Women who have children before marriage

[FissionChips]

..but get upset when their partner does not want to/ has not asked to marry them , yet still insist they are too traditional to even contemplate asking their dp to marry them or just discussing it like adults.

I dont get it. Most of the complaining women give the child their partners surname as well which isn’t even traditional if the parents are not married. They live together for years. They are in no way following tradition.
AIBU to not understand why they lie about being “traditional “?

Purpletraitor, if you know exactly what the deal is then that's great! The main issue here is those that don't, or still think that 'common law' is actually a thing.

Why do you care what other people prioritise in their lives?

Oh FFS ThatGirl82, no-one but no-one gives a shiny shit what anyone does or prioritises in their lives. It is a discussion forum ergo many subjects are up for discussion including topics which impact women's lives and wellbeing; marriage / children fall into that category and it is interesting, intriguing and informative to read what others make of this subject. We've already had quite a few myths debunked such as 'Common Law' etc.

I find it so tiresome when people seek to shut down debate under the guise of 'live and let live' - of course we should all live and let live but that shouldn't preclude discussion on clearly a very interesting topic.

I care because I hate seeing women getting fucked over. I'm aware that not all unmarried but partnered mothers are being fucked over but an alarming number are, enough so to make it a worthwhile discussion.

YANBU.

Know a woman who sobs at Mum get togethers because we’re all married and her partner refuses to marry her despite a 16 year relationship and 2 children. He is also unsupportive and always ‘away’ working, his reasoning is “you know how I feel about you, it’s just a piece of paper”. Personally believe he’s playing away and she should never have had children with him let alone want to marry the guy. She cried both times they went to register the birth of both kids because he insisted they have his surname..... 🤔

I waited 6 years to be asked, kids before marriage was not an option because I knew I would be the SAHP and true enough my career has gone down the swanny whilst his has flourished.... but feel a whole lot more secure knowing we have that piece of paper financially.

@RiddleyW having dc before marriage is not old fashioned
Right you are! I structured my point very poorly
The old fashioned part I was referring too was this
"I wanted to get married because a) I wanted us all to have the same family name and b) i felt it gave me greater security should things go wrong (which no one wishes to consider of course!) and c) I am proud that we all have this legal official tie as a family - ok yes that's old fashioned but it gave me security I gues"

@chavtasticfirebanger Channing but surely the existing kids wouldnt have the new dp's surname? So all kids would have different surnames of different dads. Thats why i said i dont agree with stepfamilies as not fair on current kids. Not tosh to argue that your kids should keep your surname-at least theyd all be the same.
The point is she was married to dcs dad. For a time they all had the same name
She is now married to someone else
Dc are upset that she might change her name and not be the same as them anymore
New DH wants to share a name with her
Any subsequent dc - well they can't take ex dh name so yes they will have different names
It doesn't make it easier . Also why should they keep the mother last surname ? To make it easier when changing partners ?!! That's ridiculous. Why doesn't the dad get a say?

@bananafish81 A: you want to have a child and would like to get married, but can't afford a wedding yet, but don't want to delay TTC.

Getting married doesn't have to be expensive
You're talking about a WEDDING. If you wanted to be married you could

@bananafish81 * She adds: “Without any sort of agreement in place or an updated will, couples could spend their entire adult lives together and literally be left out in the cold once their partner dies because they have a limited claim to the estate.

“Cohabitees can also struggle to persuade trustees in claims for life assurance payouts and pension entitlements, which can very often be paid out automatically to spouses. Some parties can struggle to access bank accounts or even have a say on how a funeral is arranged.”*
God this in spades shout it from the rooftops. My mother in laws long term cohabiting partner of 18 years died recently and guess what she gets from his pension or his estate or his life insurance??

But surely if you're named on the life assurance, pension and as sole beneficiary in the will, that's not going to be an issue? Obviously if you're not named you won't get anything, but if you are you will. And would funeral directors really demand a wedding certificate before allowing you to arrange a funeral?

Full disclosure, I am a long-term cohabitee and we did our wills, pensions etc a few years ago before we bought a house together.

Channing thats why i said double barrelled then all kids have their mum and dads name

I have children, they have their Fathers surname. I have no intention of getting married.

@oliver

I totally get your position on divorce and I think you’ve made that clear. I think if I knew half the women you seem to who have been fucked over by divorce, (and marriage) then I’d feel the same as you!

But what if you (hopefully) don’t split with your partner? I appreciate you might be in a position where iht and widows pension etc aren’t an issue for you. But what if that changed and you could no longer work for some reason, (sick child, disability etc)? I get that maybe the risk of that happening isn’t as scary for you as the risk of your dp fucking you over in court, but that’s why I say it’s all a bit of a gamble and there are no guarantees etc. For you, the thought of divorce is so bad, (fair enough, based on the terrible experiences of your group of friends), that you’d never consider marriage. But that’s your choice and you have all the facts.

What is a bit worrying is the number of women who don’t have the facts and don’t feel able to choose, either because their dp isn’t interested in marriage or because it isn’t “romantic” / “traditional” to discuss marriage with your dp and father of your children. He has to get down on one knee etc etc.

So the more of these threads the better afaic.

@thefatkinsdiet good point!

Also, it's possible that a couple might split up (but be no means inevitable) whereas it's completely certain that one of you will die eventually.

If IHT is a significant factor for you (which it will be for lots of average couples in London and the SE due to property prices) you can see why you'd choose to avoid the inevitability of IHT over the risk of a divorce.

@chavisticfireburger if my parents had followed your ideal then I wouldn't be here. Oh and I get on with that half-sibling extremely well in fact better than my full siblings. Point is you cannot prescribe how families workout.

Of course. My views are black and white. I wouldnt ever have wanted half or stepsiblings, i think they happen because adults put their sexual needs above existing children

@channingtatumspecs I know!! I've been making this whole point throughout the entire thread! My marriage cost £120

The post was specifically in response to someone saying well not everyone can afford a big wedding celebration so they have kids first and then get married later

If you read my post it rubbished this notion because you could get married for £120 and then still have a big fancy wedding later on

We're saying the same thing!

Bloody hell. Why is it so hard for some to grasp a basic concept?

If you earn less/live in HIS home , you are in a really shit position. Marriage would equalise your situation should that relationship end. Marriage also gives you options should you wish to end a relationship. For all the glib 'LTB' on these boards. The reality of leaving is significantly harder if you have no claim on the family home.. and no/low income except that which you rely upon your partner for.

This is who the thread is aimed at. Countless posts from the MINUSCULE percentage of women who not only work outside the home but are also the HIGHER EARNERS- and therefore supremely smug about their choice not to marry - are not only unhelpful but detrimental to the message that most of us are trying to get across. The reality is that the 90+% of women who are in a cohabiting relationship AND... SAHM, Work part time, Work full time on low wage OR work full time on high wage BUT still less than their partner . (Where the loss of the second income and housing would have a significant affect on the current standard of living) are in a very very vulnerable position.

If you earn SIGNIFICANTLY MORE than your partner, have a couple of castles in your own name, run your own company with your left hand whilst managing your portfolio of investments with your right.. then this issue does not apply to you. Except that some of us want to share all we are lucky enough to have amassed with our significant others because of an old fashioned notion of love, trust and a wish for equality, but of course this is a choice you can make. Unmarried, poorer women do not have that luxury.

Thanks for that reply have a niece in similar position. Last time we spoke she says her partner has a child by a previous relationship goes and visits quite often. She is young and would like a family of her own. He's not so keen. Been together for years.

Thing is when I last saw 'him,' his comment about my niece was worrying to me and her uncle as he said 'She'll do for now!" reckoned it was a joke at her grandmother funeral no less.

Don't want to interfere but I wanted to tell my niece ditch him you can do better!

But after these posts would also like to say FOR GOD'S SAKE DON'T HAVE HIS CHILD!!!!!!

@TheFatkinsDiet why do you presume it is the mother who won't work or is the one to reduce their hours if they have a sick or disabled child?

If the mother is the higher earner, and this is less rare then you are making out here, then it's sensible that the father takes over.

I've seen it in action more than once with my own siblings, with my OH, with my friends and in workplaces. The first workplace I saw it in nearly 20 years ago the male manager who did it was a sexist pig and was embarrassed to admit his wife earned more than him.

All the ones who 'can't afford a wedding' are usually the ones who really can't afford to not be married.

@TheFatkinsDiet why do you presume it is the mother who won't work or is the one to reduce their hours if they have a sick or disabled child?

If the partner was dead, then yes I would assume it would be the surviving partner, (in the case of @oliver, a woman I think), who had to quit work.

@bluebug45 I think that post was making a specific point to a poster who is female.

It doesn't matter whether the individual who takes the career "hit" is male or female, it's completely irrelevant. The point is that the "hit" is being taken by someone and it's likely (not definitely) that the individual who is in that position will be better served by being married than not.

I out earn my DH as things stand and the differential in our earnings is likely to increase as time goes on. We are married because I think it's right that he is protected should we split up (although I have no expectation that will happen!). IHT is likely to be a consideration for us too as we live in the SE. This is a first marriage for us both and our DS is the only child for both of us. If I had children from an earlier marriage I might have made a different choice. On balance I think I'm in the best position I can be for me. Everyone needs to go through that process for themselves of course and the answer won't be the same for everyone.

I wouldnt ever have wanted half or stepsiblings, i think they happen because adults put their sexual needs above existing children

You, ma'am, are an...well, let's just say that was not an intelligent post.