to think children are a bigger commitment than marriage?

[FridaysChild90]

I hear so many people say with kids say they're not sure if they're ready to get married yet, despite already having dc with their other half. I see threads on here from women with DC, who say their partner is 'not ready' for marriage or dragging his feet.

Am I the only one who thinks it's bonkers for anyone to think marriage is a bigger commitment than having children?

If you get married and it doesn't work out, worst case scenario is you get divorced. Yes that can be costly, and the wealthier partner could lose money, but after that you never have to see the person again if you don't want to.

If you have children, you are tied to that person FOREVER, even if you split up. You will have to see them every birthday and Christmas, and maintain atleast a civil relationship with them to talk about arrangements with the children.

And then there's the financial aspect of it. Having a child itself is expensive, and then there's the adverse effects on (women's) careers. Both parents will need to pay for childcare and general parenting costs, and if they split up the costs are even more as they would both need to pay for their own housing too. One parent (usually the dad) will have to pay the other maintenance costs if they were married or not, while single mums have to earn enough to support herself and the children. There's no way a divorce costs more than this would in the long run.

And lastly, and most importantly, there's the affect on the child. Having a child means bringing a human being into this world who would will be affected by their parents actions. If a relationship breaks down, surely it's much harder to deal with when there's a child involved than if there's a piece of paper saying you're married?

Just curious as to why anyone would be okay to have a child with someone, but gets cold feet and runs for the hills whenever marriage is mentioned. I'm not saying divorce is a good thing, and of course marriages can break down, but marriage doesn't tie you to another person forever - a child does.

Marriage is a commitment to each other. Being a parent is a commitment to the child. Neither is more of a commitment, but a commitment to different people

This sums it up perfectly!!!!!

I think you are right but I don’t think people plan for children anywhere near as much as they plan their wedding party. Pregnancy should be a clearly thought out, planned event not a result of a temporary liaison. Sadly that’s not always what happens.
I believe the correct order is marriage, sufficient income, baby.

I always think if he won't marry you, don't have children with him! This is a big thing for me. I don't know why you would have children with a man who won't commit to you. It seems daft, but maybe I'm just old fashioned

YANBU, I think this all the time when I hear about people having kids together but being like when someone mentions marriage.
HOWEVER I am well aware not everyone wants to get married. Some people are quite happy to have kids and be together but never get married. This is obviously fine and if they both want this then that’s great.
It does occur to me though and I can’t see anyone has mentioned this already that obviously it’s possible to get pregnant accidentally but it isn’t possible to get married accidentally. I’m not judging here at all, I fully support anyone who chooses to have a baby whether it was conceived deliberately or not. Buuuuut... I think that might be one reason people end up having kids and not getting married. The having kids decision has already been made for them as they got pregnant accidentally but they aren’t choosing to get married because they probably wouldn’t have chosen to have a child with this person (or not til much later etc etc).

Children are not a bigger commitment than marriage. Either party can leave a relationship, married or not, children or not, at any given time they choose. Marriage is a protective legal agreement in the event of that relationship break up.

If a casual agreement is the same or better than a legal agreement, why so we have laws of contracts or legal rights?

But to use the same analogy but a different spin - renting is not a bigger commitment than a house purchase.

Having children involves zero legal commitment to the other person, whereas marriage does. Marriage is a contract that potentially gives the other partner significant rights over your assets, alive or dead, and that you can't get out of without court involvement and in most cases without the other person's assent too. Having a child with someone involves none of this at all. It does potentially allow the other parent a way to exert significant control and influence in your life if they want to, but it's also entirely possible for them to just walk away entirely, if male. There are plenty of parents, mostly women, who never face the Christmas and birthday issues you mention.

What you actually seem to be saying here is that having a child tends to have more impact on the mother's life in particular than marriage does, and a more permanent impact. That's true but it's not quite the same point as the one you're making.

You're right to regard people who won't marry a partner with whom they already have children and property because they're not ready for the commitment with suspicion, though.

You are acting on the presumption that everyone is a good parent. Many people just disappear or mostly disappear from their child’s life when they split up.

For women, yes. Men can and often do walk away from their DC when their relationship breaks down, women rarely have this option.

I completely agree with you. My husband and I are fully committed to one another and marriage didn't change that or our love. DD1 changed us and we love each other so much more. We got married when she was two. Really only so I'd share their surname. I was happy to change via deed poll but husband thought it was a good excuse for a party.

After I had DD2 I went to register her birth and was told I should reregister dd1 "as a product of our marriage" because apparently "children born out of wedlock aren't viewed the same anything happens to the parents". It pissed me off so much and I had such a rant at the registrar (although a polite one), we had dd1 because we are fully committed and we weren't more committed when we had DD2.

I agree with you OP, yet you see it time and time again! I could name so many people that do this. Incredibly odd! There’s no way I’d have children without being married first, I needed that security & commitment. I’ve seen men just bugger off completely too many times leaving their children with their ex partner. A colleague of mine is always complaining about her useless ex who is a useless father. If he is that appalling why on earth did you have 3 children with him? Whyyyyy?
I know I’m going to get flamed for this.

I agree.

I think part of the problem is that people think living together affords you common law rights when it doesn’t. Also I think a lot of the legal rights don’t really matter so much unless you have property or money. If you live in rented accommodation and neither of you has a great job or a pension or other investments then you’ve not really got any assets to worry about should you split.

CherryPavlova

Totally agree with you there. I'd get flamed in RL for this but the only time a pregnancy is unplanned is when you've used contraception and it's failed. I know one couple who used something each time only for it not to work (including the snip) if you don't use anything then in my eyes, you've tried for a baby. If someone doesn't want to get married, then that's different but to find every excuse under the sun as to why they won't get married even they they want to makes me wander why when they've had a baby with that person.

If he is that appalling why on earth did you have 3 children with him?
In fairness even married women can find out they’ve had kids with an arsehole once the kids are here.

Because not all children are planned, shocker I know. My first was conceived whilst I was using contraception. And because I don't want to get married. Never have, never will. This decision should be respected as much as people who don't want to have children but it doesn't seem to be.

As PPs have pointed out, you can walk away from children at any point, and people (let's face it, mostly men) do all the time. You can end a marriage but you cant just wander off.

You would think so but for many I don't think it's the case.

So many are born without a thought. There are a large number who don't support their children financially, both resident and non resident parents. There's no penalty for that so no deterant for failing to provide and no shame in letting the state pick up the cost.

Marriage, whilst a legal commitment, seems to have lost a little of its meaning in recent years. It's all about the flash proposal and the big day, many just want that rather than think about the actual vows and what it means.

I think it really depends on what marriage means to you and what raising a child means to you. For me personally I think they are an equal commitment level that go hand in hand, but that's just my view and I wouldn't necessarily expect others to share it. We're all just doing our own thing, so I try not to worry too much about other people's lives.

You are basing your argument on a very rose tinted view of parental dynamics post split.

The unmarried parents I’ve known to split the dads never pay any/enough maintenance, contact is minimal or or facilitated by grandparents or aunts.

Unmarried fatherhood isn’t the commitment for men that marriage is.

I think it's time that we pushed for the model of criminalising non payment of child support

Hear Hear

Non payment is state sanctioned child abuse!

If you have children, you are tied to that person FOREVER, even if you split up. You will have to see them every birthday and Christmas, and maintain atleast a civil relationship with them to talk about arrangements with the children.

Yes but only in an admin way. You don't have to have sex with them, think about their emotions etc etc.

As a pp said having a child is a commitment to the child and having a marriage is a commitment to a person.

So I think you are muddled in your thinking.

To me, getting married is a commitment to your partner, having a child with them the commitment is to the child

Bollocks.

I am totally committed to my DS. His father has never met him ( his choice).

You can put a lot of commitment or no commitment into both. But yes, you're more tied to someone you have a baby with. You can't turn your back on a bad dad who wants to be around..

Actually that makes you right! Sorry.