Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Women who have children before marriage

968 replies

FissionChips · 22/05/2018 01:20

..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 “?

OP posts:
bananafish81 · 25/05/2018 16:48

Yet another survey showing how many people believe they're entitled to rights that they don't have

Cohabiting couples risk financial disaster

New research from Direct Line Life Insurance shows that more than a third of cohabiting couples don’t understand their legal rights in the event their partner passed away. In fact, one in 10 believes they would automatically inherit their partner’s share of the property, even though that’s only actually the case when there’s a will that specifically states that.

Worryingly, just 26 per cent of cohabiting partners have a will, compared with 52 per cent of married couples, leaving them at real risk. And less than a third of cohabiting couples have life insurance, again, putting their stability at risk at a time when they would be grief-stricken and acutely vulnerable to the additional distress caused by financial turmoil.

In the meantime, cohabiting couples don’t just have fewer rights than married couples, they also have fewer state financial protections.

They do not qualify for bereavement benefits on their partner’s death and their children will not benefit from their remaining parent receiving widowed parent’s allowance. That’s a situation that has been criticised by numerous campaign groups.

“The higher rate of bereavement benefit currently paid to those with children is in recognition of the emotional, practical and financial costs of bringing up children when a partner has died,” says the Childhood Bereavement Network in a statement.

expatinscotland · 25/05/2018 16:49

She was awarded those monies to maintain the children, moyes, not because she was his unmarried partner. There is no automatic legal protection for unmarried partners. There just isn't in the UK and there hasn't been for a very, very long time.

Even now, spousal maintenance is rare, as circumstances can change so mostly a clean break is favoured.

LoveInTokyo · 25/05/2018 16:51

^Specifically out of curiosity, what particular assets etc are not covered by a couple co-habiting unmarried with children if:
A) mortgage is in joint names
B) They have a joint life insurance policy
C) They are each named as the 'beneficiary' (??? Not sure of wording) of each others pensions.^

This has already been spelt out, but off the top of my head...

On separation:

  • the contents of the other person's bank account
  • any other assets owned by the other person excluding the house
  • the other person's pension

(Most relevant to the lower earning partner, especially if they have stopped work or gone part-time for any period of time, and particularly in relation to any pension entitlement.)

On death:

  • any assets exceeding the inheritance tax threshold
  • any pension benefits which can only be claimed by a spouse (particularly in the case of defined benefit schemes)
  • any state benefits only availabled to widowed partners
  • realistically, the ability to make a claim against the deceased partner's estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 if the deceased spouse does not make a will, does not make you a beneficiary in their will, revokes their will without your knowledge or makes a will which is later deemed void for invalidity (for example, if it is not properly witnessed).
bananafish81 · 25/05/2018 16:51

From the same article

It’s not just if a partner dies that cohabiting couples face a financial penalty. Research from Hargreaves Lansdown shows that getting married, and staying married, can provide a pretty substantial bonus.

Sarah Coles, personal finance analyst at the investment firm, explains: “The numerous tax benefits available to married couples means that even in cold financial terms, it may pay to tie the knot. In fact, over a 50-year marriage, even after the cost of the wedding, in today’s money, the couple could be £190,964 better off.”

The most obvious benefit is the marriage allowance, a small but constant perk specifically designed to reward marriage over cohabitation. It allows a partner who doesn’t use their full personal tax-free allowance to transfer a chunk of it to their taxpaying partner – up to £1,150 in the current tax year. That means a potential saving of up to £230 a year.

Married couples can also share assets between them and take advantage of both personal tax allowances, personal savings allowances and dividend allowances. They can reduce their capital gains tax liability on assets held jointly by combining their gains allowance.

On top of that, married couples can inherit their spouse’s ISA investments, without losing the tax-break on their cash. They benefit from defined benefit pension death benefits, meaning they typically gain 50 per cent of a deceased spouse’s pension.

Perhaps the biggest break for married couples comes from inheritance tax. A married partner can leave everything to their surviving spouse with no tax to pay, whereas unmarried couples would benefit from the normal allowances, but after that they are likely to pay 40 per cent tax.

What’s more, within a marriage the surviving spouse can also inherit their partner’s inheritance tax allowance, meaning they can leave £650,000-worth of cash and potentially £350,000-worth of property to their heirs tax-free.

That’s a massive benefit and it is not available to unmarried couples."

LoveInTokyo · 25/05/2018 16:52

(deceased partner, not deceased spouse, sorry)

chavtasticfirebanger · 25/05/2018 17:00

Channing no shed be dmith davis.
So all kids would have smith.
But ideally wouldnt have a relationship marry at all until the kids were grown.

moyesp · 25/05/2018 18:14

LoveInTokyo - thanks for that in your expert handling of cases (more than 25 years old have you ever helped clients to acquisition of assets from their time of living together?

Was it done perhaps under another legal precedent regarding contracts or the division shared assets?

Just curious. Thanks

LoveInTokyo · 25/05/2018 18:23

I’m not a family lawyer and I’m afraid the only family law cases I worked on as a trainee which involved the splitting of assets were divorce cases. The partner I worked for did do a few cohabitation agreements. But generally when an unmarried partner without a cohabitation agreement is seeking legal advice they are told there isn’t much that the law can do for them.

SandyY2K · 25/05/2018 19:02

The law won't hold you to a commitment you didn't make.

So true.

Sadly...women's desperation can lead them to accept cohabitation when it's not what they really want.

PoorYorick · 25/05/2018 20:02

If you do want legal protections and commitment, I can't understand why you'd go to all the trouble of wills and cohabitation agreements and pension plans and all the rest if it, and not just get a bloody marriage. It's a one stop shop, it'll be quicker and cheaper than all those complicated alternatives and and it has various additional benefits too.

I am married and I absolutely promise you that my husband doesn't own me. I promise that I can legally do anything I like. I absolutely swear that I can still earn money and buy things and leave the house without my chain. I swear.

fontofnoknowledge · 25/05/2018 22:16

All the 'excuses' for not getting married are a pile of crock. I have had very close experience of the worst outcome from all those who think it's just fine. It's not it's absolutely fucking tragic.

My best friend (I'll call her Lucy) since nursery moved in with her boyfriend over 30 yrs ago. He had just started as the photocopy boy in a well known bank in the city of London. She was a nursery nurse locally. After a couple of years she fell pregnant and wanted to get married. He said they couldn't afford it, now a baby was on the way. Baby arrived and her pay did not cover childcare so she became a SAHM. They worked out they could just manage as he had been offered a promotion to learn the ropes in investment banking. Another baby arrived and he kept rising up through the bank. Lucy became the consummate 'corporate wife'. Clients for dinner, 'perfect family'. Much much more money. New house.

Bfnever stopped wanting to be married. 'D' p didn't want it. Didn't believe in marriage. His parents had had an acrimonious divorce and didn't want that for his family. Lucy didn't want to 'push' it. Although she was vocal enough to voice her concerns. He placated her with a Will. She showed me a copy. Everything left to her . Life insurance with her as beneficiary.

2 more children followed. He was now at the top of his game. A (over) £800k house. House in France, skiing at Xmas and half term. Lovely summer holidays. I thought he was a really fantastic 'husband'.

3 maybe 4 yrs ago (can't remember now) He started to go to Dubai on 'business'. Easter time he wasn't able to join the family for holiday due to work. Two weeks later he announced he had met someone new in Dubai. A 26 yr old Eastern European woman. He was in love. He left. Completely and absolutely. No discussion no negotiation. Just left. The 4 children were nearly all grown. One past Uni. One there, One on the way and one 16 yrs old.

12 Weeks after his announcement he was married. The joy of cohabitation. No time for your partner to mourn. A divorce takes time. Gives you time to adjust. Gives you time to mourn. Cohabitation gives you nothing. His marriage invalidated his Will. Lucy took legal advice. She was entitled to maintenance for one child. An application was made under schedule 1 of the children's act. She was allowed to stay in HIS house (and now the Latvians house too) until the youngest was 18. (20 months). Her beautiful home that she had looked after and put her heart into.

Three years on she is in a lovely cottage that one of our friends owns. There is no security. Lucy was entitled to nothing. Her 'd'p married (despite not believing in it) because his young wife is catholic and her parents 'wouldn't approve' of living together. Shame her religious mores didn't extend to shagging men with partners and children.

I knew this couple for the entire time. I would have staked my life on his devotion to Lucy and the kids. 'A piece of paper' ??? Yes. The difference between security and poverty.

PoorYorick · 25/05/2018 22:31

"It's just a piece of paper..." Excuse me while I go set fire to my house deeds, passport, degree and other qualification certificates, driver's licence and a few £50 notes.

Nobody actually truly believes it's literally just a piece of paper, do they? Nobody is that stupid, are they?

MrsJamin · 25/05/2018 22:33

That's a powerful story @fontofnoknowledge - I just don't know what I should say to friends of mine with primary age children who aren't married and whose careers and ability to earn decent, bread-winning money has been severely hampered by mothering. It's so very naive to think that the legalities of marriage are meaningless. Men around the world are getting off scot-free and women think they are being terribly modern by not 'needing' to be married when they've had a baby. Bullshit.

KERALA1 · 25/05/2018 22:54

Font my boss did similar when I was a trainee. 3 young kids careful not to marry her. Binned her when youngest 2 for someone sexier. He was a family solicitor so knew exactly what he was doing...she got abit of maintenance for the kids but fuck all else as he well knew.

PoorYorick · 25/05/2018 23:18

Going back to the original question of why so many women claim that it's because they are 'traditional' and waiting for him to propose...well obviously this is horseshit. But as we've established, marriage largely protects the woman. Which is why it's usually men who won't do it. And why there's such an extended movement to hide this fact by claiming marriage is outdated and patriarchal and doesn't view women as equals and and and and.

But the truth is, it usually protects the woman. So I can understand why women would want the man to make a gesture to prove that he wants to do it. It's nothing to do with proving to society that you've got male approval, as a few early posters claim. Fuck that. It's to do with the man you're supposedly building your life with demonstrating that his heart is in it and he means it. And sadly, in many many cases of unmarried partners, this is why he won't propose. Because his heart isn't in it and he wants to leave the back door open.

Not every case, of course, perhaps not even a majority, but a great many. Certainly enough to warrant this discussion.

If this is the situation, it's incredibly painful to face the fact that ultimately this man doesn't want to commit, plus the fact that women are socialised not to demand anything, even their own legal protection. Claiming that you are 'traditional' is easier for a lot of people.

chavtasticfirebanger · 26/05/2018 04:25

Hear hear yorick

Stillwishihadabs · 26/05/2018 08:15

That's basically why I suggested getting married when ds was one. Interestingly I have stayed working and am now the higher earner, so possibly would lose more in a divorce. Luckily we have decided we are "better together". My dsis is unmarried, 2 kids and recently gave up her job Sad

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 08:40

She was allowed to stay in HIS house

She was with him from the beginning so wtf wasn't her name on the deeds.I might not want to get married but sure as hell want to know the roof I have over my head is mine, or half mine.

Doubt he would have been so quick to end things if he thought he would lose his housing status.

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 08:56

What do you think of this marriage and subsequent divorce.

Friend gets married. Friends dh changes almost over night and is the subject of domestic violence, emotional and financial abuse.
They have 2 children. He attacks her so badly, said it was an accident. She is left with life altering injuries.
She sees a solicitor but they all want money up front. She is stuck because she has nowhere to go.
She is disabled so house is designed for her needs.
Friends husband has his own business.
They own between them more than one property other than the family home.

After 20 years of all this there is one particular attack where the police arrive. He is arrested and they get her to take out an injunction forbidding him to contact him.

This he ignores, she reports to the police and they do nothing, after reporting every incident they finally bring him in for a chat..
Did I mention because of his business he is in constant contact with the same police force. They all know him and have described him to her as "A nice guy".
"But he is such a nice guy" is all she hears.

After one particular

Shmithecat · 26/05/2018 09:10

@Oliversmumsarmy could your friend not get legal aid due to domestic violence?

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 09:18

Sorry having to do this in sections as phone keeps crashing.

Friend started divorce proceedings after the incident as she finally found a solicitor who didn't need money up front.

That was last year. He is refusing to fill out any forms properly. Her bill is being racked up as she is spending money on solicitors and barristers and then getting to court to find the judge cant proceed because he hasn't filled out the form properly so the judge says do it for next time but he doesn't and lthough the judge could actually arrest him or make a judgement against him nothing happens.
In the meantime he is taking out loans left right and centre.

Spent £8000 in one week end in a bookmakers.
Gambling at least £2000 per week.
All of which has to be paid out of the matrimonial assets.

Friend is not entitled to any spousal maintenance because one of the bits of form he has filled in states he only earns less than nmw.
On the same form he states that he pays his dcs school fees and pocket money of £100 per week each.
Her husband has now offered her one of the rental property with a mortgage which if she sells she would end up with about £75000

He has strung the proceedings along, wasted hundreds of thousands and told her to accept what he offers otherwise he can keep this going for years till there is nothing left.

Whilst on paper you would think friend would be in a good position rl doesn't seem to work like that.

Injunction against someone who constantly breaks it..... Nothing done

Not filling out court documents.....just told to have it filled out next time and the next time and the next time... Nothing done

Friend wishes she had never married because she would have been out of there a lot earlier and it would have been down to property law not divorce law and she would have been better off.

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 09:19

No legal aid because she owns a rental property

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 09:20

Or should say half owns a rental property

TheFatkinsDiet · 26/05/2018 09:23

That situation is just terrible. Is that someone you know irl? Poor, poor woman.

But I don’t think it would have been better had she not been married? Unless I’m missing the point, it’s a combination of terrible things all happening to one person.

And re your name being on the deeds of your jointly owned house. Fab! You, as a couple, are clearly savvy enough to take sensible precautions, but many people aren’t, or just assume they’re entitled to half because they are cohabiting. This has been the main point a lot of people are making on this thread. There is no problem with people who research and make an educated choice about what to do with regards to marriage or alternative legal protections. The problem is the people who either don’t think about it or who think they are protected in law because they are cohabiting/ have been together x number of years / have dcs together, when they are not.

Oliversmumsarmy · 26/05/2018 09:38

Yes it is someone I know. The family home is in joint names with no mortgage. But unlike me who never married she wont end up with half the house and half the rental properties as with my situation any debts my dp runs up in his name are his whilst if you are married they become half hers.

In the meantime she is surviving off her disability which she has been reassessed recently and gets a paltrey sum because apparently she could go out to work.
Anyone with any sense knows friend will never work again. The "accident" left her not just physically disabled but brain damaged as well.

A friend recently married and having listened to what friend went through saw similarities in her new dh.
As soon as they were married he changed and started to become abusive.
In normal circumstances she said she would have tried to make it work but having heard my friends story she kicked him out after less than 2 weeks and started divorce proceedings.