Marriage between two parties who are massively different earners is too bigger risk for one patry

[Whoarethewho]

So to set the scene. Been together over 8 years. My partner is applying pressure to marry. However with 50% of marriages ending in divorce and us more than occasionally arguing this worries me. I own my own house brought outright with cash from my work, I have significant pensions saved already (sever hundred k). And I earn 6x my partner's salary (we both work full time), I pay for all bills council tax water ect. They contribute nothing financially. And I don't want children nor do I want them to be a stay at home house maker.

My partner wants the big white dress\suit style wedding. All I see with current divorce legislation is a massive payout coming in the future where I would have to give up half I have worked so hard for when there would be no sacrifices required for the marriage (it's not like they were paying for the mortgage or caring for children). Legally binding prenuptial agreements would help here but sadly are not valid in England. So really unless children are intended to be involved I can't really see why a higher earning partner would consent to marriage where the partner could leave at any time and just take half the assets.

Do you agree? I know people of both sexes in this sort of situation so it's not just me that thinks like this.

Yanbu marriage may be right for some but not here
Yabu marriage is a risk people with much to loose should still take.

Don't do it. I did it. He cheated. I regret it

Have a commitment ceremony without legal gubbings?

[quote Poorlykitten]@TedMullins I’m
Sorry you feel that way but that’s not why I married. Never did I once think about the financial aspects. I guess if you are then maybe marriage is not for you.[/quote]
Just because you didn’t think about it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. If you were ever to divorce you and your spouse would be financially affected, that aspect of marriage doesn’t disappear just because you did it ‘for love’! So I stand by my point it is naive and pretty foolish to not consider it at all.

* I am not sure why your partner is staying in a relationship with someone who seem to resent them for earning so little and who think they are after their assets. They should run a mile.*

^I agree.

I agree with the OP.

However if a man had written the OP = cold, calculating, uncommitted, selfish.

If a woman had written it = savvy, protect yourself, beware the cocklodger, don't be taken advantage of.

Marriages work best when a young person with few assets married another person with few assets and they built a life and more assets together.

Once age and finances skews the equation, it's not worth it.

I completely agree - relationships where one partner has significantly more money are more difficult - they come with a built in imbalance.

The obvious answer, of course, is a pre-nup! Have you suggested that? Have you discussed your concerns with your partner? I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being pragmatic.

What would you want to happen if you died? Would you want your partner to inherit?

@Flowersandjellybeans

I completely agree - relationships where one partner has significantly more money are more difficult - they come with a built in imbalance.

The obvious answer, of course, is a pre-nup! Have you suggested that? Have you discussed your concerns with your partner? I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being pragmatic.

What would you want to happen if you died? Would you want your partner to inherit?

Are pre nups legally valid in the U.K.? I understand they are valid in the USA.

@BluebellsGreenbells

I’m wondering if you don’t want to get married or have children, where you think your money will end up on your death?

Family/friends/charities of the OP's choosing? Have you heard of something called a will?

Have a ceremony without the signing of the register

You don't have to want to get married. However, if you're with someone that you wouldn't want to marry because it would end in divorce as you say, then why are you with them?

Get legal advice and get a pre nup drafted

One of the main purposes of marriage is to allow one person the safe space to make themselves financially vulnerable. That person can be then supported wholly or partially by the other person whilst they build a home and raise a family. You have to trust the other person in the relationship enough to believe this is possible otherwise marriage is a bit pointless.

Why have a ceremony at all, what it is its purpose?

I genuinely would have thought again about marrying my husband if he presented me with a pre nup, I would have been offended.

Echoing all others, marriage definitely not in this situation.
I couldn't live happily without my dh so money is irrelevant I wouldn't care how much he earns or I do we want to be together and he may not like me in ten years but we have had wondeful years together.

But you need to be crystal clear with him and be prepared for the end of the relationship.

@Temp023

One of the main purposes of marriage is to allow one person the safe space to make themselves financially vulnerable. That person can be then supported wholly or partially by the other person whilst they build a home and raise a family. You have to trust the other person in the relationship enough to believe this is possible otherwise marriage is a bit pointless.

Your thinking is spot on. Fuck the romance brigade.

I would be the same in your position, I think. As it stands we got together and combined finances young when my now husband was only earning £20 something thousand and I earned 3 times that. Now I earn much less and he earns nearly four times my decent professional salary. Kids have got in the way of my career and I've done a lot of pushing and coaching from behind the scenes to which we both credit some of his success (including funding a career change which saw him on an apprenticeship wage for a while) so it feels like an equal partnership though my earning power has actually decreased. But I think kids is the key factor here. If I wasn't doing more of the heavy lifting in that department we would likely have similar incomes. If we'd kept finances separate I would likely be richer than him - I organise all our investing etc, he has no interest in personal finances though he works in finance...

In short, I think for many families marriage still makes sense. I would not be having kids with him or running our finances had we not. For you, it doesn't sound like it does.

If your partner wants a big party then why not a big fancy anniversary (of getting together) party with speeches etc?

I think the age makes a difference. Eg I was about to start my first law job when we married and my husband owned a house and was a head of dept teacher (and I would only have been with him if married anyway for religious reasons). I was 21 when we married. After 20 years I earned 10x more and he got 60% (more than many lower earner women actually) as I wanted a "clean break" settlement so was buying out his maintenance claims - to make his salary up to a higher one - for life (we decided our two pensions were worth about the same so left those - as indeed they were). So I don't think a marriage at that early stage is too risky or unwise.

2 of my adult children have married (one only two weeks ago today). Both married someone similar in terms of assets and income (unlike my lawyer/ teacher marriage) so even though they were a bit older I certainly support the fact they married rather than live together. Had one married someone with no job or who did not own a property I would have perhaps been pushing for a pre nup - if you both have lawyers, make them fair, do them well in advance of the wedding, both declare everything to the other etc they they are likely to be used in a divorce - obviously none of us marry expecting to divorced of course.

Mumsnetters should also remember the law in Scotland of divorce (and I think at one stage cohabitation too) is not the same as England and check differences.

Thanks again for further comments.

since they say they are happy without children I don't think I am depriving them of that. They are a very vocal person so they would say if they wanted something.

I will again look at prenuptial agreements to see if there is enough advice included a court will use them but as things currently stand I am still very much unconvinced about marriage. When we met the incomes were 1.6 X so I really expected the ratio to stay approximately the same, it hasn't because I have career ambition and have moved jobs a lot they haven't it's their decision and to be honest I come from a working class environment so I would know how to spend 100k plus income I do know how to invest it though. It isn't a problem in day to day life as I invest so much of it that we actually have very similar incomes after so we can only afford to live similar life styles then. It's just I am aquiring lots of assets intended for a early retirement and that is what is up Infront of the court in a potential divorce settlement.

I agree and this is the reason DP and I aren't married. He lives in the house I own with me - he signed a living together agreement that was drawn up by my solicitor and signed it, witnessed by his solicitor, before he moved in. This means that he has no claim on my house.

He already has a daughter (DSD) and we now have a younger daughter together. If I die I want everything to go to my DD, I don't want it to end up being split between DD and DSD (it's not my responsibility to provide for DSD, her parents can do that).

DP and I got together in our mid 30s and I had already starting building up assets, whereas DP hadn't. It doesn't seem fair that he should have a claim on my assets. We also have different attitudes to money - I'm a saver and he's a spender. I think if we combined finances it would cause more arguments than if we keep them separate.

Bit of a long post but I just wanted to say that it isn't uncommon to have separate finances, despite what many mumsnetters would have you believe.

Well I think it can work if you want to work as a team, with each partner bringing different things.

However on your case, I am not sure you want to marry, so it probably won't work.

“It isn't a problem in day to day life as I invest so much of it that we actually have very similar incomes after so we can only afford to live similar life styles then. It's just I am aquiring lots of assets intended for a early retirement and that is what is up Infront of the court in a potential divorce settlement.”

It will be a problem for your partner if you or they want to separate at some point and all they own are the clothes on their back - as they have no opportunity to contribute to a mortgaged property and entitlement to half the equity.

Won’t it also be a problem if you retire at 55 and they work another 20+ years.

I was surprised reading your update as I assumed you were already wealthy when you met but actually you have got wealthy during your relationship - albeit from your hard work. You seem quite happy working hard and buying assets for yourself. Your partner would be wise to move on quickly where hopefully they are young enough to get their own mortgage or a shared one with someone that wants to build a life together rather than separately.

Reasons why YOU don't suit marriage...

Marriage is about unity and working as a team. Considering your attitude to your money, you're highly unlikely to share this approach with your spouse.

The idea you're already thinking of divorce casts bigger questions over your attitude towards your relationship. Let alone such a commitment as marriage.

Your whole post makes it loud and clear you have absolutely no respect for, or trust in your poor partner.

I think you should be very honest and tell her of these feelings. To at least give her a chance to consider if she really wants to marry you.

If I were her and I read this, or knew you felt this way, nevermind marriage, I'd be packing my bags...

Seems to me your view is perfectly reasonable. Your partner has every opportunity to make his/ her/ their own financial decisions that would enable them to be financially prepared in case of a breakup- if anything, they have a higher disposable income at present as a result of your current arrangement. Your partner is not some helpless dependent, forced by you to stay at home and wait on you. They have their own job and income, and presumably are able to think and plan for themselves for the future. I don’t understand why people seem to think they would be left high and dry by a break up. Their lifestyle would probably be not quite the same as it is now, but that is because they have a job which earned them less (as many people do) not because of the actions of the OP.