To be a sahm if we aren't married?

[NotReadyForThisX2]

More would I be really I suppose and I think I would be but Dp thinks otherwise.

Unexpectedly pregnant with a seconds Dc, Ds is only five months. We've vaguely discussed a few options but Dp keeps coming back to me staying home until they both or at least Ds start school.
We could afford it and it could in fact be the cheaper option compared to childcare X2 and getting a cleaner in or outsourcing ironing or something to ease the pressure.

I'm actually loving being home with Ds a lot more than I thought I would and Dp does pull his weight, he's not suggesting it to get out of any cleaning/childcare etc.

But we aren't married and I don't want to get married now I'm pregnant or because I'm pregnant. We are planning on doing so though and Dp would do it as soon as possible if I wanted.

I don't need to decide anything just yet, but I'm still on maternity leave and if I'm wanting to go back after the second one. I'm thinking it will be better to go back from this leave earlier and I'll need to tell work as soon as possible.

My career's not one that's particularly hard to get back on track, but I do enjoy it and wasn't planning on staying home. But I want to stay off for the year with Ds and the thought of juggling work with two under two is quite daunting.
The easy solution seems to be stay home for the next few years.
I'd be stupid to give up work without the protection of marriage though, wouldn't I? Or maybe stupid to even with marriage, I don't know!

You would if he didn't die before you sold it OP. If the joint tenancy were severed and he died while you owned as tenants in common, it would go to whoever he left it to.

I'm not saying this is especially likely, although it has happened more than zero times. But if there's one thing that's certain is that we're all going to die, and it is something you should be aware of. The main thing is it should be an informed decision.

If you are a professional, staying at home will mean you will start getting out of date in what you do, and will reduce your chances of getting back to work at the same level, which in turn reduces your earning power, increases your dependence on your DP to 100%, decreases the ability to provide a better standard of living for the kids and if things go wrong, you won’t be able to provide for your kids.

There is only one decision I fully regret in my life and that is becoming a SAHM. My son doesn’t remember the baking, the park visits, etc he can only see things as they are now. I’m a divorced mother raising him on her own with very limited means. The only thing that saved us from a life in hardship was that little contract called marriage, otherwise we would have ended up living under a bridge as soon as the ex moved on with his life.

I’m sorry to say this but if he wants you to stay at home, he better gets on one knee or at least arrange to for a quick marriage with no fuss. Becoming a SAHM is a bad idea but becoming one while unmarried is suicidal. Never put all your eggs on one basket.

Depending on what you earn the savings might cover the shortfall/lots of it from staying home then?

No, not unreasonable at all if that’s what you want to do and it works for your family.

That was my original plan @Mookatron. But i feel like I've to go back earlier so I'm not just going back and leaving a month later. Then that means missing my time with Ds and putting him in nursery and getting him settled for what will be a few months. Seems silly and I don't think I'll qualify for maternity pay again and might have to pay back the extra I've been paid for this leave. I'm not sure on all that as I don't want to tell work yet so it's difficult to find out exactly.

You own half of the house. You have substantial savings. You have life insurance. You have a pension. You have a job you can easily return to.

Wait, enjoy your time with your dc and have the wedding you want next year, the risks are very small.

Yes I do see the difficulty. I had a small gap with my two, though not as small as you, and it did feel like taking the piss a bit even though I only did what I was entitled to.

I suppose the risks are small if you plan to get married soon after your second, but I will tell you this for free: planning a wedding with two small kids is a fucking nightmare!

OP, can I asked why you posted this?

You seem to have your mind made up and won’t listen to advice.

OP, do you plan to go back to work between now and you have dc2? Will you get a second maternity leave package? If so, you said you were planning on getting married next year, could you not get married whilst on mat leave with dc2? Then if married you could hand in notice to work, and if not married you still have the option of returning to work if you want. You don't need to hand in notice at work now or make decisions about getting married either.

I am a sahm and dh is a very high earner. It made sense for me to give up my job and I was happy to do so, but after we got married and he understood that. I also ensure that some shares etc we have were transferred over into my name. He can have his career because I run the home, but I refuse to do it without some sort of security. I would absolutely get married now. Even if it’s on paper and don’t tell anyone and have a big party and renewal later. Whatever, but don’t leave yourself vulnerable as honestly I’ve seen the nicest men and women and seemingly happiest relationships turn on a dime and they can get very nasty very quickly (speaking from experience)

Obviously it's a financial risk for you.

I haven't made up my mind at all @BoomTish. I'm thinking through a few different options at the moment and trying to weigh them up.
I'm making a note of things to look into like inheritance tax etc.
My ideal solution would be being able to take my full year mat leave like I was planning and then start my next year mat leave for this baby, so Ds wouldn't have to settle in nursery to stop again. With work keeping my job available and being ok about it. Then me deciding after my second year off what I want to do. I'm just not sure that's possible!

If I do stay home it's in the shorter term 2-3 years. It's not so Dp can focus solely on his career and mine gets forgotten completely. I'm purely considering it to make the first few years with two Dc close together a bit easier. So we don't have to pay for and settle Ds into a nursery he won't be staying at and so I don't have to go back to work, pick my work load back up to then go off on another mat leave.

I don't want to be a sahm forever, I'm not sure I even want to be for a few years. But I'm very worried about having two very young dc and trying to juggle them and work.

I would plump for your ideal then. As long as it doesn't cost them extra they may well be up for it.

If OP has more savings and a larger pension than her DP arguably she’s more at risk if they marry.

A joint tenancy can be severed and the share left to anybody DP fancies regardless of whether they are married or not!

Being married does not prevent OP’s DP distributing his assets on death, via his will however he likes! It’s not a dead cert. You all seem to be missing the point that if he turns into an arsehole he still has automny over his assets. Yes, it might be easier to challenge but it’s not clear cut!

Your DP sounds pretty decent from what you’ve posted, OP. Especially him offering to move the joint savings to your name.

Yes, of course people do sometimes change... but based on all you know about him and his history with exes, has he ever behaved in a bad way (eg cheating) even (or perhaps especially?!) if just during the separation process? How people conduct themselves in previous relationships can often be a useful indicator of how they will treat you if the worst happened.

I do have a couple of friends who have became SAHM despite not being married and things are still fine for them a few years on. Yes there are risks and no one can predict the future, but if you’re with someone who has a track record for being a decent and honest person it bodes far better than the alternative.

Good luck whatever you decide to do.

Don’t feel guilty about having two maternity leaves close together. In some ways it might be easier for your work if they can just keep a maternity cover on, than if you came back and had a second maternity leave a year later. You should still be entitled to the same benefits as it’s length of service. When you’ve had a year at home with two dc you will have had a chance to get married and a much better idea of whether you want to be a Sahm long term.
I’m unmarried with two dc but have never stopped working.

Also while you are on maternity leave a second time you will still be getting pension contributions, accruing holiday and time in employment for your CV.

Being married makes it more difficult for OPs DP to distribute his assets on death however he likes. Marriage actually does reduce the level of autonomy he has over his assets. Entering into a marriage contract with someone does that. Of course, it also does the same for OP...

My ideal solution would be being able to take my full year mat leave like I was planning and then start my next year mat leave for this baby, so Ds wouldn't have to settle in nursery to stop again.

LOL! if this was true id get pregnant right now and transfer to your company
I dont think this is possible. You can take extended unpaid mat leave once your stay is up, but then to qualify for mat leave for your second child you would need to be back at work for a minimum amount of time.

www.maternityaction.org.uk/advice-2/mums-dads-scenarios/pregnancy-during-maternity-leave/ this is helpful for the actual law.

I’m a Sahm and unmarried. Ds is only 3 months old and we’re in no rush. There are no assets between us so it’s not about money. I do want to get married before I have another dc but I’m not fussed on a fairytale wedding. Nevertheless, I’d like to have a good time and want my ds to “walk” me down the isle, so it will have to be in at least 2 years (lots of family contention about this issue so it’s my way of resolving the situation). I think so long as you have a supportive family and deeply trust your dp then you are fine to leave it for a while. I’m very close to my mother in law and dp’s family so that adds extra security for me.

People on Mumsnet over egg the protection of marriage.

• ‘Next of kin’ is whoever you nominate whilst able and the nhs take a broad view on who can make decisions in worst case scenarios.
• Pension you can nominate in lots of company schemes; i think you already said you checked this
• house you can protect when you buy it so it passes to you in the event of death and you are considered to own equal parts (the daily mail article cited upthread showed that the unmarried woman WAS protected as HE was suing HER for a larger share; the law was upheld supporting her entitlement to a half share.)
• other assets, allocate in a will. The ‘he could change it’ brigade should search for the thread on here where the husband did exactly that, leaving money in trust to his sister for his dc, and the wife found out only when she stumbled across a document
• the widows allowance was challenged in court recently and the court found in the unmarried woman’s favour though this is being challenged by government

In cases of will changes and pension changes, marriage will give you a stronger legal case to fight on should you need to but it’s not a guarantee that your husband has to be open and fair about financial arrangements.

I think the only thing that really protects women is having an independent income.

To be fair, I should have mentioned the tax advantage of marriage too should your assets be of that level

You should, and there were a couple of other bits missing from that post. As explained upthread, buying a house as joint tenants doesnt mean one persons share will go to the other on death, because the joint tenancy can be unilaterally severed. It is protection only as long as the other person wants to give it to you. Like the will of a cohabitant. The wife in the thread where the husband left money to his sister will, if she's in this jurisdiction, have a stronger case to challenge it.

People do talk a load of guff on here about next of kin though.