Marriage vs living together (breaking the wealth taboo!)

[Elderflowerasusualthxs]

This follows from another thread started earlier just a few days ago and related to women who have v wealthy men by their side. I would like to know what's your real opinion when...

A) Women legally married (wife) with a wealthy man.
B) Women living together (partner) with a wealthy man but they have kids.

I know people in one or the other situation but for the sake of your future security and that of your children I'm sure marriage beats partnership and if people want the rights of married couples, then get married.
Would you be willing to accept to be the partner of a wealthy man if they don't want to marry? I know some mums living long term with partners, who won’t get married for various reasons and I respect it but I think is a mistake. A child means you are committed to the child, not necessarily to each other.
Aibu to consider that cohabitation/ living together does not have the same importance as being married, particularly when the man is the affluent and the woman depends entirely on him? Just another point of view.

I would strongly prefer marriage before shared financial commitments (beyond rent/bills) and DC, and if had DC and wasn’t married wouldn’t work PT or SAH. Too much risk otherwise.

I might accept not being married but living with any man, but not if we have children. Marriage is insurance. Going about life with zero insurance is insanity.

What's the reason for the man not wanting to marry the woman who shares his bed and is mother of his children?

Is the woman equally committed to not marrying?

Tbh if a man says a woman is good enough to share his bed and give birth to his children but not good enough to marry because he's rich, he's an egotistical, possibly narcissistic nob and nobody with an ounce of self respect would stay in that relationship.

However if both partners were against the institution of marriage from the start and put legal measures in place to ensure the children would always be generously provided for regardless of what happened to their parents relationship it would be a far more acceptable set up. That arrangement would require some very hard headed legal planning before bringing children into it and absolutely on no account should the woman allow herself to get into a position where she was not independent - no handy sahm facilitating rich guy's career by being default parent and housekeeper.

I absolutely would not accept being the partner of a wealthy man if he wanted me to have his children but wouldn't marry me because he wanted to protect his money, no. I'd rather be single or with a normal man who saw me as an equal partner than with a rich egomaniac who saw me as a an inferior disposable gold digger even when I was the mother of his mutually planned and wanted children!

I would never get married again and I don’t think it’s good to be financially dependant on anyone so I would not put myself in that position either.

I think if you can’t commit to marriage then why have kids - to me they are the non-negotiable commitment. Dh and I got married for visa reasons - we couldn’t have stayed together otherwise - well not easily and being together was what we wanted most, marriage was pretty much a legal instrument for us. The kids came later but the marriage would always have to come first.

Regardless of your partner's wealth, you should always have a 'fuck it' fund as a woman. 3-6 months living expenses (or more) in case you need to leave. Easier said than done obviously, saving is hard.

For me I see nothing wrong with living with a partner and having kids together, I think it's equal to being married (except from the legal standpoint) but I would never have children with someone who wouldn't marry me, or at least provide some legal security for the children and myself if the relationship dissolves especially if our finances were so different. I wouldn't trust someone who wouldn't put that important stuff in some sort of legal contract. It would feel like a basic violation of our relationship to not have that mutual respect and trust around money.

We weren't rich growing up, but my mother was a SAHM. My dad always made sure she had full access to his paycheque, always had a good, safe car to drive. He trusted she wouldn't be wasteful with the money he earned (she wasn't) and she trusted that he wouldn't just rip it away from her leaving her with nothing (and the marriage helped ensure that).

It's not about wealth to me, I earn more than DH, possibly always will due to him retraining and completely changing careers.
I still refused to have children without being married and we didn't buy a property together until we were engaged and the wedding was booked and pretty much paid for. I owned a flat prior to that he payed rent to me as he would've if he stayed privately renting, but it cost him a hell of a lot less than market rate. I also have no intention of jeopardising my career, intellectual development or financial independence because I had a baby, men aren't expected to.
DH and I now both consolidate our full time hours and both have a day off mid week, the other three days are covered by a combination of nursery and grandparents. This arrangement to me is fair, if we ever divorce he will be entitled to half, and yes I've contributed more financially but it doesn't mean he doesn't work as hard and we're equals in every other way so I'm ok with that.

@flirtygirl obviously that happens, and happens way more often than it should but it's not the only or inevitable consequence of a breakdown of a relationship. There are men who happily continue to support their family after they've split up, it does happen and just because they're decent people and not because they're forced by the courts/government.
I'm not being "not all men" about it just pointing out that it is possible to have a relationship without getting married and not be left completely in the shit when it breaks down.
Still more sensible to have some legal protection though rather than relying on that, and marriage is the cheapest way to do that.

What age should your child start paying for their own haircuts? My boy (14) has his own money and wants a new haircut. Should I give him the Money for it or should he pay?

Perhaps if we stop subscribing to the men work and women don’t and aim to be financially equal then it wouldn’t matter. Children are a choice and quitting work or going part time is also a choice.

Absolutely this

Choices aren’t made in a vacuum. Most men are not willing to make work compromises on becoming fathers. They assume they will continue to work as though they have no DC. So mothers have to choose between working PT, not travelling etc and taking the career / earnings hit, or using a LOT of childcare (nannies, since most childminders and nurseries close at 6).

Choices aren’t made in a vacuum. Most men are not willing to make work compromises on becoming fathers. They assume they will continue to work as though they have no DC. So mothers have to choose between working PT, not travelling etc and taking the career / earnings hit, or using a LOT of childcare (nannies, since most childminders and nurseries close at 6).

Or not having kids

In essence marriage is a legal and financial contract so if you have significant assets ; property, investments , capital holdings etc then half of all that . maybe more , is at risk. Viewed in those terms , coupled with the fact that 50% or marriages fail, then you'd be mad to sign up for it. I know several people, men and women, who see no advantage in getting married at all.

I didn’t marry my “wealthy” dp although we have a ds together a) because I have no desire to be married and b) I soon discovered that although he had a high income, he had no financial sense at all, and I didn’t want me or ds to have to rely on him.

I earn enough to keep me, ds and the house. Being financially separate was the more sensible option.

I didn’t think twice about being unmarried and pregnant. I didn’t consider what would happen if we split as we were in love! Not everyone is cynical!

We married when ds1 was 12 months old, dh felt funny about not being married. I wasn’t bothered.

If your relationship is right whether you’re married or not shouldn’t be a consideration.

Sure, not having DC is an option. But many of us wanted DC! And lots of men don’t reveal their attitudes pre living together/marriage DC, or lie.

Good to ask Qs/discuss. DH was honest pre marriage / DC that should we have DC he was unwilling to work PT. That pissed me off! barring ill health or DC with additional needs neither of us wanted to be sole earner. Neither was willing to be a “trailing spouse” within the Uk or abroad, or do all weekday parenting regularly while the other travelled.

Wanting financial protection in the event of a breakup (or illness or death) isn’t “cynical” or an indicator that a woman is less in love than one who takes the (massive) risks. More than half cohabitating relationships break down.

I am another one who doesn't see the relevance of 'wealth'. No way was I buying a house together and having children until we were married. I earn more than dh, but whether I did or not I wouldn't have given up my career either. Since having children, I have completed a degree and nearly finished an MSc and have had several promotions. This would be the case even if dh was a high earner as my career is important to me.

So mothers have to choose between working PT, not travelling etc and taking the career / earnings hit, or using a LOT of childcare

many women don't want to chose, I have seen so many friends in tears when it was time to go back to work FT, as per their choice, and who decided that spending time with their baby was a lot more important.

Nothing wrong with not wanting to think about your career for as many years as you think your children will benefit from you being around.

When the mother has already been on maternity leave for a year, the father has 0 choice but keep working full time to support the family. It's the mother who benefits, not exactly the dad is it.

A lot more important than retaining financial independence? Almost no new fathers choose to give that up.

So mothers have to choose between working PT, not travelling etc and taking the career / earnings hit, or using a LOT of childcare (nannies, since most childminders and nurseries close at 6).

You can choose not to have kids with a sexist who thinks he'll just carry on and the mother will be the one to compromise her financial independence. You can choose to be a mature adult and talk and discuss and agree such things before having children and if you find out later your spouse has lied to you and changed the goalposts, make the decision not to enable them by compromising your financial independence and also to not further procreate with a chauvinist.

Giving up your financial independence is a choice in such cases. Doing so for a 'partner' leaves you very vulnerable.

I was part of a cohabiting couple and have a son with complex special needs and health issues- two heart surgeries and possibly more, numerous hospital appointments at different hospitals for different reasons and admissions to hospital, having a year of school ILL as well as the many other meetings with school etc.etc. make it impossible to work especially as I don’t have any family support. I also feel like I’m “on call” and have even been known to drive 20 minutes to school with hair dye in my hair after an urgent call from them.
I was with my ex partner for 20 years he has two successful dental practices and has been able to carry on paying into his very lucrative pension pot as well as continue to be a high earner while my pension is virtually nothing. If I was lucky to hold a job down(because of my responsibilities) I will probably be on a minimum wage. However I do have a roof over my head because my name was on the mortgage, had it not been I would not have been entitled to anything.
The law is very unfair to cohabiting couples and it is most often the woman/caregiver who is at a disadvantage. You have no rights to anything, it is totally unfair! I would say from experience if you are a woman who has children with a man and you are a Sahm(or vice versa) and they are high earners, get married, it’s the safest and wisest thing to do.