To call him my husband?

[WingingItMumma]

My partner and I are engaged and have been for over 2 years now. We have been together 5 years and were friends for 4 years before that. Towards the beginning of the engagement, we lost a baby and then fell pregnant again and my mind was all over the place with anxiety because of the previous loss. We then had the baby and 4 weeks later, lockdown happened. Otherwise we would probably be married by now. (I don't want a huge, takes years to plan wedding). The only reason we haven't popped to the registry office when it was safe to during COVID is that his 2 brothers live abroad and he doesn't want to get married without them there (which I totally get!).

But, we are living like we are married. Everything is the same between us as it would be a happily married couple, apart from a piece of paper. I hate referring to him as my partner, or worse, boyfriend (he's in his 40s, hardly a boy!) and the term fiancé gives me the ick. If people refer to him as "your husband" (trades people, shop staff etc) then I don't correct them. But is it weird to actually refer to him as my husband if we're not technically married?

Just to note, I don't call him my husband at the moment. I just want to put feelers out to see if it's socially acceptable. I also realise I'm a chronic over thinker and in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter.

[quote MaskingForIt]**@BathshebaAndGabriel* It’s awful that unmarried couples are not afforded the same rights married ones, but that’s the law of the land (England)*

Not ridiculous at all. I would hate for full marriage laws to be applied to my relationship just because I had started dating someone.

How would it work for a man who had children with multiple women?

When cheating occurs, which is the “real” relationship.

Legally solemnising relationship should be someone entered into voluntarily.[/quote]
Agree.

Marriage is a hugely important contract and it should be treated different in law to just cohabiting.

Long may it continue.

@Billben

Sorry OP, but if you referred to your partner in front of me as your husband and I knew you weren’t married, I would correct you. I think it makes a mockery of marriage. You don’t get to use words related to certain things just because you “feel” like it. I don’t like this trend of calling people something they clearly aren’t.

Wow. Just wow.

Glad you are not the OP's 'friend' then.

It would be an odd thing to do.

I’m intrigued though. What does “living like we are married” look like?

How do married people live that is different from how long-term partners/engaged people live?

@TrustTheGeneGenie that still has literally nothing to do with morality/judgement.

It’s not wise to set one’s assumptions by the odd outlier - I prefer to advise women with a view to the circumstances that apply to the vast, vast majority. Anyone who it does not apply to doesn’t have to pay attention, whereas those who it does apply to will be better informed.

But telling op that she is vulnerable might be wrong.

Saying the vast majority of unmarried women so consider it. .. very different.

Then I’m sure OP will have the brains to evaluate for herself.

Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive

@HollyandIvyandallthingsYule

Then I’m sure OP will have the brains to evaluate for herself.

Yes presumably she's got enough brains for her not to be told by judgy people on Mumsnet what she needs to do when it's not what she asked.

@damselindedress

I get this Op, in my opinion it doesn't really matter what you call him. As long as you know what your legal standpoint is you can call him whatever you like. There are some very sanctimonious posters on here. I've been with my partner years, engaged for a few, we have a child, own a home, have legal doc inc wills in place but we just haven't got around to getting married yet. I don't really see what difference marriage would make you us?

People call him my husband all the time and I do try and correct them and say partner but sometimes I just can't be bothered. We'll get around to the wedding one day, but I'm just not that into the whole wedding thing. I think it's an awful waste of money.

But surely going to a registry office and getting married (just over £100) would've been much cheaper and far less faff than getting all the legal documents/wills in place with a solicitor?

The 'whole wedding thing' would be 15 mins in an office with a registrar and 2 other people

It’s clear that you’ve got your back up for some reason.

However just to make it clear, absolutely no one is judging the OP, nor calling her pathetic. Discussing vulnerabilities is not judging. Stop reading things into it that aren’t there.

You also keep mixing things up that have nothing to do with each other - answering a question that wasn’t asked might be annoying, but in this case that still doesn’t make it judgy.

I know married couples who refer to each other as 'partner' rather than husband/wife as they prefer the terminology

As I said way back,on a superficial level of social interaction call him your husband

However that nomenclature doesn’t confer the same legal protection
You can call him your husband but he isn’t

[quote eaglejulesk]@LadyFelsham - Heavens, I'm no law expert, but I imagine there are ways to safeguard goods for children of previous marriages. However, why on earth would our fictitious widow live with a man for 15 years if she didn't think of him as her equal partner? Surely people live together for the same reasons as they get married, because they love each other.[/quote]
But if she wanted to marry him she could. We've read on here of couples who love each other but have decided not to marry for whatever reason because, again ,as we've read on here, marriage is less to do with love and more to do with a contract.

There are all sorts of reasons why people don't want to marry or re-marry-the widow is just one example. Marriage should be an active choice and one shouldn't feel that one is officially regarded to be in the equivalent of one simply because of the passage of time.

I'm sorry, I've forgotten the country that you point out as an example where living together for a period of time means there is no difference between being married and living together but it sounds a policy full of potholes. One of those is, as you mention, having to take out safeguarding measures, to protect assets.

In the UK, the only safeguarding measure you need to take out is not to get married. Much simpler.

I think it takes away choice but we'll have to agree to disagree.

@user1481840227

I definitely wouldn't call him your husband if he's not. My parents pretend to be married because my dad is still married to someone else so I might be biased lol

I don't think you need to correct people who call him your husband either. When me and my ex split and got past the horrible phase and moved towards being friends we still went on days out with the kids and we had many awkward moments where people assumed we were a couple and would tell my ex to "hold onto her" lol....now THAT was awkward!

Have they got proper wills as your dads wife gets everything if he dies and your mother nothing?

Yabu as he isn't your husband. Sorry, it's weird.

Really I came on to comment about the Master/Miss thing. 3 year old DS is registered as Master st his surgery and all his NHS post is adressed to Master our surname. I am surprised this isnt widespread and some people dont have the option of Master. He is also Master is his red book.

How is it a statement of fact to state that automatically being an unmarried mother makes you vulnerable. You could say it is more likely to make you vulnerable but it definitely can't be a statement of fact when it is untrue for many people.

But when you do get married,you won't have that excitement to refer to your new husband as my husband if you're doing it here and there now.
Would your dp be happy to either have a quick wedding now to get married then have a party and proper reception with his brother's next year?you could maybe use a webcam for the service so they can watch live?
And,fwiw,marriage is so much more than a piece of paper.🌼

@WorraLiberty we do want a small wedding to celebrate though but haven't decided whether to make it family only or have some friends and so far timing hasn't been right plus his family are all abroad so it hasn't been possible this year. So in the meantime we've got the essential legal matters in order - it's important to have wills once you have a child anyway. We're perfectly happy with our approach.

I've been with mine 7 years and we have a child. Some of the local corner shop people and cafe workers refer to me as "your wife" when they've spoken to my partner. I don't correct them.

@AllFanjoAndNoSnickers I'm with you. When I re-marry my fiancé (eventually) I will ensure my boys (his stepsons) remain protected on event of divorce / my death. Especially important as I am the only one with savings and also a higher earner.

[quote Nicknamegoeshere]@BarryWhiteIsMyBrother Agreed. I have savings whereas my fiancé doesn't and my earning capacity is far greater than his.[/quote]
There. But until women put their foot down and ask their partners to stay at home raising their children while they (the women) go to work, things won't change. Yes women currently may, on average, earn less than men and this may be why of the two they choose to stay at home and raise their kids, but this is because they are often seen as a 'risk' by some employers because they may indeed take a year or longer out each time they have a baby. This can be very disruptive for a business, especially a smaller one.

Whereas a man can be trained, invested in, and won't necessarily take a year, or longer, out when he starts a family. Until women push to have men stay at home with their children, the pay gap will not change (much) and women will continue to be disadvantaged. This is as much because of women as it is of men.

So a woman who chooses to have kids with a man shouldn't necessarily get married - she should however talk to her partner in advance about who will stay at home with the kids and not take for granted it will have to be her. If she wants to stay at home to raise her kids, then that's her choice but that doesn't mean she should then have a right to her partner's assets should they split up. She chose to give up or pause her work to raise her kids. She wasn't forced.

I'm all for free choice but not when that comes at the expense of the other partner should the couple go their separate ways.

Of course the above doesn't apply to each case but generally speaking, that seems to be how things work currently. I'm sure I'll come under a lot of fire now - probably by SAHMs.

But until women put their foot down and ask their partners to stay at home raising their children while they (the women) go to work, things won't change

What? Eighty percent of women now work. And those who don’t. Plenty don’t wish to, they are on here all the time going on about how they could not outsource parenting and why habe kids to let someone else take care of them.

Only a tiny percentage are at home when they don’t wish to, either due to a child having additional needs or they can’t afford childcare. And of those many are the lower earner

It’s minute the amount of women where the husband stamps his feet and demands his wife stays home. It happens, but it’s far from the norm

The norm is overwhelmingly mothers work. Four in every five. And it has changed, decades ago it was a tiny percentage. Every year more and more women go back to work after having kids.

It’s already moved on. I don’t know how you missed it.

I wish people wouldn't bang on about how "vulnerable" unmarried mothers are. Only if you've left your finances and career in such a state that you couldn't manage without your partner's financial input. Which is unwise married or not imho.

In some respects you're less vulnerable as your money and property is definitely yours, and you don't have to share parental responsibility if you don't wish to whereas married women have no choice and can end up tied to a bad man for life via shared children.

@VeniceQueen2004

I wish people wouldn't bang on about how "vulnerable" unmarried mothers are. Only if you've left your finances and career in such a state that you couldn't manage without your partner's financial input. Which is unwise married or not imho.

Sadly for many that’s the truth though. Hang about here for five mins and you will see thread after thread of unhappy women who can’t leave because they have no money.