Not assuming at all simply responding and even asking questions for clarity on certain points based on what people are posting - quite the opposite of assuming actually.
"Not that it is any of your business but the account is joint" which account? The children's? If so that still doesn't answer any of the questions I asked. And no you don't have to answer, but for your and your DCs sake I'd recommend you know the answers yourself - and by checking with the bank/a lawyer not just your partners say so
"My MIL would be the childcare as she is now" thats YOU assuming she'd still be willing to and you'd actually want her to. Splits can quickly and unexpectedly become acrimonious it's rare they're completely amicable. I think you're naive to assume this arrangement would continue. Even in cases of bereavement I've seen such arrangements falter
"Yes I am on the mortgage and i know he would not kick up about who leaves if were to split." I asked if your previous statement about the family home meant you weren't on the tenancy or mortgage I didn't assume. Though it did suggest you likely weren't from how you worded. You STILL absolutely CANNOT "guarantee" how he'll behave at all! As myself and others have said and the proof of this as I said before is hundreds of women who have been through a split, thought their now ex wouldn't behave in certain ways, only to find they're then completely screwed! Don't be naive
"I dont quite understand why you're jumping on the 'legal' bandwagon when the OP is about commitment to be married?" Because words are cheap. Saying you're committed is meaningless without backing it up legally. So very very often on these very boards women post about men they are living with, having children with, supporting the man's career by being a sahm, sacrificing a lot for the man's benefit...BUT he won't marry them. Then he "leaves" (often for a younger woman), except it's the 1st woman has to find somewhere else for her and the kids to live at her own expense, has to drag any pittance of child maintenance out of him, and certainly doesn't get any settlement or financial recognition of all they've done. Why? Because he was never really committed to the first woman
"I feel very sorry for you. Such a shame you have had to married just to feel secure and that your 'legally' entitled to whatever you're after."
ODFOD! That's not why I married! I married because we loved each other, were committed to each other at the time and it was right for our relationship
"Myself and partner have morals. When children are involved myself nor my partner would be so selfish to bicker over materialistic things" oh ffs you really ARE that naive! It's not a case of 'bickering over materialistic things' it's a case of the REALITY of being responsible enough to ensure your child/rens security in terms of NEEDS - housing, food, clothes, heat, light... Things your children will still need in the event of your relationship breaking down but could be damn hard for you to sort if you're an unmarried sahm with no assets put out on your ear by your now ex - which can and does happen - a lot
"He would support the children as would I and I would be more than capable of supporting myself." again you've NO guarantee of that. Even with cms it can be murder getting cm even WITH everything clear cut on paternity and his earnings (many nrps exploit loopholes to avoid paying) and you don't know that you could continue in your current job depending on certain circumstances
"Think you have too much time on your hands....I havent even read the bible length story after my part because in actual fact it's boring and people like you bore me. You must lead a very boring life." that just makes you sound defensive (because you're realising how vulnerable you and your kids are?) and that you know you've lost the argument
It makes no odds to me what you do or don't read - but not properly informing yourself or preparing yourself for the most likely eventualities (many relationships break down, in all relationships one of you eventually dies) is naive, ignorant and irresponsible. And you don't just have yourself to consider.
"i do think it’s esssential to discuss the big issues early on and establish what each other’s definitive ideological positions are" while I agree to a point what many are failing to acknowledge is that people's ideological positions change. Especially if influenced by someone else. Again one only needs to read the relationship, divorce and lone parent boards to see how much people can change in the aftermath of a split.