsh! I am not trying to pretend the legal sides of marriage does not exist. I regularly weigh up if the benefits outweigh the costs. I was thinking there might be more to it than the legals though??

Also, not 'bad' points against marriage, simply reasons that individuals may not want to get married. Only (as I said) one of which applies to me & DP.

once yes, sorry, it's all got a bit out of hand. And no, I shan't expect extra sympathy.

chunder I thought there was more to marriage than the legal side. Oops. And yes re: visas, I appreciate the example I'm thinking of is unusual as there was a choice, and she chose to go spousal and then it went south and then he could ... and then... and... Bit of a red herring anyway, should never have mentioned it maybe.

jackie before but with the understanding that we would, some day. I appreciate that I have to go ask the experts again, properly for uniquely tailored advice but one cannot do that as easily as one can post on MN so I did this first...

Yes I just would have assumed that a solicitors advice to a pregnant woman that marriage would not offer anything in the way of protection/security would seem a bit odd....

Of course marriage offers more than 'insurance'. I bloody love being married, I love how getting married to DH made me feel and for many other totally non-financial/non-practical reasons.

But you started the thread asking what marriage gives you that cohabiting doesn't, and so we gave you the practical info. Because of course the non-tangible stuff varies from person to person.

I don't think people are just saying marriage is for legal protection. I said unthread that my DH and I really wanted to be married to each other; I love the fact he's my husband, I have a ring on my finger and we have shown the world we are committed to each other for life.

It shows we value each other above all of our previous relationships (as neither of us have been married before) and we made vows to each other (private ceremony, no guests) that I will stand by for the rest of my life.

Marriage offers great legal protection, but it is so much more than that.