AIBU to think if you want marital rights then you should get married?

[KitKat1985]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42134722

According to this BBC article, 2/3rds of cohabiting couples wrongly believe 'common-law marriage' laws exist when dividing up finances, and there are calls now to introduce some form of legal financial protection for 'common-law marriages'. AIBU to not get this? Surely if people choose not to get married (or have a civil partnership for same sex couples) then they do so knowing that they don't have the same legal protection as married couples. It was one of the reasons me and DH decided to get married after co-habiting for a couple of years. Surely if you choose not to take on the legal and financial commitments of getting married, then you can't expect to have the same rights if you break up / your partner passes away? And surely for some couples the whole reason they don't want to get married is so they can just walk away from things if the relationship fails, without having to have the legal and financial complications involved in getting divorced? Is it really fair to then force those people to have to support their partner if they break up even if they actively choose never to make that commitment in the first place?

The upshot of the bereavement payment ruling is that payments will become less generous, since more people will now be considered eligible (and will be further eroded since for a few just on the ‘not really a partnership ‘ side could find the prospect of eligibility an incentive to moving the relationship up a gear).

I don't see why a couple who have been married say one year should have more rights than a couple who have been together for 10/20/30 but just simply didn't want to marry, it's easier to walk away if you don't have the bother of legal proceedings, so surely longer term unmarried couples who stay together deserve equal rights.
Marriage is an outdated institution, we have our own choices, and I don't expect everyone not to marry, so why should people who want to get married expect everyone else to.

However, I don’t think people who are cohabiting should get the exact same rights as married couples. But I do think they should be entitled to some kind of basic rights. When you choose to share your finances and a home with someone that’s still a big commitment. And I do believe that people should have a basic level of protection in some way. What form that takes I’m not sure - maybe a kind of cohabiting agreement they sign to agree how they split finances if things don’t pan out that will be valid in court

So why not draw up a cohabitation agreement if you want agreement about how to split finances in the event of separation?. That already exists

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/five-reasons-you-may-need-a-cohabitation-agreementukk_5a1bf1dae4b0bf1467a84802/

http://www.family-solicitors.co.uk/Cohabitation-Agreements

What do you want out of a cohabitation agreement that's different to the existing legal framework?

Not everyone wants to get married, I've been with my partner 24 years and do not want to marry, nor would I expect him to support me if we separate.
Our relationship has lasted a lot longer than a lot of marriages and we are fully committed to each other and do not need a ceremony in order to validate this, but I do expect people to show us the same respect and not judge us on our choices.

No one is saying your relationship isn't valid or any less deserving of respect. Just that cohabitation doesn't afford the same legal rights and responsibilities as marriage does. Not better or worse or more or less worthy of respect. But different under the law. Not everyone wants these same rights and responsibilities. That's fine. If you don't want these legal rights and responsibilities, then what's the problem?

Marriage is historically about property, generally gaining it along with the burden of a wife in the form of dowry. My partner and I got married for the romance, the dress and the honeymoon but I totally understand why some don’t get married. Certainly those from especially from families that experienced divorce or parental infidelity might prefer to cohabit rather than enter into something they see as our-of-date or potentially unrealistic but, unless you view marriage as insurance against break up, I’m not sure why one state should confer greater protection than the other.

We certainly didn’t have “and you get half my shit if you screw around” in our vows.

I've been cohabiting for 18 years, 2 kids, mortgage, I work and house is jointly owned. I would like civil partnership. I just don't want to get married, never have wanted it. Don't like the ideaof a wedding ceremony. Might do it for pension rights but the idea fills me with horror.

I don't see why a couple who have been married say one year should have more rights than a couple who have been together for 10/20/30 but just simply didn't want to marry

Because the couple who married chose to enter into this legal contract, and the couple who did not want to marry - i.e., did not want to enter into this legal contract - did not.

If you want your relationship to be legalised, legalise it. If you don't, that's 100% up to you, but you can't then complain that it isn't legalised.

I just don't want to get married, never have wanted it. Don't like the ideaof a wedding ceremony.

How many times do people have to explain that you don't need to have a wedding?

You can do it in a few minutes for next to nothing at a registry office. It's just a legal contract. If you don't want to do it, that's entirely up to you, but if the only thing putting you off is that you think you need a flouncy wedding to go with it, that's just daft.

You still have the words of the ceremony and you still have all the cultural expectations and baggage that come with the word 'marriage ceremony '.

You still have the words of the ceremony and you still have all the cultural expectations and baggage that come with the word 'marriage ceremony

No, you have. I haven't because it doesn't mean any of that for me, any more than my university degree has the cultural expectations and baggage of a 14th century monastery, as one PP said.

If you don't want to marry because of what it used to be before its numerous reforms, that's your choice. But if you don't want to make a legal commitment, you can't complain about not having the resulting legal protections.

"If you want your relationship to be legalised, legalise it. If you don't, that's 100% up to you, but you can't then complain that it isn't legalised"

But I don't want mine to be legalized. I do want children to be protected, though. And I want to be able to choose to put in place whatever financial arrangements my partner and I wish. And I want it to be widely publicized that there is no such thing as common law marriage, and women and children are vulnerable unless proper arrangements are made.

But I don't want mine to be legalized.

Then you're fine not having the legal protections, no problem.

And I want to be able to choose to put in place whatever financial arrangements my partner and I wish.

You can. You just can't stop him from changing his without telling you, or voiding it against your will by marrying. If that's not a problem, as you say it's not, then great.

And I want it to be widely publicized that there is no such thing as common law marriage

I agree.

and women and children are vulnerable unless proper arrangements are made.

Quite. There's a way to fix that....

Horlick, why does it matter to you that people who aren't married might get the same provisions that you get through marriage?

Did you mean me? I don't care at all. As I said to another poster, if they do bring in an identical institution with a different name, it means nothing to me. Just seems redundant and has the same shared history they wanted to avoid.

They don't get all the same benefits, Bertrand. Most, but not all.

But I don't want mine to be legalized. I do want children to be protected, though. And I want to be able to choose to put in place whatever financial arrangements my partner and I wish.

What financial arrangements do you wish to put into place that a cohabitation agreement doesn't permit? A cohabitation agreement is bespoke for each couple according to their needs. It can't cover tax benefits afforded by HMRC to couples who have entered into a legal partnership arrangement, but otherwise you can set up a contract that's mutually agreeable. What financial provision would you like that wouldn't be covered by a mutually agreed cohabitation agreement?

Because the couple who married chose to enter into this legal contract, and the couple who did not want to marry - i.e., did not want to enter into this legal contract - did not.

I don't agree, I don't see why people should have to marry to be entitled to equal legal protection.

I do not see why I should be required to sign a legal document in this day and age, marriage is a choice, it should not be a necessity for equal rights.

Absolutely agree. Is there going to be a time limit on when the laws apply? Some people don’t want to be in the position of a married couple. They too deserve a choice.get married if you want to be in the same position as a married couple

Child support has to be paid by a father regardless of marriage.
But i think to force people to marry for rights is wrong, marriage should be about love and respect not rights or financial security. Getting married for those reasons is wrong.
We have to move with the times and the fact is that less people are getting married so i feel something should be put in place.
We are very happy as we are, been together 8 years, been friends a lot longer but due to my partner having a serious accident at work it has thrown up some issues and this shouldnt be the case, we have been together longer than some marriages last.
We believe if its not broken why fix it.
I dont believe we should have the same rights as a married couple but there should be some rights and protection put in place, least of all incase the worst was to happen.

I don't agree, I don't see why people should have to marry to be entitled to equal legal protection.

Because that's what marriage is - a legal contract that afford certain protections.

I do not see why I should be required to sign a legal document in this day and age, marriage is a choice, it should not be a necessity for equal rights.

Equal rights mean not forcing people into legal commitments regarding their assets that they choose not to make.

Jeez.

I dont believe we should have the same rights as a married couple but there should be some rights and protection put in place, least of all incase the worst was to happen.

So why not put a legal cohabitation agreement in place?

"What financial provision would you like that wouldn't be covered by a mutually agreed cohabitation agreement?"

I think it's only widows pension, some workplace pensions and inheritance tax that are anomalies.

marriage should be about love and respect not rights or financial security.

No, it should be about rights and financial security. It always has been. You can't contract emotions and you cannot make a legal commitment to love someone.

I sort-of agree, but think you should be able to make that contract without any kind of ceremony. I don’t want even a registrars ceremony

But you pretty much can.

Think of it like a mortgage application or making a will: you have to sign a piece of paper and you have to have someone witness the signing of that piece of paper. That's all a registrar wedding needs to be. You can skip readings, processions, songs - all of it. You can write your own vows so that they aren't mushy and lovey-dovey, and they can be really short. It is really that simple.

How about those of us who perfectly rationally don't want to have any part in an out dated institution which has its roots in patriarchy and misogyny? Or do you just dismiss this because you don't understand it?

I don’t see anything “perfectly rational” in that position... By acting rationally you’d recognise that marriage does afford rights to partners that they would not have otherwise, and that if (and i get it’s a big “if”) you want those rights, you should get married.