Father of my children does not want to marry me!

[Jessil91]

So my BF of almost ten years who I live with and have two lovely children with does not believe in marriage. This wasn’t made clear to me til a few a days ago when we were for talking about it ( I just kind of assumed we would get married at some point given circumstances). I’ve never been a massive marriage advocate per se but I can’t help but feel really depressed and down about it, like he doesn’t want me or take our relationship seriously. I know that may sound silly since we have children together but I can’t help how I feel. There’s this feeling of rejection, like the man I love doesn’t love me enough to marry me. I communicated this with him and he turned round and said that his not believing in marriage is not personal and that he felt a little offended because I seemed more bothered about marriage then just being with him. But that’s not the case, I just believe in marriage and what it stands for and I want to legalise our relationship. I must add that he’s a great Dad and we have a healthy relationship otherwise.

Am I being stupid??? Any advice would be greatly appreciated !!

nothing will change if you get married

wrooooooooooooooooooong.

Many of you will remember the story I've told many times before of my best friend.

Précis
Lived together 25yrs
4 kids at the time 22, 24, 18 , 16
Husband started as photocopy boy at bank.
Ended as director of own venture capital company.
Friend was the ultimate 'corporate wife' although didn't work outside the home since birth of first child.
She begged for marriage but he 'didn't believe' in it. Saw 'too many happy relationships crumble after marriage '
He met 26 yr old Latvian on Business in Dubai.
He married her within 12 weeks if meeting as 'is Catholic and felt funny about the sex without marriage!! '
Friend entitled to CM for 2 children for a month then 1 child for 2 yrs.
Entitled to stay in HIS house for 2 yrs until youngest 18
(At this point all 4 still dependent as eldest at Uni)
Upon marriage the new wife had a beneficial interest in the family home. Something my friend , who had painted, decorated and furnished it - would never have.

She got NOTHING . After 25 yrs and 4 kids.
Now has a small housing association flat. Whilst Ex , Latvian and New baby live in the £850k home .

Cool, wasn't much work and expense at all though.

Sadly inheritance tax will never be an issue for us

I cant believe that it wasn't much work or expense. Even for simple things solicitors are expensive. Unless you actually haven't done anything but make a will, which can be inexpensive.

Things may change and inheritance tax may well become an issue, you never know.

Thanks for more of your comments, it’s most helpful.

I disagree with the comments about me being vulnerable or being silly for not getting married prior to having children. As I explained in my second post, we have taken necessary security and financial precautions so that we are both secure.

If we split up - he legally has to pay for the children as he has parental responsibility and both our names are on the house of which we have both contributed 50%

If one of us dies - the other gets the money and we have life insurance

I still need to look into next of kin and pensions etc.

But tbh it’s more just a case of legally recognising the relationship. Everything is just clearer and simpler if we split or one of us dies. And it’s probably just more cost effective to go to a registry office and get it done in one hit then it is to do it all separately. It’s also a lot less complex in general.

I think when he gets in from work tonight I’m just going to say that I don’t care about a big fancy wedding. And if he doesn’t agree in marriage as an institution that’s fine, civil partnerships for heterosexual couples are in force from May. We can just get a civil partnership. It costs about £40 if it’s just the two of you with two witnesses. And if he wants a proper wedding, we can just go ahead and do it later when we have the money.

What’s everyone think of that?

Well tbf expense/work is subjective, but it wasn't (I will add "for us") and it achieved what we wanted so all's fine.

And it is nice to daydream re: inheritance tax, but it honestly will never be an issue. It would be a nice problem to have though!

jessil he may legally have to pay for the children, but that's not as easy as you're imagining it to be. You only have to look at threads on here to see how easy it is to get out of paying maintenance, how to find the loopholes, play the system etc which is what a lot of NRP's do.

The CMS will chase NRP's for payments, and eventually will do a deduction of earnings straight from their wage, but that takes a long time and it doesn't stop the NRP quitting their job and you getting a 5er a week for 2 kids.

It also doesn't dictate anything about contact, and whilst the ball would presumably be in your court with that, I think its always good to have court ordered regular contact because people don't stick to verbal agreements they made previous to splitting up in my experience.

Don’t forget he can change his Will without telling you and if something happens to him, you’re screwed.

Yes a married man could also change his Will but his wife would still be entitled to the marital assets in Law, no Will could change that.

Once civil partnerships are open to all, I think me and DH will likely divorce and get one.

But if you object to the misogynistic roots of marriage, surely you should object to the homophobic roots of civil partnerships as well? Why is misogyny wrong but homophobia is just fine?

Civil partnerships for straight couples are only being brought in as a "fuck you" to same-sex couples. It's meant to appeal to the people who say, "Why is there no International Men's Day? Why is there no White History Month? Why are there no Straight Pride Parades?"

If we split up - he legally has to pay for the children as he has parental responsibility

He would have to pay even if he wasn't on the certificate and had PR... It's just easier for them to string it out for a bit

On the many, many previous threads on this subject, it's sometimes suggested that we should have a law similar to what I believe they have in Australia, namely that if you live together for more than ?2 years you have rights over the other partner's assets in the event of his/her death or if you split up.

The problem with that is it makes life much more complicated for people on a second or subsequent partnership if they want their children from the first partnership to inherit.

E.g. Ann and Bob are married, two children. Bob dies. Ann eventually meets Chris. He moves in with her. Ann wants her house to go her children. Ann doesn't marry Chris, to make sure he has no claim on the house.

Australian-type law would say after two years Chris should have a claim, whether Ann wants that or not.

Is that fair?

Personally I think it should always be an active choice whether to tie yourself to someone else financially and legally, not just something that's happened without you realising it was in the offing.

@you - would be just as easy if he had changed your name to yours or if you had picked a new name or double barrelled. I have travelled extensively and never had a query as to why my dd have a different name.

It’s sad that women still feel the need to erase their identity cos it’s “easier” when it’s obviously not. I wonder if many women still see it as an achievement to have their husbands name (same as we always see the smug marrieds on these threads going on about how they found a man to support them).

@cave - that’s rubbish I’m afraid. A married person can will their assets to whoever they like in England.

@cave

That is utter rubbish

My partner and I talked about getting married on our first date!hes been married before but I haven’t I’m not fussed either way but he 100% doesn’t want to do it I can see both sides to this-you need to sit down and really talk about it-why is it so important to you and so important for him not to? Good luck xxx

I wonder if many women still see it as an achievement to have their husbands name (same as we always see the smug marrieds on these threads going on about how they found a man to support them

weird assumption to make, for me, dps other kids have his name, so consequently so did ours (which was fine by me) and when we get married I will have his name too. To me it just signifies we are a family.

If he didn't have kids from a prev relationship with his name, theres just as much of a chance that our child and him would have my name, or double barrelled. Its nothing to do with achievement.

Also, saying "smug marrieds" is pretty offensive to people who are offering good advice on marriage and its benefits. Its nothing to do with having a man "support you" of course some people do, some people just don't want to get fucked over and left with 3 kids and no job and no money, yeno.

It's worrying that he says he'll marry you if it means that much to you, but then immediately puts obstacles in the way of actually getting married. That's what he's doing by insisting on the "big wedding", "doing it properly", because that is an expensive way to get married, and takes time to organise, instead of a couple of hundred quid, and 3 weeks.

I don't believe he WILL marry you.

I have to agree with pp, he just does not want to marry you. At least not when he can have his cake and eat it too. Why would he want to marry you when you already gave him everything he wanted with out any promises etc. Perhaps you might get what you want if you put your foot down etc. However, it may be the case where he still won't marry you. But I have heard stories like this before...and then they go on to marry the next person...

Or another couple, the wife wanted kids and at 39 her husband said he definitely did not want kids. So she divorced him as she thought she would just do it herself etc. She got lucky and met someone soon after and managed to get pregnant naturally, and years later she heard through the grapevine that her partner remarried and low and behold, and two children with the new partner!

Or the times when men are dating a women says "I'm just not ready for a relationship." They just mean, I am not ready for a relationship with YOU!

Men who "don't believe in marriage" are just keeping their options open

This isn’t true. I know many people who have absolutely no desire to get married, it’s not because they are wildly promiscuous.

I also want to say that I was married to my ex, we have three DC. He still only pays me bare minimum in maintenance, barely sees the DC and I got fuck all from our divorce because I was the higher earner by a long shot. Marriage did not protect me or my DC, I did that all by myself.

Forgot to mention, about a year after I started dating my dh, (after talks of him saying he wanted to marry me and was serious) I got notice of having to move out of my apartment, which I was just renting a room from with friends, so it would be difficult to find another place and friend to live with (one couple was getting married and moving to a place alone after marriage) and the other person was moving country. So anyway, when my dh (boyfriend at the time) suggested I just rent a place somewhere near by him (even though I spent most of the year at his place every night anyway and my room was pretty much always empty!) I pretty much said, either we move into together or thats it (in a nicer way then it sounds lol)....I explained that he said he was serious, he has a two bedroom to himself....he is 34 so not like he is young and needs space....he is at the age where he wants to settle down etc. Anyway, lets just say, I never rented another place and that was that....now married 2 kids, a dog and a third dc on the way....

But you are in a more difficult situation, as its more difficult to walk away as you are a family etc. But its also not fair he doesn't give you the security of marriage.

I think your idea of asking him about a cheap wedding is a good one, OP. That should give you an idea of where you stand.

Surely OP, it isn't about what anyone on AIBU thinks, it's down to you and your partner!

Something doesn't ring true for me though, he's talked about weddings etc and now 'doesn't believe in marriage'?? There's just something I can't put my finger on

Marriage protected me and my DCs when I divorced their DF. When I married my 2nd DH I insisted on our property being owned as tenants in common rather than joint tenants, to make sure whatever happened, my property assets go where my will says they should. We have one joint current account and separate current and savings accounts. Plus I’ve made sure that life insurance, mortgage protection and salary protections are in place for each of us too. Marriage makes many things simpler, but I’m also personally making sure that each of us and our DCs from our previous relationships are protected. I’m not relying on laws alone.

valanice not wishing to side track the thread but I'd genuinely not come across the idea that straight couples are being homophobic if they get a civil partnership. I am certainly aware that the original existence of civil partnerships stems from homophobia and the initial refusal to allow gay couples to marry. But you would consider it actively homophobic to use a new legal instrument that you prefer to the old one due to its more equal treatment of the two parties signing it?

tell him
“The next time we have sex I will be married “
Stick to it .its your body and your life...
If he ends it ,rather than marry you,he was always going to end it eventually.