To Refuse To Marry?

[boggyd]

My partner and I have been in an international relationship for 4 years, and have lived together for the past 8 months. Up until recently, our relationship had been one of strong, independent equals. My partner was living in the UK on a work visa. Both my partner and I had high-income jobs, with their earnings slightly more than mine.
6 months ago, my partner said they wanted to leave their job in order to focus on artistic pursuits, something that they were unwilling to be flexible on, but that I wanted to support them with. This would mean that they would lose their visa. We looked at our options, and it seemed like it would only be possible to secure a visa through marriage, something I was reticent about but willing to consider.
Having learnt more about the financial implications of marriage in the UK, I am beginning to have serious doubts. I have significantly higher assets (5 to 1, seven figures) than my partner, and it seems like these will be difficult to fully protect even if we attempt an English prenup.
My partner is unwilling to have children, so that is not a factor. This means the only legal benefit to marriage would be to secure a visa, whilst I would need to be willing to comingle our assets and be the only income earner. If I do not agree to this marriage my partner will have to leave the country.
Our relationship is a good one, and I fear that I'm approaching this marriage in too cold a way, but at the same time I feel like I have to be realistic about what it would actually mean. Would I be unreasonable to refuse? I feel like my partner has left me with no good options.

@Crystal90567

Why the ambiguity about gender?

Because OP believes us to be prejudiced.

The they/them thing only ever happens when it's that. or same sex couples. No idea why in that case, but the prejudice stuff is tiresome.

Why the ambiguity about gender?
Because on financial threads there's often a lot of double standards (and I'm not talking about being a SAHP once children are on the scene).

For example, if a woman wants to protect her assets by choosing to marry then she should, but if a man does it then he's a financially abusive arsehole. In reality adults of both sexes are more that right to assess their financial situation and draw up their affairs in the way they want. Their other half can choose whether this is a deal breaker or not.
If a woman moves into a man's house then she shouldn't pay towards a property that isn't hers, shouldn't be contributing to his mortgage so it should be paying nothing or bills only. If a man moves into a woman's house then he should be paying her rent because otherwise he is a cocklodger as he would be paying rent if he lived alone.

Plus for this thread the sexes are irrelevant. When one partner suddenly wants propping up by the other it's a huge red flag.

I feel like it is my duty to support them

Why did your partner not feel that it was their duty to wait for another 16 months, by which time they would qualify for an unmarried partner’s visa? Why did your partner not feel that it was their duty to make things as easy for you as they want it to be for them?

Relationships are about give and take on both sides. I see you doing all of the giving and them doing all of the taking.

Completely not the point of the thread, but since when have people stopped saying "he" or "she"? Is this done on purpose? Why "they"? I've noticed it on so many threads recently and I'm assuming these partners aren't all gender non conforming with preferred pronouns!

First things first - basic compatibility.

"My partner is unwilling to have children, so that is not a factor."
versus
"I would like to have children in the future, but biologically I understand that I could wait at least 10 years to do that."

So, are you willing to gamble that they'll change their mind over having children? Because odds on, they won't. And you'll have wasted your fertile years, during which you could have met another partner who wanted the same things as you. Don't underestimate the resentment that can build where two people want different, incompatible things. Imagine ten years down the line, those ten years that you 'could' wait - and you've waited and they're still unwilling?

On this basis alone, I don't think you should marry.

Next up, your current issue.

"6 months ago, my partner said they wanted to leave their job in order to focus on artistic pursuits, something that they were unwilling to be flexible on"
Well there's a problem, right from the off. 'Unwilling to be flexible'. Relationships involve compromises for both parties. One partner being inflexible and backing the other into a corner where they can say "I feel like my partner has left me with no good options" - that's not a good relationship. Certainly not good enough as a basis for marriage.

Something else to consider, in my opinion:

"My partner and I have been in an international relationship for 4 years, and have lived together for the past 8 months."
An 'international relationship' generally involves long periods apart. That can give the time spent together an excitement, akin to an extended holiday romance. The drudgery of daily life tends to be missing. So I'd be inclined to concentrate on the past eight months, how the relationship has been without the 'international' frisson.

And one last point:

"I fear that I'm approaching this marriage in too cold a way"
No, you're not. I wish more people would approach marriage as you have done, considering the ramifications of marrying or not marrying. Marriage is important, and the decision should be treated as such.

@user86386427

Completely not the point of the thread, but since when have people stopped saying "he" or "she"? Is this done on purpose? Why "they"? I've noticed it on so many threads recently and I'm assuming these partners aren't all gender non conforming with preferred pronouns!

They don’t want to bias responses depending on gender?

I would like to have children in the future

So how will it work if your partner doesn't?

Jesus, s/he is going to lose their visa to follow their dreams at the cost of possibly loosing half of your assets?

Even with immense love, that’s having their cake and eat it. I wouldn’t risk putting all my eggs in the same basket for someone who cannot even check something as basic as what would happen with their work visa if they stop working!

I don't see how gender is relevant here, and anyway, they may be non-binary.
My advice would be don't marry them. It will always be at the back of your mind and you may resent them, which in my experience has always ruined past relationships.
It's not fair of them to put this pressure on you.

Read your post back.
Then don't get married.

Don't do it
They only want you for a
Visa they've earmarked you specifically for that purpose

Get rid

If you marry then I think assets should be shared equally, thats marriage- for richer and poorer, all that i have I share with you etc etc
But if you don't feel ready to make the commitment that is absolutely fine, but I think in your circumstances it would probably spell the end of your relationship, its put you in a position where you have to choose whether to commit or not. Don't marry for convenience but equally dont let financial independence stop you from marrying someone if you truly love them.

@Crookairroad

2 months into living together this is what your partner proposed. No. Just no. It’s not in your best interests based on what you’ve written.

Just read the OP. It’s not two months.

It’s really interesting that every pp interprets “support” as financial support, other kinds are available. Presumably this high flyer has significant savings if they have 20% of a seven figure sum - that’s at least £200k.

The issue appears to be entitlement by marriage to OP’s £1 million or so assets. I personally wouldn’t do it if marriage hadn’t been on the cards in any case, but I don’t necessarily think the partner is as mercenary as you all seem to think.

I don't understand why you're even considering marriage when you have completely different views about children.
If your partner wants to keep their visa, the easiest way to do it is to find suitable employment not get married to someone who has different views about savings, work and children.
This relationship seems to have run its course. Don't get married.

For this thread the sexes are irrelevant. When one partner suddenly wants propping up by the other it's a huge red flag

Well said - though you're not wrong about the double standards so often seen

No.just no. Don’t do it.
The hills=====>

Although tbh the sexes may be relevant since there is also a difference in opinion about wanting DCs. Women have a shorter, viable timeframe for becoming mothers than men have for being fathers.

I fear that I'm approaching this marriage in too cold a way

Yet suggesting marriage for visa purposes is all about the romance!

Both of you are being cold and pragmatic about it. Which is fine. It’s how I’ve approached marriage too. If your partner can suggest marriage for their convenience then it’s only fair you can reject it for yours.

If it were me I’d say no. I have only ever married people to have children with them. If no children I see no benefit. You can still love them and be as committed without marriage.

@WhereYouLeftIt

First things first - basic compatibility.

"My partner is unwilling to have children, so that is not a factor."
versus
"I would like to have children in the future, but biologically I understand that I could wait at least 10 years to do that."

So, are you willing to gamble that they'll change their mind over having children? Because odds on, they won't. And you'll have wasted your fertile years, during which you could have met another partner who wanted the same things as you. Don't underestimate the resentment that can build where two people want different, incompatible things. Imagine ten years down the line, those ten years that you 'could' wait - and you've waited and they're still unwilling?

On this basis alone, I don't think you should marry.

Next up, your current issue.

"6 months ago, my partner said they wanted to leave their job in order to focus on artistic pursuits, something that they were unwilling to be flexible on"
Well there's a problem, right from the off. 'Unwilling to be flexible'. Relationships involve compromises for both parties. One partner being inflexible and backing the other into a corner where they can say "I feel like my partner has left me with no good options" - that's not a good relationship. Certainly not good enough as a basis for marriage.

Something else to consider, in my opinion:

"My partner and I have been in an international relationship for 4 years, and have lived together for the past 8 months."
An 'international relationship' generally involves long periods apart. That can give the time spent together an excitement, akin to an extended holiday romance. The drudgery of daily life tends to be missing. So I'd be inclined to concentrate on the past eight months, how the relationship has been without the 'international' frisson.

And one last point:

"I fear that I'm approaching this marriage in too cold a way"
No, you're not. I wish more people would approach marriage as you have done, considering the ramifications of marrying or not marrying. Marriage is important, and the decision should be treated as such.

I agree with this.

OP, I think you're being taken for a mug by your partner, definitely a potential . I wouldn't marry them, and you're having doubts for a reason.

There is an unmarried partner visa route. Here's your option without a marriage.

Although tbh the sexes may be relevant since there is also a difference in opinion about wanting DCs. Women have a shorter, viable timeframe for becoming mothers than men have for being fathers.
Sexes are still irrelevant because even ignoring the children question, one partner has conveniently decided they want to be financially propped up by their partner so they can do their hobby and have also conveniently engineered the situation so the only way the relationship can move forward is to marry in a country where they could live a life of leisure in marriage and then leave the marriage with substantial assets in the event of a divorce.

Bit surprised at the OP's lack of involvement in her/his own thread - one comment in 4 hours or so.

I think the OP knows the answer already. Just needs validated argument with partner.

@emptydreamer

There is an unmarried partner visa route. Here's your option without a marriage.

The op has said they cannot go down this route as they don’t fit the criteria.

I would like to have children in the future, but biologically I understand that I could wait at least 10 years to do that. My partner has enough savings to support themselves for a few years. We are in a position where our relationship is viable in the short term if we maintained separate finances, but marriage does not allow that. I expect that their future income will be small, they have no professional artistic training and little experience.

If you want children later, and your DP doesn't, then you already know this relationship will not last. No way should you get married with that at the back of your mind.

Separately, it doesn't sound as if your DP's artistic endeavours are going to work out anyway. In a relatively short period, unless you are bankrolling them to be a housewife/husband, they will end up going back to a normal job.

Could you get a job and work visa for their home country? Then you could live together, and support them if you want to, without marriage.

The op has said they cannot go down this route as they don’t fit the criteria.
Then they run a risk as being seen as a marriage of convenience in case of a formal marriage as well, I think the burden of proof is more or less the same - outside of the cases where there are known cultural differences (e.g. arranged marriages)