AIBU to think why did this couple just get married

[Gin96]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51676780

@DCOkeford

Maybe that’s because us happily un-married women don’t need the advice you provide?

I’ve protected myself as much as possible financially, but I simply don’t believe in the idea of essentially being forced to get married.

That's entirely your lookout. Just don't expect the law to kowtow to your beliefs.

RE life insurance: surely life insurance goes to the next of kin? So if you are not married it wouldn't nessecarily go to your partner?
I have LI but no mortgage, so I don't know if it's different in that regard.

As someone who is a SAHM and not married, I find this thread highly amusing

Let’s hope nothing happens that makes you laugh on the other side of your face then.

@Pentium85

If you are an unmarried mother, and think this was a sensible choice, then you are desperately, desperately in need of advice.

RE life insurance: surely life insurance goes to the next of kin?

Legally, there is no such concept as 'next of kin'

Its yet another myth.

Pentium95

So what is making you laugh about this thread? It seems to me there is a pretty serious issue about women's rights and how women with children can be fucked over either by their partners, by their own ignorance of their legal position or by their obdurate refusal to take steps to protect their rights and their children's rights.

I don't find any of them funny.

Jesus. Shut anyone down who doesn’t follow what is the ‘right’ way.

I know my choice, I know every element of it, but I still believe we shouldn’t be forced to get married.

...unless you have written your life insurance policy in trust (which nobody ever has the foresight to do), the payment forms part of your estate and if you die intestate, it is distributed according the the rules of intestacy.

Ok...so, if you die intestate it goes to your nearest living relative surely? I'm just asking, no need for narkiness .

not trying to shut you downPentium , just asking you to expand on your comment about the thread making you laugh.

Jesus. Shut anyone down who doesn’t follow what is the ‘right’ way.

Its not about shutting you down, its just that on this issue, there aren't really '2 sides to the story'

One way (marriage) benefits the woman and DC in almost all circumstances, whereas cohabiting makes women and their DC incredibly vulnerable in all circumstances.

Your opinions are ill-informed, yet you seem too stubborn to see that.

Ok...so, if you die intestate it goes to your nearest living relative surely? I'm just asking, no need for narkiness

Fair enough, I apologise.

...and no, there are specific Rules of Intestacy

@DCOkeford

Not ill informed.

I was provided all the information, but have made my choice.
Why don’t you try respecting others choices instead of just being rude?

Bloody life insurance for God's sake

@DCOkeford wills only apply in the case of death, not divorce. I do not want to give a man a chance to leave me taking any of my assets with him.

@pentium85

If it were just you, making a decision on your own account, then yes I would tend to agree that you are entitled to make your own mistakes without interference.

The trouble comes when DC are involved and have to also carry the can for your own ill-judged decisions.

As I have already said, outcomes for DC from unmarried parents are universally poorer than those for DC where their parents are married to each other.

I really do have to call your judgement into question if you genuinely think you are doing the right thing by them

I do not want to give a man a chance to leave me taking any of my assets with him

Try playing that back, with the sexes reversed.

@DCOkeford if he has children, that would be fair enough.

I am not going to have further children with anyone. I am old enough to have a house and assets. In the event of having a partner live with me, I do not want to be married off without my consent because of some new cohabitation rights.

@UserV

You feeling ok?

Because that response is slightly OTT

@Missillusioned

Just have a think about a man, who wanted to live with his female partner, have all the benefits/conveniences of marriage, but refused to marry her in case she ran off with half his assets.

If he posted to that effect on here he would have his arse handed to him on a plate.

Might be worth reevaluating your viewpoint?

If they change the rules, there is no legitimate way of proving there was a relationship, nothing legal exists.
The state should not pay, when there is no legal requirement to. To bend this rule, will cause a new wave of fraud. Photos are not enough sometimes.

I’m sorry for the people that are in a relationship but one or both don’t want to get married. It’s something you need to establish quite soon in a new relationship. Not wait and hope they change their minds some day. No way would I have a baby with someone that refused to commit to me long term. Not fair on me or the baby.
Agree this needs to be thought in school.

What would happen in a case where a man is married to and has children with his wife but is living with and had children with his girlfriend? A Boris Johnson type situation.

Two lots of payments or shared?

That benefit is because he had kids - it should have gone to his kids.