To be quite embarrassed by this

[bluepurplepinkyellow]

Been with dp 11 years, have dc together, Aibu to feel embarrassed that we aren't married or even engaged?

Not that this has anything to do with marriage but he owns the house he brought it on his own, we had brought a house together ( he inherited a lot of money, which is the only reason he could buy ) but when dd was 2 weeks old he asked me to sign a deed of trust to protect his money and then when I realised what I had signed I asked him why he felt he needed to do this as I have no intention of interest in " his money " we were very much together and In love or so I thought, I decided that when I we moved and sold the old house I wanted to be either together and equal or to allow him to buy it alone without me owning about 7000 of it and feeling like it was only part my home. It was clear from the start it was more his house, we've moved now and it just feels really off that I'm just his girlfriend living in his house that doesn't feel like we are in it together, Aibu to feel embarrassed by this ?

Six pages in and I am still do not understand the set up regarding the home ownership. If the house is completely in his name then the left over money from the £7k needs to be saved, so you can provide accommodation for your child should you split up.

So it is a mobile home? Where did he bring the house from and where did he put it and why does this have relevance as to whether you are married?

@NerrSnerr

I don’t understand why people say they can’t afford childcare.

I luckily don't have twins but if we had twins the nursery fees would come to more than 50% of our wages if full time, probably more. With mortgage and others bills we would not be able to afford it. There would not be enough money to pay nursery, bills and food. It can't be that difficult to understand that different people have different incomes and nursery is very expensive (my youngest has just gone to school after paying nursery fees for the last 6 years).

But with the tax free childcare account. It’s likely that you could break even or at least be a bit better off. My job isn’t massively over minimum wage but even with twins I’m still better off working my 3 days a week! Sibling discounts, the tax free account etc. all helps.

It’s great if you choose to be a SAHM, but I don’t think not saying that you can’t afford being able to work is true in most cases.

Quite frankly I’d sign a deed of trust if I was moving an unmarried partner into my owned house, and I’d advise my daughter to do the same, and I know on every bloody thread where th genders are reversed the woman is always advised to protect her assets from her male partner should they split.

Op, what’s your plans to get into work, how old are the kids and when does the free nursery hours kick in?

I’m not sure what the common laws are here with co habiting couples in the UK.

There are none. It's a dangerous myth that makes some women think they have some of the rights that come with marriage when they don't.

@Bluntness100

Quite frankly I’d sign a deed of trust if I was moving an unmarried partner into my owned house, and I’d advise my daughter to do the same, and I know on every bloody thread where th genders are reversed the woman is always advised to protect her assets from her male partner should they split.

Op, what’s your plans to get into work, how old are the kids and when does the free nursery hours kick in?

Will you stop reversing the genders so that you can attack everyone for something they aren't doing in a situation they aren't discussing?

I would hope that your daughter would think harder if the unmarried partner was the SAHD to their joint children, and ask herself why he wasn't working and how that decision came to be made. Being a daughter, though, this is far less likely to happen, so as much as you like reversing genders, you might like to pay attention as to where they usually end up.

This is exactly why we need to break the default expectation that it will be the mother who takes care of the children, unless agreed otherwise.

The starting point for all planned children should be that BOTH parents expect to do 50% of the caregiving, including cooking and cleaning, organisation, school admin etc. Both parents should expect to have to reduce working hours to free up the time to do this on weekdays as well as weekends, school holidays, sick days etc.

This won't work for every family and so the conversation will progress to whether or not it benefits everyone for one person to give up work to do the majority of care. But that will then highlight that one parent is getting considerable benefit by having the other take on (their share of) caring responsibilities.

Right now (some) men seem to think their job is done as soon as the baby is created - and that they can dip in and out of child care as they want or feel able. Leaving their partners to do all the rest at considerably financial risk and penalty to themselves.

@Bluntness100

Quite frankly I’d sign a deed of trust if I was moving an unmarried partner into my owned house, and I’d advise my daughter to do the same, and I know on every bloody thread where th genders are reversed the woman is always advised to protect her assets from her male partner should they split.

Op, what’s your plans to get into work, how old are the kids and when does the free nursery hours kick in?

But it's rarely the woman who sods off scot-free with all the cash and assets and leaves a SAHD with the children and no job, house or money, so it's not the same situation at all when the genders are reversed. Women are well-advised to protect themselves when DC are involved.

@dopeyduck

So my DP owned a house before we met, we moved and brought together but have a deed of trust to protect his initial investment as that money was solely his.

I have no idea what all the negative comments towards this are - it would be fine it it were me as a woman protecting my assets.

His money being put into a joint house enabled me to buy as I otherwise had no deposit. Of course I could have got a FTB mortgage but not on a place big enough for a family home without changing area. I'm now building equity on a house I own 50% of rather than renting / living in his house. This is ideal for our family unit and not at all unfair.

We're not married so he supplemented me whilst I was on maternity so I suffered no loss of earnings whilst I'm the primary cater for our child. Equally a percentage of his pension will be mine should we separate to compensate for lost pension contributions during raising our children and / or lack of promotion / overtime opportunities. Should we separate he can lose that part of a pension or he can pay me off (calculated via solicitor). Don't suppose anyone thinks that's unfair.

Should we marry these agreements will be superseded by the marriage and everything with be a normal 50/50 marital split.

On divorced everything isn’t necessarily split 50:50. It depends how long you were married for and also what you both brought into marriage. Assuming 50:50 split explains why more men are not getting married.

Your partner has protected his financial assets which is reasonable

But you are unable to create any personal financial assets as you are a mum who doesn't earn much

So the situation vis a vis your finances and potential finances is unfair

You're not married so you have zero security

It looks utterly shit for you.

I wouldnt be embarrassed. I'd be scared

Don’t be embarrassed OP. CAB have good guide on difference between marriage and cohabitation. You are vulnerable. Don’t be left in a precarious position by him dangling carrot of marriage one day.
You are in his house if you split you are homeless and unlikely to have any rights to house. If he dies with no will you won’t inherit. Has he nominated you for death in service etc? Has he got life insurance as you won’t receive bereavement support payments aka widows allowance if he dies (has been challenged but law unchanged as yet).
A great phrase I saw on here was women pay for donkey work, men pay for assets. So you pay for childcare, kids clothes etc he pays for house. If you split in 10 years he’s got a house and you are starting from scratch age 40 or 50.

@bluepurplepinkyellow what was your career pre DC?
Obviously at this point you can't go back in time but your time is worth something. If your "DP" (quotations because you've currently got the rights of a lodger but more responsibility because of DC ie worst of both worlds) wants to treat you like hired help he should pay for your time/loss of earnings raising this child FT. If you've had all the caring responsibilities since birth then c.50% once DC is in school he should fund that.

You've allowed yourself be played for a mug and now rather than wasting time being embarrassed you need to pull your socks up and start looking out for you and DC best interests.

You aren't equal to him. He has made sure of that.

He may have done. But she's gone along with it. FOR 11 YEARS.

I so wish women would realise marriage is a legal contract designed to protect family units.

If you take the role of not working or working less due to child care the other parent should be committed to supporting that as a team. Different roles shared responsibility. Marriage is based on that principle. One team, different but equal roles, for the good of children.

You are in a dreadful position.
You are extremely vulnerable and dependent on his choices.

Everyone saying go to work.
Well yes.
But that's hard with children and will be limited.
Which is why we have marriage.

If he doesn't want to get married ask for a civil partnership for legal protection.
When he says no to that your answer is clear and not muddied by these romantic notions of marriage and a proposal.

He doesn't want to legally protect you and the children.
He wants to legally protect himself.

This is not a partnership never mind a marriage.

That's obvious anyway. You've been ignoring it.

You're on your own. Start making decisions with that mindset.

Not embarrassed but a bit worried should you split up since you have a child together.

When I hear this type of story it makes me think back to a friend's boyfriend. They spend years together but he had the money and she rented. Good for visits and sex but unlike your case they never moved in together. It made the split easier but she never felt like he loved her enough to trust her, to buy together. He is viewed as tight.

For me there is a difference in protecting money/assets made prior to the relationship and doing this but also controlling the money and assets built whilst in a relationship even after having children together. In fairness to him he has made it quite clear that what is his remains his, and there seems no indication that this will change.

Thing is, he's using your family income to further his investment. In 10 years, he'll have a decent chunk of a house paid off, and what will you have? If he decides you can't live there anymore, then what? That £7k won't get you very far.

Right. Here's an exercise: If he came home from work tomorrow and said he's met someone else and is moving her into his home, how fucked would you be?

You have a few thousand in savings, but you've dipped into that - still though, you'd have enough for a deposit and private rent.

You have a career break on your CV. What do you need here to return to a job that can support you if he plays funny buggers with his income to avoid paying CMS?
What would you get in terms of tax credits or benefits?
What would you get in terms of CMS for the children?

Also, go to a place that does free legal aid and see can they help you unravel exactly who owns what. You may find that if he did just hand you the £7000 that you still are on deeds somewhere..

Gather all your financial information and make sense of it for yourself.

I know it's hard. For the first 3 years of DS's life something like 2/3 of my little salary went on childcare. But I was adamant I wasn't giving up my job as we were not married. And I'm with someone who's always considered his money to be family money. But I was determined that without the protection of marriage, I would be ok if we split.

You should not feel embarrassed. This is not your shame but rather his. It's all very well to ring-fence your assets going into a relationship, but a very different thing when you agree one of you takes a career break for to raise the kids you made together and there's no financial or legal protection for that person.

He’s only doing what women on here are constantly being told to do. If the roles were reversed, you’d be told to do exactly the same by posters. He’s right to protect himself in my opinion, it was his inheritance that enabled him to buy in the first place. There’s no way of knowing you’ll be together for ever…

@Mybestgirl

He’s only doing what women on here are constantly being told to do. If the roles were reversed, you’d be told to do exactly the same by posters. He’s right to protect himself in my opinion, it was his inheritance that enabled him to buy in the first place. There’s no way of knowing you’ll be together for ever…

Stop with the imaginary reversals! Not only is it completely irrelevant, but part of the point is that it's almost always women who find themselves in this situation.

And if it were reversed, and the man were a SAHD, that would be taken into account by most people.

I've been with my dp for 13 years. 2 DC and a mortgage and we have no plans on getting married at all. Doesn't bother me or him in the slightest

If he is picking up on the fact that you want to be married so you have a claim on the house, it's not going to happen. And tbh I wouldn't blame him. It sounds a bit mercenary though I also understand it from your point of view.

You need to look at your situation objectively. You'll feel more secure with some money behind you. Perhaps you need to look at going back to work. It will be hard financially now, but it will be split between the two of you, and means you won't be so low on the ladder in a few years. And then make sure you have a private savings account and put a portion of your wages in there. If you know you have enough that you could pay rent on a place for 6 months if everything went wrong, you'll feel more comfortable and won't seem needy. Even an evening job stacking shelves would be good. No childcare required and you can start to build up your savings.

If he dislikes that, he can propose and make you feel more secure that way. But you don't only have one option, so start exploring all options.

I'd be very hurt with the 'Deed of Trust' that he asked you to sign, and would be asking myself serious questions about why he is so worried that you could take 'his money'.

When I met my DH, he owned a one bed flat and I rented. I eventually moved in with him (I helped him with costs for his mortgage and bills, but it worked out a lit cheaper to the rent and bills I had been paying from living by myself). About a year after we moved in together, a close relative of mine died, and I inherited a decent sum from the estate.

DH sold his one bed flat, and put the profits from that to my inheritance to allow us to out down a deposit on a 3 bed house. The deposit we put down was about 60% - of that I would say I contributed around 40%, and him about 20%.

Never dawned on me to ever question that I out down more. I had been in a position where I was able to, and so did it. He earns more than me (everything goes into joint accounts), but his higher earnings mean that he contributes more each month to our ongoing mortgage/bills/general other outgoings. Over the course of our lifetime, it will roughly equal out. If it doesn't, so what? We both contributed what we could, when we could, for our life together.

And if it were reversed, and the man were a SAHD, that would be taken into account by most people.

More than taken into account. I think SAHD's are the most fiercely defended group on MN. I always ctrl+f those threads to see if I guess the number of "poor bloke" comments correctly.

He won’t get married OP, as it’s not in his own (financial) interest

And he’s putting his needs and wants first

He’ll never proposed