"Boston marriage" - any experience?

[abostonfiancee]

In the historical understanding - i.e. two women living together as a household, or even a family unit, but without the underlying romantic / sexual relationship.

Discussed it with an old friend (we know each other for 20+ years), firstly as a joke, but then it actually turned into a serious discussion... and then into planning. We used to flat-share during the student years, and then were often on-off coach-surfing at each other's places for a couple of weeks at a time, and just joked that it was the healthiest and the most pleasurable co-habitation experience both of us have ever had (including our marriages). We get along extremely well together, all our friendship teething problems are (hopefully) well in the past.

We both are single mothers in professional jobs (same industry too), our children are approximately same age and are good friends. The housing and childcare costs are crippling us both, and we both are very lonely. No intention from any of us to remarry or even live with a man again until our children are much older.

Any obvious drawbacks to the plan?

@ChargingBuck

Given that neither of you has been a single parent for very long, I wouldn't make big decisions at this stage.

FFS.
Women move in with men all the time - often when they've only known them a few months.

Why is it suddenly "a big decision" simply because a man isn't involved? Do you think 2 adult, high powered women aren't able to make sensible decisions without some dick being on offer?

What an odd way of looking at things!

It should be a big decision to move ANYONE into your childs' home, whether they have a dick or not. The impact on the child if things go south isn't going to be any different because OP is going to be living with a woman.

What an odd way of looking at things!

How is it odd, @icedcoffees - especially as you think the same as I do:

It should be a big decision to move ANYONE into your childs' home, whether they have a dick or not. The impact on the child if things go south isn't going to be any different because OP is going to be living with a woman.?

OP is obviously putting a lot of thought & planning into this. I haven't seen a single cavalier or dismissive word from her on the topic.
But PP came over all scoldy, like she & her pal are incapable of making a sensible decision - compare that with the tone of hundreds of other threads about wanting to move in with a man & it's all -
"he needs to show you commitment" "make sure you get married" etc.

The comment I quoted irked me. It doesn't tend to be said when a woman is deliberating about whether to live with a man. Because that's perceived as a "normal" progression.

@abostonfiancee

Surely both fathers have a say in who looks after their DC if their mother dies? Why would you leave your money to someone who is likely not to be looking after your DCs? Not leaving money, but the payout on life insurance, to ensure that e.g. school and university fees continue to be paid for. Both fathers are not involved much. In my case it is very very unlikely that he would have decided to spend the windfall money on the children anyway.

How odd.

Their own fathers will be deciding where/when/if your DCs go to private school in the event of your death - doesn’t matter how much money you have left your friend (she could put it all on a horse!) - suggest you invest in some expert legal advice.

Also I am really impressed that on a single salary in London you can pay out full time childcare / school fees for two DCs, after 2 relatively recent maternity leaves, have multiple investments abroad and live in a 6 bedroomed house. You go girl!

It should be a big decision to move ANYONE into your childs' home, whether they have a dick or not. The impact on the child if things go south isn't going to be any different because OP is going to be living with a woman.
I absolutely agree. In this case it is not just anyone random, but an auntie they knew from birth, and who ranks second in terms of the "contact" time spent together. Obviously not a guarantee that things won't go south, but (I hope!) we'd be able to catch any decline early enough to go back to the precious arrangement and stay friends (and for the children to stay friends).

I wouldn’t, due to the high risks of issues in ‘blended families’.

Also I am really impressed that on a single salary in London you can pay out full time childcare / school fees for two DCs, after 2 relatively recent maternity leaves, have multiple investments abroad and live in a 6 bedroomed house. You go girl!
I did not have maternity leaves with either over the statutory two weeks, and as I said in my very first post, the childcare costs are crippling. Not sure where you have read that, about multiple investments abroad, or about the 6-bedroom house.

@abostonfiancee

Also I am really impressed that on a single salary in London you can pay out full time childcare / school fees for two DCs, after 2 relatively recent maternity leaves, have multiple investments abroad and live in a 6 bedroomed house. You go girl! I did not have maternity leaves with either over the statutory two weeks, and as I said in my very first post, the childcare costs are crippling. Not sure where you have read that, about multiple investments abroad, or about the 6-bedroom house.

I think the six bedroom house came from the fact you said all the children (4) would be able to have their own bedrooms. Plus you and your friend (2). So, 6 bedroom house?

@ChargingBuck

Given that neither of you has been a single parent for very long, I wouldn't make big decisions at this stage.

FFS.
Women move in with men all the time - often when they've only known them a few months.

Why is it suddenly "a big decision" simply because a man isn't involved? Do you think 2 adult, high powered women aren't able to make sensible decisions without some dick being on offer?

You are referring to my post here, @ChargingBuck

I would like you to tell me where I said it would be different if a man (or, as you so poetically put it, "a dick") were involved.

My comment would have been exactly the same if the OP and her children were proposing to live with a man and his children. It is an absolutely massive decision, whoever you're proposing to live with.

I think it's completely different once the children have all left home. I can see lots of advantages to it then (though I'd still rather have my own space).

I thought @OnwardsAndSideways1 's post was very sensible all round.

I think the six bedroom house came from the fact you said all the children (4) would be able to have their own bedrooms. Plus you and your friend (2). So, 6 bedroom house?
There are only 3 children (I never said four?), and the house is a 4 bed / 2 lounge. The plan is to convert one of the lounges into a bedroom too.

@abostonfiancee

It should be a big decision to move ANYONE into your childs' home, whether they have a dick or not. The impact on the child if things go south isn't going to be any different because OP is going to be living with a woman. I absolutely agree. In this case it is not just anyone random, but an auntie they knew from birth, and who ranks second in terms of the "contact" time spent together. Obviously not a guarantee that things won't go south, but (I hope!) we'd be able to catch any decline early enough to go back to the precious arrangement and stay friends (and for the children to stay friends).

I think in a way, that increases the risk of them being really upset if things don't work out.

What happens if you fall out to the extent that you don't speak afterwards? Your kids don't just lose their friends, but they lose a parental figure in their lives too - and your friend has no obligation to remain in touch afterwards either.

Staying with someone on holiday is very very different to living with someone full-time while you both juggle full-time jobs, housework, looking after your own DC, school runs, activities, homework etc.

I have two friends in the states who have lived this way for over 20 years. They are both artists with a really camp vintage aesthetic and they bought a massive old American Victorian house (think Addams Family-style detached house with a turret, not brick terrace) which is painted in cartoon colours inside and out. They have both had boyfriends come and go over the years and friend B had a child who tragically died very young due to a congenital illness but in his short life, they raised him together. They are now selling their crazy beautiful house to move to one of their hometowns to be near friend A's elderly mother (friend B's parents died years ago) because their families are now entirely integrated - Friend A's mother has a beautiful old house and a working fruit farm and orchard which they are planning on turning into B&B once they build a smaller house on the property for the mother to live in.

Anyway, all that to say that it can work beautifully. I wish it were more normalised.

@JustLyra

But doesn't solve the housing and childcare costs are crippling problem mentioned in the OP.

It would solve the childcare costs in the same way living together will.

And since the OP isn’t planning to ask a contribution to her mortgage it’ll not make a negative difference.

Maybe OP means things like bills and electricity?

*bills, don't know why I mentioned e;ectrovy seperalt

“I did not have maternity leaves with either over the statutory two weeks,”

Why did you do that?

It’s 6 weeks in the UK on 90% salary?

I half think it's a wonderful idea but half think it has the potential to turn very ugly and ruin a great friendship.

Does anyone remember the 80's sitcom Kate and Allie, which was about this exact situation? It was one of my favourites as a kid.

@TakemedowntoPotatoCity

Does anyone remember the 80's sitcom Kate and Allie, which was about this exact situation? It was one of my favourites as a kid.

I posted a link to it AGES ago.

I agree that it seems a bit odd that you work in the City yet didn't take more than two weeks maternity leave, so although it doesn't have much relevance to the thread, I'm curious as to why? Everyone I know who works in the City work for firms that have very generous maternity policies, usually full pay for a significant chunk of it. If yours didn't, I'm surprised market forces haven't forced them to improve it tbh. And why not take the 6 weeks, you may as well take longer off work to avoid the astronomical childcare costs. How does going back to work after two weeks help with childcare costs? If you're getting paid 90% of your salary, surely that's better than going back to work after two weeks and paying for childcare? That post doesn't make sense.

@Orchid876

I agree that it seems a bit odd that you work in the City yet didn't take more than two weeks maternity leave, so although it doesn't have much relevance to the thread, I'm curious as to why? Everyone I know who works in the City work for firms that have very generous maternity policies, usually full pay for a significant chunk of it. If yours didn't, I'm surprised market forces haven't forced them to improve it tbh. And why not take the 6 weeks, you may as well take longer off work to avoid the astronomical childcare costs. How does going back to work after two weeks help with childcare costs? If you're getting paid 90% of your salary, surely that's better than going back to work after two weeks and paying for childcare? That post doesn't make sense.

I am self employed, a contractor.

@A8mint

And why the stupid name-Boston Maariage, when what you are talking about is a houseshare?

Because it’s an existing idiom that describes a specific sort of houseshare.

You might as well ask ‘why Dutch treat when what you’re talking about is splitting the bill? Why French leave when you’re talking about bunking off? Why Croydon facelift when you’re talking about tying your ponytail too tight?”

It’s the way language works - not that you’re obliged to use those expressions if you don’t like them. Except the last one. As a South Londoner, I think that one should be mandatory.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_marriage

Ah I see, but that's not really about childcare costs, that's because you're a contractor and presumably can't afford to take more than two weeks off work. Unless you were planning on taking maternity leave AND paying childcare costs. I can see how that wouldn't be possible on Maternity Allowance.

@Orchid876

Ah I see, but that's not really about childcare costs, that's because you're a contractor and presumably can't afford to take more than two weeks off work. Unless you were planning on taking maternity leave AND paying childcare costs. I can see how that wouldn't be possible on Maternity Allowance.

It is a vicious circle really, between the childcare costs and the transient nature of contracting work. I would not be able to pay two lots of childcare fees out of a permanent salary for what I do. It is not the ideal arrangement, I wish I had considered it in more detail before deciding to have children (but then there was a second income in the family, so the cost of error did not seem too high). But it is what it is now.

I replied about this to a poster who implied that I am lying, because how on earth would a sweet ickle woman manage a job after two maternity leaves.

@Dozer the difference with blended families is that the children have no prior knowledge of the radon’s parent select. In this case, they’ve know both adults and kids since birth. That’s v v different

No children involved as we are all adults now but my mum did this with a friend.
They were both single and lonely so aged 57 they both sold up and bought a joint house, joint car and joint holiday home.
They do lots of things separately but also lots of stuff together.
There wasn't even an issue when one of the adult children moved in for 2 years.
They are both enjoying life and have company with each other.
They also have watertight wills.
No property, or assets can be sold until they are both dead and is then split equally between the children.

@Cordyceps

I have two friends in the states who have lived this way for over 20 years. They are both artists with a really camp vintage aesthetic and they bought a massive old American Victorian house (think Addams Family-style detached house with a turret, not brick terrace) which is painted in cartoon colours inside and out. They have both had boyfriends come and go over the years and friend B had a child who tragically died very young due to a congenital illness but in his short life, they raised him together. They are now selling their crazy beautiful house to move to one of their hometowns to be near friend A's elderly mother (friend B's parents died years ago) because their families are now entirely integrated - Friend A's mother has a beautiful old house and a working fruit farm and orchard which they are planning on turning into B&B once they build a smaller house on the property for the mother to live in.

Anyway, all that to say that it can work beautifully. I wish it were more normalised.

That sounds so lovely.