AIBU benefits of marriage without marriage

[serbska]

Yes another persona complaining LIFE ISN'T FAIR because they can't access a benefit for married people, because they weren't married.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-45348176/bereavement-allowance-widowed-mum-on-why-her-kids-are-penalised

If you want to be free and easy, stay as DPs. If you want the legal protection and benefits of married, get married. It costs a few quid down the registry office.

It's not remotely a red herring. The assumptions about unmarried partners not having a say at all are outdated catastrophising, I think people remember an they heard of 20 years ago and presume nothing has changed.

However, being a parent without PR can certainly be significant. If for example the baby is unwell before being registered and the parents are in disagreement about which of a couple of options the medical staff are considering is best, the person who'll be consulted is the mother. Some people would consider this a significant reason to get married (or not) so it's important to be clear about it. This doesn't of course mean the mother can insist on treatment that medical staff wouldn't view as being in the best interests of the child. But then pretty much nobody thinks it would, so that's a strawman.

In smell's case, having taken the trouble to designate an NOK beforehand who wasn't DP is quite unusual I think. Might have complicated matters. It's normally a realistic assumption that a person wants their unmarried partner involved, to be the point of liaison if unconscious etc, so clinicians proceed on that basis. I don't know what happens when the person has effectively done something to rebut that assumption first.

my friends (elderly) DM and DP didnt get on with his DC, they married and less than a month later he was taken very ill and into a home, if they hadnt got married his evil (yup) dc would have moved him to a home many many miles away and he and her DM would never have seen each other again (he died shortly after)

Her DM would have not been notified about the funeral etc - i believe that if you are a committed couple / team then marriage gives you protection

Paul - there’s no such thing as a next of kin in law. It would be nonsense for drs to ignore fathers wishes for medical treatment of a child co’s he was not married to the mother. There is no basis in law to prefer the mothers opinion on treatment to the fathers because he hasn’t yet got himself parental rights. I have never heard of a case in which this has happened. It’s simply mumsnet made up law.

And we’re getting away from the op horrible post which was that some bereaved children are more deserving of benefits cos their parents are married. Ghastly creature

I know there's no such thing legally as a next of kin, I'm a solicitor. People do sometimes lodge something with a GP saying they want someone to be regarded as such though, which is what i presumed the poster who talked about her NOK referred to.

As for there being no basis in law, I'm afraid that's incorrect. If they are in a position where someone with PR is required to agree to something, ie not a situation where they're acting on some other basis such as having got a court order, if there's only one person with PR that person is in a legally different position to a person without it. It doesn't matter whether you've ever heard of it being an issue or not. It is possible for someone without PR to consent to treatment for a child in some circumstances, which I suspect is what you're thinking of here, but that's a separate issue to disagreement.

I do think that there should be civil partnerships available for all but atm if you want the benefits of marriage get married.

Another scenario that doesn't fit the criteria. My married friend and her husband adopted a child. The husband died 2018.

She is not entitled to a bean as they were both retired and in receipt of their pensions when he died. He was 68.

Ah is that because he hadn't been paying any NI contributions recently enough? That seems very unfair too.

I think it was abolished in last few years but this pre dates it iirc

On the subject of the law relating to PR being mumsnet made up law (one of the most impressive pieces of head in sand denial I've ever seen on these threads, so congrats) there are a few posts on this thread with some real life experiences of unmarried fathers and consent.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/a3351455-To-be-p-ssed-off-that-no-option-for-cohabiting-long-term-relationship-exists-on-maternity-notes?msgid=80708784#80708784

A useful read for anyone who doesn't think the law on parental responsibility is imaginary.

K

Another scenario that doesn't fit the criteria. My married friend and her husband adopted a child. The husband died 2018.

She is not entitled to a bean as they were both retired and in receipt of their pensions when he died. He was 68.

Because they were retired she wouldn’t have got it as it was originally introduced to lessen the financial impact when someone died unexpectedly young.

It’s a very harsh line, especially now when so many people work beyond official retirement age and have children later.

They’ve changed the lower age limit for childless people so the upper age limit may move at some point I think. Previously if the widow or widower was under 45 abd childless they got no help at all.

This document by the Childhood Bereavement Network talks about if you think you potentially qualify what you can consider doing prior to hopefully legislation coming into place.

www.childhoodbereavementnetwork.org.uk/media/92073/Note-for-parents-on-Siobhan-McLaughlin-case.pdf

It's not as simple for us all just to "get married" when you live in a country (the only one in the U.K.) that doesn't yet allow everyone to get married - anyway probably a different comment for a different thread!

It's not as simple for us all just to "get married" when you live in a country (the only one in the U.K.) that doesn't yet allow everyone to get married - anyway probably a different comment for a different thread!

being a bit dim here, can you explain a bit more?

Presumably meandyou is referring to same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland.

That is exactly what I was referring too sorry didn't mean to rant! One of those days at work - nearly home time!

i didnt think you were ranty @Meandyoumake2 - you make a bloody good point!

CP would give you almost all of them, fortunately. Not saying the NI situation isn't a disgrace though. It is.