To have kids before marriage?

[PandaEyes25]

I'm desperate to start TTC with my Partner of 7 years. Everything is pretty much spot on regarding timing as I am in a good job which will allow me to work flexibly, we have a good amount of savings and live in a nice area in our own house with a couple of spare bedrooms.

The only thing is, we are not married.
It's not the my OH doesn't believe in marriage. He says that we will get married at some point but I'm not sure if I want to bring a baby into the mix without having the stability marriage provides.

I'm just curious to see if other people agree with me that getting married first is definitely the right thing to do or if I'm just getting a bit hung up over it and that it's not worth putting off having children for.

Not sure if I'm being naive here- own a house 50:50 with partner, have a small child together, not married. If anything were to happen to either of us I understand the share of the house would go to our parents- his parents would surely want the best for me and their grandchild and wouldn't demand their share though.

Do you own the house as joint tenants or tenants in common? Its incredibly important that you know which it is. One means the other person would own the whole house if one of you dies, the other means that persons 50% would go to whoever they willed it too, or whoever it went to intestate.

If your DP is on your DS's birth certificate then your DS would be the first beneficiary in line he die. Same if you died intestate, your DS would be the inheritor. You really need wills to make sure that, if that happened, you know who will be controlling your DS's finances.

Bare in mind also that depending on the value of your house inheritance tax could come into play as there is no transferrable allowance between non-married couples.

I thing those women who always say marriage is essential, wouldn't have children before I was married, tend to be those who aren't financially independent i.e.lesser career, or worse no career, don't have a decent pension and therefore might thing they are vulnerable if not married.

We got married when DT's were 13 - never had any plans to marry but DH's grandmother was very ill and it was what she really wanted for us. We got married, made her very happy but nothing changed - we already jointly owned the house, had joint savings, our own pensions and careers and a will which tidied everything up.

On mn I hear 'I would only give up my job if we were married' etc as though being married is a magic bullet whereas it is the job rather than the marriage that gives you financial independence and security. I have known several people who have also lost out in divorces.

Pretty sure the MN line is never give up work but if you do at least be married as you get some slight protection and fuck all if you're not.

I'm not advocating marriage for everyone. I've posted links citizen advice links to the legal differences between marriage and cohabitation- the OP and anyone else can read them and work out if they are relevant to them and their circumstances.

Marriages clearly break down, people do get fucked over in divorces, clearly there will be women worse off by marriage if they hold the main assets and circumstance like declining fertility and waiting for prior divorces where waiting isn't a good idea and many very happy cohabiting fully aware of legal situation couples who have children.

However marriage is a legally recognise union which has some built in legal ramifications that offer most women more protection and rights than if they are not married. Most of the protection is stuff that day to day doesn't matter and most people happily ignore till they can't.

Bare in mind also that depending on the value of your house inheritance tax could come into play as there is no transferrable allowance between non-married couples.

The inheritance tax comes in if the whole estate is over is £325,000 threshold - pretty sure that's been raised since I last looked may years ago, though suppose London and SE houses rises it could be a problem.

Just as an aside, (feel free to ignore me!)dp and I are just going to get married for the legalities, I mean we love each other deeply, been to get half our lives etc but the marriage part is for the ease of paperwork essentially. We are going to do it one afternoon with parents and siblings and go for a curry afterwards. If you are very pro marriage does this offend you? I've had some pretty odd responses to our plan (almost everything nice has been said through very gritted teeth, MIL not terribly happy etc).

If you are very pro marriage does this offend you?

Good god no! I'm not necessarily 'pro marriage', but I definitely wouldn't have had children without being married, for a whole load of reasons.

The only time I was a bit about a registry office do was when a couple I know announced it on the day they were getting married and expected people to drop everything to attend. They had the big white dress, the works just kept it secret till the very last minute for attention no good reason! They were all when hardly anyone came .

The whole load of reasons are quite personal to me; I don't have any judginess over whether other people decide to or not. Different circs.

Nicky I suspect people are disappointed because they want a big all-singing, all-dancing, hat-buying wedding. People love to complain about weddings, but also to complain when the wedding isn't what they want!

People are daft. I think your wedding sounds fab!

...without having the stability marriage provides

Hold out and wait for marriage then.

Or start a family now.
If you are in a long term relationship ...happy, content and thinking about starting a family, you already are stable or have some level of stability.
Perhaps you think things change with children. Yes they do - whether you are married or not.

The inheritance tax comes in if the whole estate is over is £325,000 threshold - pretty sure that's been raised since I last looked may years ago, though suppose London and SE houses rises it could be a problem.

Half a house, some savings, a pension lump sum and an insurance policy and you are quickly getting toward £325,00 for a lot of people.

The ability to take that half a house out of the equation can be the big difference between owing IHT and not.

Fwiw nicky I think your plan for your wedding sounds totally fab. Would love it if someone I knew did that drops hint for invite .

Personally I wouldn't even entertain it. But it's horses for courses. What I would say though is if you're not married do not become a sahp or reduce your earning potential. If he expects that type of setup he should marry you.

Nicky I love weddings, big and small, and I think yours sound fab! People can be very opinionated and judgey about weddings, though, which sucks - try and ignore them as much as you can. And have a fab day!

If you are very pro marriage does this offend you?

Absolutely not, I have had two weddings - both very small with very few guests. Actually what does 'offend' me (in a mild sort of way ) is big, flashy weddings held in Church where clearly neither of the couple have any interest in the religion/faith of the Church but just want an expensive, flashy day out. I loathe big weddings, find most of them totally ostentatious and a complete waste of money.

I am pro the leglalities of being married - not the actual ceremony.

Legalities aside, I just can't imagine putting the same time & energy into our wedding or having had as much carefree fun with Dc about!

Likewise honeymoon!

I'm not saying you can't have an amazing time if you do it after, but it would certainly be a different ball game.

If anything were to happen to either of us I understand the share of the house would go to our parents- his parents would surely want the best for me and their grandchild and wouldn't demand their share though.

Cinnamon why would your shares of the house go to your parents? If you don't have wills, aren't tenants in common and it's the intestacy provisions then your son would benefit first. Not his parents. Although a minor child inheriting causes its own set of issues.

If your DP has willed his share to his parents, that's an incredibly vulnerable position you'd be in. Not only is there no 'surely' about it but they might not have a choice. Like if they needed care costs for example. They'd not be allowed to pass the bill to the state whilst sitting on a share in a property they don't live in!

I had a perfectly good, well paying career.

My husband got offered an incredible opportunity abroad (just before we got married). I quit my job at trailed after him for four years and had two kids.

I'm now back in the UK and back at work, on 2/3 of the salary I should be on, which is reduced further as I work part time as husband works long hours and travels.

His income has almost doubled as a result of the move abroad and he has barely ever had to take days off when the kids are ill and can leave the country whenever he pleases for work as I make the sacrifices at work so I can be home for the kids.

I'm unlikely to get promoted as there aren't enough hours in the day and the kids have to come first.

We live in a house I couldn't pay the mortgage on, so if we broke up I couldn't stay here with the kids, despite the house being in joint names.

If my husband were to up and leave me, I'd need the legal protection marriage offers.

I didn't think this through before we got married and I'm just lucky we were already getting married before moving abroad and having kids came up.

I don't care, morally, whether anyone is married and has kids. But if a friend asked, i would tell her not to consider having kids with being married.

You don't know where life is headed, or whether your relationship can last the next 50 years.

I've read an article stating that "Almost no couples with children who stay unmarried stay together" I thought that was quite interesting.

The four little words that mean so much: mutual duty of support.

You know what you do when your baby is sleeping?

1. Nap (yourself, because you've been awake for feeds literally half the night)
2. Nap
3. Run around the house doing a bit of ironing, tidying, hoovering because you can't when baby is awake and wanting held or fed (feeding is also holding..)
4. Wash bottles if your ff
5. Shower (because you can't when baby wants to be held)

The list goes on and on. You only have 30 - MAX 45 mins usually to. Baby has colic? Won't sleep. Baby has a cold? Won't sleep properly.

I had slings to do all this. And my baby hated every. single. one. That's rare, but these sorts of things you never know before the baby arrives.

Your best bet would be the daycare and/or DP(H) doing ALL the baby care at the weekend and you work then. But if you're breastfeeding that won't work either.

If you're not going to keep your full hours, family business or otherwise, you are making yourself vulnerable. Everything changes after babies and that's wonderful, but whichever person reduces their hours, pension contributions and therefore future earning potential makes themselves very vulnerable if anything goes wrong.

Remember, you choose to be in this relationship because you also have the choice to leave. You can afford to. When your financial situation changes negatively, so does your real choice about staying in the relationship. The power dynamic changes and you don't notice when everything is fine. If something happens, then you realise it's too late to do anything about it and you're not the one with the upper hand..but you do have another life to think about.

I'm in a similar situation. Partner always said he didn't believe in marrigage and I wasn't too bothered. He then proposed out of the blue but we didn't get arse in gear to organise the wedding tha year and also wasn't sure if we needed to save money for house depisit. then didn't want to wait any longer to TTC, good job because it took 1+ years. However, I am a little unsure about organising a wedding with children. I also have a thing about having one child there and then maybe having another one later - somehow doesn't feel right. So not ideal but I am super happy to be expecting first baby soon!

I would be interested to hear about legal aspects PPs have mentioned as I had never considered this. I am sure we will be fair but always good to be aware. I always assumed father will be liable for maintenance etc anyway. Maybe it's to do with split of money after and spouse payments? We share all finances but to maximise savings we have equal amounts in each of our accounts. I used to be bigger earner before returning to study, he is now supporting me but I will earn more again in a few years.

Well, getting married doesn't have to be expensive as others have said. Registery office, witnesses, done.

The security and legal aspects of marriage are probably the most important factors, if the less romantic ones. You could see a solicitor to discuss wills, powers of attorney should one of you end up unable to handle their own affairs, and a few other safeguarding documents. To be honest though, if money is his primary concern, it would be cheaper to do a quick I Do at the registery office.

Married now and wedding later could work well for you - have a big first/fifth/tenth anniversary party, lots of time to save and plan! Or don't, and just have your marriage, which is the more important thing anyway :)

But you're presuming every woman needs security,why?

And frankly I think basing a marriage on a security back up plan is not a good example to set and pretty awful. Probably why so many fail.

Also love the way on MN they come out saying if a man won't marry you run. What if the woman doesn't want to get married,or both sides of the couple don't want to get married?You don't need a ceremony or piece of paper to show commitment( as divorce rates show).

The degree of security you need depends on how financially self sufficient you are.

If you return to work after maternity leave, share childcare (child sick days etc) so that your career and salary progress the same as his, have joint ownership of the house, your own savings, then marriage becomes much less relevant.

If you become a SAHM, are not on the house deeds, have no savings or assets of your own, that 's when you are vulnerable.

If you have assets greater than him, another property or investments left by a relative, for example, then arguably you become less secure by marrying and giving him joint rights.

Maternity leave is expensive: you will need savings for that.

My own view is that big expensive weddings at hotel venues are a ridiculous use of savings if you are in an either / or situation.

Every woman does need security, though. As does every man. It's just that for some people, this may exist without marriage. Someone with substantial savings already, for example.