Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that women should stop starting families before they get the ring?

543 replies

MeteorGarden · 08/09/2018 08:49

Ok so hear me out.

I’ve read a few threads now from women who have got themselves into the same difficult situation and judging by hundreds of comments, they are seriously not alone!

They desperately want to marry DP who ‘always said he would’ But now (a few children/ years later) has declared he has no intention of marrying them.

It follows the same pattern, OP wanted to marry early on and DP was open to it but didn’t actually pop the question. OP didn’t force the issue (god forbid she be labelled ‘pushy’ or ‘crazy’) and instead started a family with DP (OP seemed under the delusion that having his children would make him propose).

Why!??
A) Would anyone ‘start a family’ with a man who isn’t proposing to you? If he’s open to it why isn’t he doing it?
B) Is having children becoming just an alternative to getting the ring/ security you want?
C) Would anyone think having his children will make him propose? If you have the kids without a ring it’s fair for him to assume you’re happy enough with the current situation!
D) are so many women put off flatly asking for what they want? It’s terribly backward to just quietly have his children and keep his home in the hope that one day you’ll be ‘rewarded’ you with a proposal! We’re living in a society where you can carry his children but feel uncomfortable asking WHEN he’s going to propose and pushing the issue?!?!

The stories I’ve read are horribly deflating and I empathise with their explanations of frustration and humiliation but wonder if perhaps it could have all been avoided?

We have so much more freedom and independence than our grandmothers, but we’re expected to pretend we don’t care about marriage or kids for the first year of dating so as ‘not to scare a man away’!! WtF?

I wouldn’t ever plan a family with any man I wasn’t married to. It was spelt out to me that the time to lock down my chosen relationship was BEFORE I had children or made irreversible sacrifices!

This kind of thinking seems to instil fury in a lot of modern women but why? Taking the more ‘modern’ approach really doesn’t seem to be working out very well for alot of women so would a bit more tradition In our approach to getting the ring really be that bad?

Maybe if women banded together and made ‘getting the ring’ more socially acceptable we’d be able to push the point and get answers before wasting years with a guy and learning the hard way! Right now it feels men have more power over the marriage process than they really should!

* This applies only to women who ‘want’ to marry but aren’t getting the ring. Not those who don’t want to marry!

OP posts:
ThumbWitchesAbroad · 13/09/2018 17:11

Informed choice is the key here.
You don't want to get married? Great! No problem.
You want to have children without being married? Great! No problem.

But just make sure you understand the ramifications of those decisions, and don't imagine that you are in any way in a relationship that is equal to marriage, in legal protection terms, however long you are together, unless you have taken a lot of legal steps to get yourself covered.

No one is trying to force anyone to marry if they don't want to, especially not if it actively disadvantages them, financially or however else.

No one is trying to stop children being born outside of marriage either.

Just make sure you understand what your legal position will be if you do those things, so that IF the relationship collapses, you are not left completely in the lurch financially or in any other way.

If you are one of those who are financially independent and would not benefit in any way from being legally married to your partner, then great! You've done your research, you made an informed choice, and this thread is neither for nor about you.

Tigger001 · 13/09/2018 21:29

@ThumbWitchesAbroad I hope your accurate post succeeds where all others have failed to try and explain the actual OP. I think certain people just like being on the soapbox and see a post that they can slightly jump on for their own agenda
@zsazsajuju my best mate would most definitely not want you as her advocate, so I suggest you are only a advocate for yourself and don't try and put all single parents under your misguided umbrella.
A woman can be independent and married the same as a single parent can be single and independent.
I have heard women just like the op relates to, talking about. Why hadn't he proposed, when will he propose, sadly even, what can I do to get him to propose. If he doesn't propose and you have spoken about it, I doubt he ever will....move on and don't have his kids if your not happy with your relationship status.

moredoll · 13/09/2018 21:39

would prefer the law to protect the rights of children in all circumstances in the event of a break-up (it's half-way there already but needs developing further) rather than make all women get married prior to having children.

Marriage is becoming an archaic concept if statistics are to be believed.

Rather than adapt our lives to meet archaic divorce laws, why not adapt the law to the needs of modern society?

^This

ThumbWitchesAbroad · 14/09/2018 03:10

Thanks Tigger - we shall see :)

RedneckStumpy · 14/09/2018 03:37

We wanted to get married, because we love each other, for security and stability.

We only have the 1 joint account, and absolutely everything is in joint names. It works for us.

EBearhug · 14/09/2018 08:51

We only have the 1 joint account, and absolutely everything is in joint names. It works for us.

It won't if one of you has an accident and dies suddenly.

SnuggyBuggy · 14/09/2018 08:55

I think it's a bit of a timebomb that's only going to really hit when people in unmarried LTRs start dying off and leaving the other in the shit.

VeryBerrySeptember · 14/09/2018 13:58

As explained to me the bank will transfer a joint account to single account for the survivor on production of a deafh certificate.

There would be more of an issue on death with a single person's account being frozen until all affairs are sorted.

VeryBerrySeptember · 14/09/2018 14:00

I mean a,solo account rather than referring to marital status by use of the phrase single person!

Graphista · 14/09/2018 16:01

As explained to me the bank will transfer a joint account to single account for the survivor on production of a deafh certificate

Which depending on the manner of death could take some time, and until it's produced the account would be frozen.

One of the women I'm referring to was stuck on this as the death was 'premature' which means an autopsy was needed before death certificate could be issued (young seemingly healthy guy - undiagnosed genetic heart issue not discovered until autopsy) and if the coroner is busy for any reason (eg flu epidemic, hell just 'winter' sometimes - there were issues here locally last winter due to the heavy snow impeding transport of bodies and officials, also in increase in deaths. Funerals were delayed which was very distressing for folk).

SnuggyBuggy I agree, most of those still in their first long term relationship born maybe as late as early 70's (like me) tend to be married, as even though living together was becoming less stigmatised in 80's/90's most still felt the need to be married before having children. I think iirc that was a mix of there still being a social stigma AND Govt policies on benefits and tax breaks etc.

Those born late 70's on less likely to be married so when they start reaching ages where they start dying the legal and financial issues around this will come to the fore.

The problem is govt and legislation is always slow to catch up on how people are living, it tends to work best for the previous generation.

VeryBerrySeptember · 14/09/2018 16:13

Thanks Graphista. I've just recapped the relevant posts upthread.

I knew I should never take my bank's advice/ assurances at face value! I think I asked about this twenty years ago (when we both seemed more indestructible.)

We have separate accounts too but household bills come out of a joint one.

There's always food for thought with MN.

MissRoadie · 14/09/2018 17:14

Got a ring ages before we had kids... didn't bother with the getting married bit! win-win.

P3onyPenny · 14/09/2018 18:00

You don't need a death certificate to carry on accessing my joint bank account only to convert it to a solo one. It is a joint account and we can both sign for it,we are both legal owners of the account and it's contents.

Bluelady · 14/09/2018 18:05

So how does that work if the other account holder can't give permission and there's no death certificate?

P3onyPenny · 14/09/2018 18:07

I don't need permission in life,don't need it in death. Would if it was a solo account. It isn't.

Graphista · 14/09/2018 18:07

P3ony I'd honestly urge you to double check that. Particularly if either party doesn't have a will.

OnNaturesCourse · 14/09/2018 18:13

I think you are getting 'a ring' mixed up with commitment...

P3onyPenny · 14/09/2018 18:19

We did,we do.

The death certificate is to take a name off. I'd be notifying my bank of death( wouldn't be high on my list of priorities) and unlikely to happen before I had the certificate anyway. If in the unlikely event it was to happen I'd contact the bereavement team and ask them to transfer savings from my single account to temporarily cover any dd's.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page