In thinking marriage is an institution preferred by the middle class

[disorganisedsecretsquirrel]

and based on economics ?

I will tell you the truth. I know absolutely NO One who Is unmarried with children. Middle class mother of 3. Dc now in early 20s and 18. Live in South East. Work full time in the Civil Service on about 40k. DH has a very tricky Mental illness therefore we don't currently live together but he has 5 DC with ex wife. When he works he is a high earner.

I read on MN all the time about couples living together with dc who are not married and wonder why there is such a disparity between my 'world' and the outside world where cohabitation is prevalent .

Based on the fact that I have had 'kids parents ' around for a quarter of a century - that's a LOT of couples ...I am wondering why my world is so different from the norm - and thinking , is it to do with money /property. ? Surely MC women have the same number of accidental slip ups than anyone else as fertility isn't governed by economic prosperity. Or are the well off more ruthless and feel more able to abort if 'the perfect situation isn't in place'

No judgement either way. I have no religious agenda about marriage and kids - just genuinely interested why I have absolutely no 'living together ' friends , even when a first marriage has ended and there are no more kids. Why do all the families i know, re marry when it's not the norm these days. ?

I agree with your original suggestion OP. Women who are focused on education and career are more likely to be careful with contraception and more likely to abort if it would interfere with their lives. Perhaps it’s also been drummed into them that you get married first - I wouldn’t have dreamed of purposely trying for a baby without a ring on my finger.

Hmm interesting question.
We are both teachers and married with 3 children. All our friends with children are married - all similar level of jobs or higher.
We work in primary schools in quite deprived areas and it’s very very unusual for children’s parents to be married.
I’d never wondered why until now. Age partly I’d think? More chaotic and less planned lives, no spare money to even contemplate an event out of the norm? Other people not doing it as well?

I think in many cases there’s a lack of understanding of the practical benefits of marriage and more of a focus on having a big expensive party. People who think this way are less likely to just have a quick register office ceremony in order to acquire the legal protections - they want the party but can’t afford it so they don’t bother getting married.

It may also have something to do with not gaining from marriage. DH and I have property and assets we want to leave to each other tax free, and I wanted to be financially protected before having children. I can see how that would be irrelevant if you don’t own a house or have any assets and your partner doesn’t earn a lot.

That's interesting. I'm 30 and most of my friends are in our really 30's. The couples that are married don't have kids (yet or won't at all) and those who have kids have no intention to get married any time soon. I was talking with a friend of mine and she could think of only one coupe in our peer group that was married before having a child.

These people are professionals, house owners and well educated (masters or phd) work in decent jobs either as auditors, university researchers or heath care. most of the kids have been planned.

It's economic in our situation and that of my brother / friends etc. We are in our 40s and whilst a significant number of us could be considered middle class ( have degrees, work as teachers etc) we all seem trapped in a medium wage / high mortgage situation because of the gorgeous area we grew up in and choose to rear our children. Even marrying on the cheap costs about a grand and there's always something else that money needs to be spent on! I would say married couples are the minority in our social circle.

Marriage is all about money and property. Women were included in that as property (still are in some cultures).

We got married for 2 reasons. Money and next of kin rights. If dh ends up on a ventilator (much more likely at the moment) I want to be the one making decisions, not MIL.

If unmarried, pension, death in service etc are not certain to go to each other. Plus much more time consuming.

Marriage financially benefits the partner with less money more than their wealthier spouse. I've worked part time for 15 years. So my ability to earn and pension pot is massively reduced. Marriage is a good way to offer some compensation for that in case of separation.

I understand that divorce is massively stressful. Is separation of unmarried couples better though? Or is the stress less obvious because no legal rights means no court case?

This is a weird thread. Working class couples are just as into marriage. I'm more middle class these days but even then we have friends with kids and my husband (very middle class) has family members that aren't married with kids. Many are engaged but when kids come along they've not quite got around to it or don't want to. There are economic factors but then at least they're not married to a dick, which can be priceless.

Surely even your friends who are on second marriages would at some point been on an in-between stage where they were in an unwed relationship?

I know quite a few divorced middle class people at school, growing by the year.

Maybe the age that working class families have kids is younger if they don't go to uni and get into work sooner so that can be a factor. Maybe there is more money to blow on a wedding in the event of an accidental pregnancy for middle class couples.

I think maybe the middle class mentality is more centred around money. When you grow up without money, aren't going to inherit any and divorce is more about the sharing of debt than assets you think differently. The amount of middle class people that moan about not having money but working class people generally work hard and don't have much spare to pump into a pricey property. I've yet to meet many middle class people who have any notion of what it's like to have no money and how that impacts on decisions in life.

A civil ceremony at a register office is around £50.

You go in to give notice 29 days before and then take 2 witnesses to the ceremony.

Anything above the £50 is unnecessary additions. Obviously most people do have the additions and the party but just pointing out that a cheap service is £50 not £1000.

At my Daughters private school she became the one known as "the one with the divorced parents "as it is so rare.
A few parents discouraged their children playing with her after this. My DD came home one day and said another child had informed her that she " comes from a broken home". Awful phrase.

That's weird because I looked into a wedding at my local registry office and it appeared to be way more than 50 quid. With the paying if the registrar etc. We would have done it like a shot! Thank you, I'll check again. Difficulty is, everyone wants a party gathering of family to mark the occasion, which is whilst not essential, the norm. That's the incredibly expensive part.

Just looked it up, and there are other fees besides the 49 pound registry office charge. Could be done for around 150 pound. But whilst I'm no bridezilla, I don't really want to get married without all the immediate family present, and it would be nice to have at least a few drinks and snacks somewhere pleasant to mark the occasion.

A civil ceremony at a register office is around £50.

The cheapest option here is £116. £35 each for giving notice and then £46 for the marriage ceremony and certificate/

Just over the border it’s £125. £60 for giving notice then £65 for the marriage ceremony.

I think there might be an urban / non urban split here.

I used to live in London and know a handful of MC people who have had kids without being married, in a kind of we're relaaaxed, we're equals, no need to conform to the piece of paper kind of way.

I think that's also why it surprised me so much that my university friends, who without exception live in London, suddenly all married at around 30/31 - I definitely thought there'd be more of that.

"That's unfortunate @couchlover, since they are probably the ones with the most to gain from being married."

Depends who they marry!

I see exactly the same as you OP. People I know from work are mainly middle class, though not as middle class as you, and most of those who have children are married. There are 1 or 2 with 2 or 3 children and not married.

I live in a very low income area and I don't think people here are likely to get married unless they're of an older generation 60+. I think if your potential spouse doesn't have a stable job it's not necessarily beneficial.

"Age partly I’d think? More chaotic and less planned lives, no spare money to even contemplate an event out of the norm? Other people not doing it as well?"

I would say that for the women in low income areas, a lot of them men might be OK to live with and have children with but won't necessarily give you any financial stability so there isn't the same incentive to get married.

Marriage benefits women who earn a lot less than their partner, who plan to take years out of work and who are marrying men who already own property.

Wow! People’s lack of knowledge is scary!
I was a sahm when ex and I split. No property, a family car, small amount of money in savings and in joint account, he has an army pension*
Accounts he emptied within days!
As a result of us actually being married I was able to:*
Reclaim my half of the money he took out the bank accounts
Easily start cm claim (not that it didn’t take years of wrangling csa ex to actually get money though!)
Easily start and process benefits claims until I was able to start working.
As part of the divorce proceedings I was awarded money in lieu of my half of the car, and when he hits 55 I can get a small portion of his pension.*
If we’d not been married, the money he took from the joint accounts I’d never have seen again, I wouldn’t have got any money re car and pensions*
^^
Wow! It really isn't lack of knowledge Graphista!

I own my own car. I have my own pension. I have never been a stay at home mum. I have this in common with many many women.
Sure, if you share property, if you work PT or not at all, if you have joint accounts (and shared savings rather than just debts as a pp pointed out) it benefits you to get married.
As far as child support goes, being married makes no difference-married men get out of paying it just as much as un-married ones.

I'm not saying women are not often disadvantaged by maternity and being over burdened with domestic responsibility, and that marriage can help protect them, I am saying that not every woman is automatically in that position.

I got legally married about 9 months before our wedding party. Pretty sure a lot of our guests had no idea that wasn't actually the legal part. We did it mostly for immigration reasons but there's nothing to stop anyone who wants the protection of marriage but can't afford the party yet from doing likewise.

Unmarried. He asked I said no. I also refused to give up my career and financial independence because I knew this was the main cause of women's poverty, not the failure to marry.

All my friends are married (a few divorced). Having had 3 kids in 3 schools every single one of the children in their classes had parents who are or were married. I think that a very few had a first child, and I mean 2 that I know of, had one child before marriage, and then married when they were very small. V middle class crowd

This thread is both interesting and offensive in equal measure in assuming that those of us who aren't married are somehow deficient in education, knowledge and/or upbringing. My partner and I have been happily unmarried for 25 years and have two teenagers both of whom were planned. We are both from solid middle class backgrounds and both degree educated. Thankfully we also have the ability to think for ourselves. We jointly own our house, have wills, have nominated each other for pensions etc. I think that many of our acquaintances would probably assume we are married - in fact I was quite amused when a few years ago my daughter told me that her school friends were shocked that we weren't married- not often that you have the ability to shock a teenager these days! I have recently been shocked by the fact that my daughter's friends have their own Pinterest boards "for their wedding " (they are 14 yr olds!). To me that shows how society has regressed and how young people have become more conventional since we were young. I appreciate that young girls seem to focus on the wedding rather than the marriage but what a sad reflection of our times that the pinnacle of their ambition is marriage.

Admittedly my DP and I are old hippies at heart and our values although traditional in terms of peace, love and understanding, are also centred around not just doing something because it's expected of you.

I am shocked to hear that I am somehow "less than" because I didn't wait to have a "ring on my finger" - talk about the passive female! We made a joint decision to have children and have raised them in a loving and committed family, not "out of wedlock". Some of you sound about 100 years out of date. In the time we have been together we have seen siblings marry and divorce, parents divorce and remarry, and countless divorces amongst our children's friends. I do not judge them for their decisions but I should be judged, at least on here, because clearly I am naive or uneducated or, working class which seems to be a cardinal sin. I am actually none of these things, my family are tediously middle class as far back as I can see. Perhaps the middle class being referred to on here is actually the "keeping up with the Joneses" insecure middle class who are obsessed with how others see them as opposed to the stable "couldn't care less what others think or need to explain myself to anyone" middle class. Or maybe some of us don't like to be put in a box and can think for ourselves...

young girls seem to focus on the wedding rather than the marriage but what a sad reflection of our times that the pinnacle of their ambition is marriage.

I was younger than 14, but I used to be really interested in weddings when I was a child. My sister and I used to discuss weddings fairly frequently. (she said she would change her name unless her fiancé’s surname was Shufflebottom). I think we were influenced by Charles & Di’s wedding - nowadays there are celeb weddings everywhere so it’s probably hard to avoid the influence. At 14 I was probably hoping I would marry Michael Hutchence

I didn’t get married until my mid 30s and would have been happy to go to the registry office. (DH wanted a ‘proper’ wedding). I don’t think you should extrapolate too much from what teenagers are keen on.

@IfNotNowThenWhenever - totally agree. It’s not lack of knowledge. I broke up with my ex (2 dc). I was the one with the pension ancc dc property so it was so much better for me that I didn’t marry. I got to be in a better financial position and my savings and property can benefit me and my dcs rather than my ex. Also the actual split was simpler and less hassle.

I should say I got to keep my property and it was less hassle because I wasn’t married. Marriage would have left me much worse off.

@Tollergirl Nobody on here has said that everyone who is not married lacks knowledge.

What people are reacting to is the "it's just a piece of paper" fallacy, which has been stated quite a few times on this thread. As has been said upthread, a marriage certificate is a legal contract.

There have been many, many women who have been screwed over by thinking that cohabitation is legally recognised when it is not. I would really, really like there to be a better societal understanding of this so that people can make informed choices, as you clearly have.

I appreciate your point @iPityThePontipines and totally agree about the importance of knowledge and education about the misconceptions around cohabiting. I would like to see increased awareness in young people but it seems that in today's world there is almost a fetishism around weddings and marriage with a huge industry centred on the whole thing. This takes away from the fact that it is the relationship between a couple that is important rather than the label placed on that relationship by society. My partner and I are planning on a civil partnership after lockdown (we were waiting until it was introduced for heterosexual couples so it's not a reaction to the Corona situation) because we feel it better fits how we see our relationship - a partnership. I respect other people's choosing to marry if that suits them but I do get tired of the same old trope around long term cohabition and on this thread there is definitely the implication that it is only those who are uneducated, have an "accident", or are with an uncommitted man who are unmarried. Whether people like it or not marriage has a history steeped in misogyny and we are grateful that couples can have legal protection without having to marry. I realise some people think it's just semantics and that's their prerogative.