DP won't marry. Is it me or is it him?

[Teeandee]

DP and i have been together a few years, one child and a second on the way.

We'd spoken about marriage after being together for about 12 months and we were getting serious. I was lead to believe it was on the cards and was something he wanted too, so I had no concerns about starting a family about a year later. He's a good provider, supportive and a good father.

He's been engaged twice before but never made it up the isle. His first engagement was in his very early twenties but she left him for somebody else.

His second engagement was to an ex he was with for six years and has a child to, who he later told me he'd only proposed to because her family were putting on the pressure to "make an honest woman out of her" so he did it to make her and them happy. They eventually broke up but he continues to pay child maintenance and sees his DD regularly so he hasn't been evading his responsibilities.

He's not a serial romancer and has only had three significant relationships in his adult life, the two I've mentioned then me.

With our DC2 on the way I began to press the subject of marriage and he now tells me he really doesn't want to get married, never has, and that it's not "me" he doesn't want to marry, it's anybody.

This is when he tells me about his heart not being in it when he proposed to his ex, and says he doesn't think he'd have gone through with a wedding because it's not something he ever wanted, but felt pushed into by her and her parents.

I'm understandably upset because I was lead to believe it was something he wanted, only to be told it's definitely not.

What's going on here, is it me or is it him? Is he spinning me a line about not wanting to marry 'anyone'

FTR I'm not remotely concerned about being left in the lurch with DC and no support, house is in my name and I have my own money. I can see he's somebody who provides for his DC regardless of whether he's with the mum. It was about love for me and not money

OP- did you post about this a couple of months ago? If not another user had your exact circumstances!

I commented extensively on that last post - felt very sorry for you/ the OP

But unfortunately just because you’ve had kids with him/ created a life with him...does not mean he owes you a ring/ wedding!

If it were the other way around and he were pushing an ‘idea’ he really wanted on you whilst you said no and didn’t really want it- MN would be FAR less sympathetic!

If the ring was a deal breaker to you or extremely important you really should have established that earlier on and got it before you tied yourself to him with children (I get that in your current situation leaving isn’t easy - not over simply not getting your way)

Chances are that if he has this and hasn't updated it then it will all be left to his Mum/Dad who are his next of kin.

Not sure about pensions/death in service benefits, but any assets he has will go to his children if he dies intestate. And if they're minors, it will be put in trust for them, until they're 18.

But if his assets are over the inheritance tax limits, then that will have to be paid out of them first, before any goes to the children. Marriage would mean that inheritance tax wouldn't need to be paid.

OP, have you spoken to him about the legal protection side of things? Would he be willing to sign cohabitation agreements, write a will, arrange for pension/DIS benefits to go to you etc?
Mind you, those can all be changed, even if he did agree to it.

The "just a piece of paper" bullshit is the oldest excuse in the books, he must think you're stupid. It's also contradictory, as others have pointed out.

I do think that with his history, you were foolish to trust that he would marry you, and have children with him. But now this has come to light, and being that the house is in your name, I think you should consider carefully whether you still want to risk losing half your assets to him, by getting married.

adaline

"Men can lie and say they'll marry them one day in the future, but women still have a choice. They don't have to have unprotected sex or get pregnant if they don't want to. Of course contraception fails sometimes but if you don't want a baby outside of marriage there are loads of ways in which you can protect yourself from that."

So women bear all the responsibility of contraception and then if it fails they either have an abortion which they may not want or accept that the men they are with will never marry them? How about men take some bloody responsibility here?!

In the old days men would never get near a woman until they had proven they could provide for her and any children and had married her. One of the few things they did better, back then.

So women bear all the responsibility of contraception and then if it fails they either have an abortion which they may not want or accept that the men they are with will never marry them? How about men take some bloody responsibility here?!

Women are the ones who get pregnant, go through all the physical risks involved, go on maternity leave and in a lot of cases put their careers on hold in order to stay at home with their children. That's just simple biology.

If they are not happy to have children outside of marriage then of course it's their responsibility to stop that from happening! If two adults are in a consenting relationship and have unprotected sex, surely they're willingly accepting the risk of pregnancy and everything that comes with it? Men aren't holding guns to their heads and forcing them to have children outside of marriage - they're making that choice for themselves.

adaline

"And as for this Plenty of men in this day and age think it's fine to have the benefits of a wife without getting married. - what on earth? These women aren't forced to move in with men and have their babies at gunpoint, are they? They make those choices themselves! They choose to have children outside of marriage (not that there's ANYTHING wrong with that if both parties are happy with it) but you can't choose that life then complain it's not what you want afterwards."

How about not blaming women for men's bad behaviour? Lots of women get pregnant in long term relationships - it's unsurprising when the message from society is also "don't rush into things", "live with him first etc" and naturally expect that they will get married. It is frequently the catalyst for it. Its a problem for women only because they tend to be the lower earner and it "makes sense" for them to cut down their hours or give up work completely due to childcare costs for the couple. Many men know this and are happy for their partners to screw their earning potential, career progression and pension without giving them the security of marriage because they won't risk having to split their assets if they separate. It's totally calculated, spineless shitty behaviour. If you are happy to jeopardise your partner's future financial security, especially if that partner is the mother of your children - you don't love them.

How about not blaming women for men's bad behaviour? Lots of women get pregnant in long term relationships

Yes, and they make that choice. I've been in plenty of long-term relationships and never got pregnant or had a baby because I refused to have unprotected sex with a man I wasn't married to.

Women need to stop sleepwalking into these situations. They are choosing to live with men they're not married to and have their children - they're not being forced!

There's a poster every couple of weeks with these circumstances or frequently worse knightly...

OP what would happen if you gave him a list of all the things he/you need to do to gain the financial security of a married couple without being married, and ask him when you can start working through that? Would be balk at that too or be happy to do it all?

Zachary unfortunately women are the ones who get pregnant. If they also choose to buy into compromising their earning potential for a man they're not married to when they wanted to be married then it is indeed their lookout.

YoungLenny

"Then it’s up to women to make damn sure they are married before having children. It is on women, as it’s in their best interests to be married, and they should make sure it happens. Men wouldn’t get very far if no woman was playing that game, would they?"

Very much depends on the woman doesn't it? If she is the higher earner, owns property, assets, money etc and she can convince her partner to give up work or reduce his hours, why should she get married? Why shouldn't she be just as selfish and calculating as the men in that position?

And its on the men, because unmarried men don't get parental responsibility unless they register the birth with the mother. Something many only realise once they split and have to face going to court for PR/access.

In my opinion it's nothing to do with blaming women for men's behaviour.

It's about taking control of your own life and situation. Don't sleepwalk into a situation you're not happy with because of pressure from society or your partner. Make your own choices about your life and relationship and don't settle for something that ultimately is not what you want.

I agree, adaline. You can control your own life. You can't control another's or force her/him to do something he/she doesn't want.

I judge the men in such circumstances for their deceit and selfishness.

This doesn't mean it wasn't possible for the woman to avoid the situation in many cases, nor that women wouldn't be better served by making more self-interested decisions. The two things are separate.

@shitme

I know but this is exactly the same- engaged twice previously under same circumstances. One child- one on the way.

Literally the EXACT same circumstances!

Deal breaker for me. I've nearly been with my partner 5 years and i've said i'm not presuring him, but have said i won't wait forever.
Our dd has a double barralled surname for this reason

With respect @Lazypuppy how is it a deal-breaker if you had a child and are still together despite not being married?

@Lazypuppy
It’s obviously not a deal-breaker - you’re still with him and have a child.

If you wanted to be married, you should have done it before your DD was born. Otherwise if it doesn’t happen and you leave, you’re essentially punishing your DD for her father’s faliure to propose at this late date when he has no incentive, and your bad judgement in not getting married. How is that fair to her?

I don’t understand why women do this -
How can you possibly have children with a man, and then decide to leave him because he won’t propose? That decision should have been made before they were born. If it doesn’t happen, that sucks, but it’s not ok to disrupt your children’s lives and dump their fathers because you failed to demand what was necessary in the first place.

If my partner said he would never marry me then thats the deal breaker. At the moment he says he wants to marry me, and i have no reason to doubt him yet.

Having a baby was always more of a priority than marriage, i never wanted to be married before having a baby. We bought a house, got a puppy, had a baby and now marriage is next. marriage is important to me and he knows it, but i won't wait forever.

Good luck OP. If it's festering, you'd be better off exposing it now.

Get to a solicitor, get everything in place that could cover you as much as you can- POA (everyone should get), wills, make sure not to pay your salaries into a joint account, life insurance, savings ...

If he wanted to marry you he would have proposed by now, wouldn't he?

How long are you going to wait? Until your child is seven? Ten? Thirteen? Why is it okay to be unmarried now but not in five years?

And are you really leave your partner, sell your home and split your family up if he doesn't marry you by then?

I've only read your comments, OP, so don't know if anyone else has brought it up, but would you/he consider a civil partnership? I don't think they're available to heterosexual couples yet, but they should soon be.

Does it bother him that you're not each others' next of kin? If anything were to happen neither of you could decide for the other?

That neither of you will inherit from the other?

Have you wills?

@adaline

If he wanted to marry you he would have proposed by now, wouldn't he?
No, because as i said we had other things we both wanted to do 1st, marriage wasn't at the top of the list until now.

How long are you going to wait? Until your child is seven? Ten? Thirteen? Why is it okay to be unmarried now but not in five years?
Because i haven't been waiting 5 years (see comment above), we've been doing other things. If he hasn't proposed by next Xmas i'll be having a serious conversation. My dd is only 1yo.

And are you really leave your partner, sell your home and split your family up if he doesn't marry you by then?
Yes 100%. However, it wouldn't be me splitting the family up, it would have been him because he would have changed his mind about marriage.he's allowed to, but i'm allowed to go and meet someone who does want marriage then. I made it very clear to him when we met what i wanted, and he has always said he wants the same things.
I would bever stay in an unhappy relationship, imo that is worse for children than having parents apart but happy with other people

i'm allowed to go and meet someone who does want marriage then.

As long as you’re alright then. Don’t worry about the child.

My DP and I didn't want to get married. We thought we had covered things by making wills and I was named on his pension plan. Then he died suddenly when I was pregnant and so many things were made more difficult through not being married (including not being able to name him as father on DC2's birth cert).