He doesn’t want to marry

[StandingMirror]

Hi
I’ve been with my partner for nearly 18 years and have three children together. In the beginning of our relationship, marriage wasn’t that important to me, however now we have children and we’ve been together this long it’s something that I want.
I’ve mentioned it several times over the years, however nothing ever changed.
I don’t want a big wedding, registry office would be just fine.
Yesterday we were watching Bridgerton and I jokingly said it’s an insult you don’t want to marry me haha. But then I thought about it more and thought actually yes it is kind of an insult we’ve been together this long, we have children and I want to marry but I’m clearly not good enough for you. Partner kind of got in a huff and said oh not this again. This is his standard answer but never gives me a reason why he won’t marry. This morning I’m getting the silent treatment and when I commented on it he’s saying well I’m always getting that treatment.
I’m a SAHM, house ( mortgage free) in his name and all savings in his name (inheritance) . Some financial arrangements made in case of his death.
Am I really this unreasonable to expect better?

[quote donewithitalltodayandxmas]@WhateverJudy it really doesn't cost that much to feed another adult compared to childcare and its also being available drop of a hat to pick up a sick child from school/ nursery and will limit jobs people can do.
A full time nanny would cost way more than providing for another adult living in your house , one that is also going to provide eventually.
After all the law looks at the contribution a sahm makes , yet people on mumsnet fail to see this .
Yes people do it alone all the time and usually women , but it is harder than doing it with support and funnily not so many women have top jobs and promotions , why is that ? [/quote]
Realistically, supporting a stay at home partner is far more than paying for their food. Every single expense that adult incurs for years is covered. Clothes, haircuts, holidays, meals out, cinema tickets, phone bills, prescriptions, transport costs. I won’t include rent and mortgage as that’s basically the same with one adult or two in the house but half of all extra energy, water usage etc. Add that all up over a decade or so and tell me it’s not thousands upon thousands. That’s not saying there’s anything wrong with the arrangement but it’s disingenuous to imply that food is all a SAHM has paid for her. Her entire life is funded from the husband’s wages. To reiterate, nothing wrong with that if everyone’s happy but I fail to believe it’s cheaper for the man than paying for childcare for a couple of years (taking into account the extra funding you get when both parents work) and then wrap around. Unless the family is living like absolute paupers (in which case I would question whether having a SAHP is best for the children) then even a fairly modestly living adult incurs a lot more expenses than just food.

Plus you say the wife will of course provide eventually. This OP’s youngest child is eight and she’s yet to get back to work so I wouldn’t make that assumption.

To reiterate, I absolutely believe that a SAHM makes a contribution and it’s right that is recognised in law. I just maintain that she gets a lot out of the arrangement as well, and that if she chose to no longer be a SAHM, the vast majority of men would find another way to manage their family as well as maintaining a career. And in many cases I honestly don’t believe that would be more expensive than funding a long term SAH wife.

Heels my 'for heaven's sake' should really have been directed at JER27. Sorry! Hers (if she is female) is an insulting attitude towards both women and men.

Heavens sake what?having an engagement ring isn’t the pinnacle of a women life
How does having a engagement ring make a man or woman more responsible?

@florascotia2 just seen your update, thanks for clarification

[quote donewithitalltodayandxmas]@BumbleBiscuit are you a man? [/quote]
What? Because she's not falling over herself to see this as OP's boyfriend's failing?

There’s a lot of posters on MN who illustrate perfectly that an engagement ring is absolutely worthless as a commitment. It’s the marriage certificate that matters. Many a woman has been shafted by an empty gesture proposal to placate her, and ends up in exactly the OP’s legal position but with a nice piece of jewellery on her finger for years and years.

Heels Thank you. I feel very sorry for the OP. But as I keep saying, I think that both partners in a relationship have a responsibility to their children, first and foremost, and then to themselves AND to each other. The exact balance of theose responsibilities is going to vary from year to year according to circumstances. But essentially, unless right from the beginning one party has formally disclaimed all responsibilities, them morally both have a duty to care for each other. Legally, marriage/civil partnership makes that all much easier. And, as some pps have also said, there are legal ways of almost replicating some of the securities of marriage - although not exactly, and not from a tax point of view.

Are you a man, are you drunk, are you on glue? Mn trope,If a poster doesn’t familiar and tired cliches on mn they get a pasting

Please excuse typos. Typing too quickly!

@florascotia2 yes women need to take a responsibility for their own finance and wellbeing and not rely on a man putting a ring on it. Adult women hoping and pining that a man will marry them, but they themselves reluctant to initiate marriage

OP i am so sorry to read your updates. The bottom line is your either need a marriage certificate or your own financial security. If he walks away you are only entitled to what is in your name. I am learning this the hard way after almost 27 years unmarried with kids. And whilst you need to consider he has his name on the mortgage and money dont forget about pensions, his will be constantly increasing whilst your will have stopped. And also your qualifying years for the state pension. Good luck

I quite agree that women should be free to be as sexually active as they choose. But not without thinking rationally and responsibly about the consequences, for themselves and for their children

Sounds about right to me

I also agree the thread would be no bad thing if it encouraged just one woman to think before jumping, but sadly I doubt it
Somehow, "theirs" is so often said to be different ... until he isn't

Every woman who thinks it’s cool/modern/unnecessary to marry needs to read this thread.

My goodness.

This is a person.

Not a ' terrible warning'.

I know lockdown is gruelling but the sanctimony and dehumanisation on this thread is horrible.

@Washingmyself

Isn't here that if if lived certain time together then you are entitled 50%?

Completely untrue. Not married = zero entitlement to anything.

It all reminds me of Les Dawson in a pinny and rollers, joining his bosom and rolling his eyes.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee

Let’s be clear women don’t need an engagement ring to be sexually active We can have sex because we want to,because we like it without seeking or needing the so called legitimacy of an engagement ring

Of course. It’s wise to have a wedding ring before having children, though.

catfrom japan I am sorry if you think I am being moralising. That is not my intention. I am very sorry for the OP and the situation she finds herself in. It is not an easy one.
I was only writing generally, in response to some comments from other posters (that I diasgrred with). I wasn't intending my remarks to apply to the OP as an individual - she obviously cannot turn the clock back.

flora It's more the posts that seem to have utterly forgotten that there might be a real person here.

I know that there are a lot of trolls on MN - but there are a lot of real people, too.

I think there are posts here that are really dehumanising and downright unkind.

There's a sadism in evidence here, which in incredibly unpleasant.

@thecatfromjapan

flora It's more the posts that seem to have utterly forgotten that there might be a real person here.

I know that there are a lot of trolls on MN - but there are a lot of real people, too.

I think there are posts here that are really dehumanising and downright unkind.

There's a sadism in evidence here, which in incredibly unpleasant.

I can certainly see where you're coming from on this and I don't think you're wrong. But it may also be coming from the zillions of threads we get on this subject, telling this story. It just happens over and over and over and over and it's very hard not to start getting jaded with it and so, so, so unhappy with all the women who are living like this and how they are suffering. I don't think it's sadism, but more the collective sound of 20,000 women banging their heads against their desks and screaming, "NOT AGAIN!"

@grapewine no because she appeared to be putting down sahm as if they made no contribution

@whateverjudy in some cases no it would not be cheaper in other circumstances yes , all depends on what you spend. When I was a sahm i had haircut at most twice a year and clothes rarely , mostly bought with birthday money etc.
I also was only a sahm for 5 years ( one of those years I worked evenings so I guess 4 ) but chidcare for my dh would of been over £300 even of he would of qualified for 70% ( which wasn't the norm )approx £100 not including days off unpaid and I personally didn't cost over £100 a week but i did make sacrifices to stay home , like less clothes , lost car etc.
Infact to be fair my single sil at the time on part time job with top ups and rent paid etc was better off.
But the OP did say she has worked at times in their relationship so not never earned .

Lots of Trolls on mn? I don’t get that impression. Disagreement with perceived orthodoxy doesn’t = troll

You wouldn't even get a widow's pension if he dies and you weren't married.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee was it not you that posted about trolls