Partner still legally married - AIBU

[LegallyBlonde30]

I have been with my partner for 6 years. I have just given birth to our second child. He supports us all, we rent a nice flat in a nice area and have a good relationship but he is still legally married to his ex wife, whom he has 2 older children with. I try not to pressurise him and ruin what we have but it is starting to bother me that technically, I have 2 kids with a "married man". Whenever I ask about it, he says he will divorce her eventually, but that it is expensive and he is waiting until he can afford it. He is also worried she will try and take money from him. AIBU?

Exactly, if it isn't my responsibility not to have a couple of children with a married man and to not work, and be completely financially at his mercy......who's responsibility is it????

His! It’s his responsibility to look after the children he created. My god, imagine if we held men to the same account as women.

Can you not have life insurance that pays out to a named person?

For example, I have life insurance that pays to my husband should I die. Could I take out another policy that pays to my daughter?

Could the OP have one that pays just to her?

@CakeRequired it does make a difference if he gets a will and life insurance (with op as a beneficiary). Assuming he lives in England, he can leave all his property to op if he likes, regardless if he remains legally married. A spouse could challenge such a will but would be extremely unlikely to be successful in this situation.

@Twisique you can have life insurance that pays out to anyone you like. A spouse would have no legal claim on that.

@LegallyBlonde30

My partner owns 2 successful gyms and he is worried she will try and get a lot of money out of him. He does pay her maintenance and no, I don't have my own income, he supports us. I don't know what his ex wife thinks about is as I've never asked her or him.

Well his ex wife has probably played a blinder as his assets have probably increased significantly since they separated. That means her settlement when eventually done will be more.

Yes he can get divorced cheaply but if he doesn't get a financial agreement and consent order...she will be able to come back at any time and demand money which will cost a fortune to defend...ask the boss of Eco Energy whose ex wife turned up after 20+ years and demanded money.

He is totally,y irresponsible and sorry OP..so are you having children within a situation with no financial security.

@Twisique - my life insurance is named to pay to my dds. Previously if went to a friend.

Yes he could sort life insurance to op but sort of man who doesn’t get around to divorcing wife isn’t usually type to ensure life insurance with updated nominee or have an up to date will etc. Some schemes only pay out spouse/civil partner not case here as he’s self employed.
Have you looked on companies house aswell as land registry. My guess would be his wife is also a director in his business plus possible they co own a house.

@CayrolBaaaskin Thanks for the info. Good to hear that the OP can also do this.

@Pumperthepumper

Exactly, if it isn't my responsibility not to have a couple of children with a married man and to not work, and be completely financially at his mercy......who's responsibility is it????

His! It’s his responsibility to look after the children he created. My god, imagine if we held men to the same account as women.

So basically you’re saying that women are poor, vapid little nonentities who should take no responsibility for themselves because it’s all up to men to take it for them. Even my grandmother, who was born in 1884, wouldn’t agree with that.

So basically you’re saying that women are poor, vapid little nonentities who should take no responsibility for themselves because it’s all up to men to take it for them. Even my grandmother, who was born in 1884, wouldn’t agree with that.

So desperate for a fight Vinyl?

Imagine it being so controversial to say ‘men should take responsibility for their own children, instead of blaming women for being reliant’.

I don't think anyone is saying men shouldn't be expected to take responsibility or to even take responsiublity, but right now in 2020, women are usually the ones left holding the literal baby. They need to act responsibly (too).

The difference here is this:

If a man doesn’t take responsibility for his kids by doing the right thing by their mother (in this case marrying her) yes he’s morally wrong but it’s the woman and kids left in the shit in a practical sense.

If a woman doesn’t take responsibility by ensuring she doesn’t put herself and her kids in a vulnerable situation and things go wrong, it’s herself and the kids who are in the shit.

So the difference is, if men fail to take responsibility they aren’t the ones who suffer. If women don’t take responsibility, they do suffer.

Generalising hugely of course but that is why people are telling women to take responsibility for themselves. Because they are the ones that will feel the consequences.

We could also teach girls not to have multiple children with married men. Or men who won’t marry them.

Well said.

@Faultymain5
None of you are wrong, but do you really think these women and these men were raised without being told these situations are wrong.

Some weren't. In many cases they cycle repeats.

You have to realise a situation is wrong to advise your child against it and many don't have a clue.

@Vinyldetective

So basically you’re saying that women are poor, vapid little nonentities who should take no responsibility for themselves because it’s all up to men to take it for them. Even my grandmother, who was born in 1884, wouldn’t agree with that

You're right.

This notion that women are weak and unable to make sensible decisions, taking responsibility for their lives is not helpful when we're continually fighting for equality.

@GeorginaTheGiant

Generalising hugely of course but that is why people are telling women to take responsibility for themselves. Because they are the ones that will feel the consequences.

Absolutely 💯 correct.

When women are the ones left carrying the can, it's common sense to take steps to protect yourself and your children.

Because if we sit back and just blame men, that doesn't stop the woman and children suffering. It just absolves women from accepting responsibility for the situation they find themselves in.

@GeorginaTheGiant
Exactly.

I'd love if the world was different.
That every man automatically took responsibility for the children he fathered, and ensured that they were provided for and protected.
That they shared the load with women in this respect.

But because I inhabit the real world, I deal with the reality of the world I live in.

That world means that women need to be self reliant and financially astute when they have children, and not just hope for the best.

When women are the ones left carrying the can, it's common sense to take steps to protect yourself and your children.

Why are women the ones left carrying the can?

Basically he will not divorce as he doesn’t want to share assets currently he doesn’t care what happens to everything once he is dead as he will not benefit in any way.

@SandyY2K I agree with everything you said.
@GeorginaTheGrant Agree once again

@Pumperthepumper, we get the men that abandon or do not look after their families are bad bad men. We all agree with that, no-one disputes that. The thing is what now about those abandoned families? The man is gone, he's bad we can shout it from the rooftops (and often do), but practically speaking in the moment, who is left holding the baby that needs feeding. So who do you think right in the moment is going to satiate that hunger?

That does not mean we don't put in place systems to stop men being able to just up and leave. Surely we need to consider it a two prong approach.

Another point OP - even if he divorces her, you are in no better position, legally.

He would need to marry you, and do you really think he will do that? I reckon he'd come up with all sorts of excuses not to.

My DH was still married when we got together. Although the money side was well and truly legally separated, he stayed married so she would have a widow's pension to support their son with should anything happen to him. When we got together, he took the necessary steps to get the divorce finalised (she would never have done it as it wans't in her financial interest.
If anything happens, you will have nothing. You really must get this sorted (why you agreed to have children with someone who is married to someone else is beyond me)

Spot on @GeorginaTheGiant.

Marriage gives the wife a whole load of rights and protections, that’s the point of it. Inheritance rights, residence rights, next of kin medical stuff, etc. At the moment she has all those rights not you. I would not be ok with that.

Make him sort it how much can it really cost?!

@Pumperthepumper

When women are the ones left carrying the can, it's common sense to take steps to protect yourself and your children.

Why are women the ones left carrying the can?

That's one for FWR ...

[quote Faultymain5]@SandyY2K I agree with everything you said.
@GeorginaTheGrant Agree once again

@Pumperthepumper, we get the men that abandon or do not look after their families are bad bad men. We all agree with that, no-one disputes that. The thing is what now about those abandoned families? The man is gone, he's bad we can shout it from the rooftops (and often do), but practically speaking in the moment, who is left holding the baby that needs feeding. So who do you think right in the moment is going to satiate that hunger?[/quote]
This whole conversation was a result of a pp saying the way round this is to teach women not to be ‘reliant’ - not ‘we should teach men better’ but ‘women need to sort this’.

I hope she gets her fair share out of a financial agreement included in divorce.
She had their kids and was (is) his wife. It's not her 'trying to get money out of him'. Some of it IS hers.