How many more women are going to find themselves in this situation ?

[sofrustratedbylackofknowledge]

Thread borne by the sheer amount of posts this week alone, of women who have moved in with wealthier men . Men who own houses solely in their name.. and women who have children with them without a contract of marriage or civil partnership..

The relationship breaks down and the woman is either not working or massively economically disadvantaged compared with their partners .

Made even worst by the courts bias towards shared care rendering CM almost negligible...

Why are women putting themselves in this situation. ?

Marriage has a lot of patriarchal connotations which are 'no go' for some women... but now we have civil partnerships why would you not go for this option .. ? Or is it the man refusing to commit ?

Also really concerned about the massive number of contraception failures . So many women taking the pill finding themselves pregnant and deciding to continue the pregnancy with no legal protection ..is the pill /implant failing ?

Truth be told, dearly beloved, as I call him, earned 10x or more some years than me. I made damn sure I knew where all the money was. It wasn’t an accident that I became an accountant.

I don’t like that prenuptial agreements aren’t recognized in the UK. Mine came in very handy when getting divorced as all assets brought into the marriage were listed along with their valuation.

I think many women want a baby so much that they’ll overlook red flags in a relationship in order to have one. And then they’ll have more kids with the same man even though they already know he’s a shit dad.

Why can't women do that? Why such low expectations of women?

Because this list isn't about empowering women, it's about bashing unmarried mothers. Empowering, would be encouraging women not to give up work. Ultimately, this bunch want to stay at home with the babies and be condescending to unmarried women who want the same.

Never mind there are circumstances that don't financially protect even married women.

I think its one of the things that maybe the old days had right. The only thing that women have that men want is access to our genitals. Deny that and guess what, they were up the aisle and away from the reception as fast as they could arrange it.

Now they get it all with no committment. Sex on date three (later and she is frigid, throw her back. Earlier and she is a slag, shag her then throw her back). Kids where she does the wife work without any wife rights. And if he is really lucky, half of the bills and mortgage paid too.

Trading virginity for security isnt romantic, but is a hell of a better deal for us. The sexual revolution did nothing for women but devalue us in the eyes of men.

Yes! You have phrased this better than I could and it’s so true. In my grandmother’s day, the perks of marriage only came with marriage.

(However the wedding industry is thriving so let’s not tar all men with the same brush)!

@PurpleButterflyWings I know you've said most not all, and especially those with children so I do acknowledge you're trying not to make a sweeping generalisation... but please, don't cringe on my behalf, don't feel awkward on my behalf and be assured that I am not heart broken. I am happily unmarried, secure in my decision and now my friends' marriages are starting to sadly end even less convinced by marriage as an emotional concept, or one that I should feel heart broken not to have experienced.

As a legal concept, yes, I understand completely and particularly where children are involved but since I'm child free and the higher earner, don't pity me anymore than you pity anyone else happy with their life choices!

Oh here we go again! Didn't think it would be long before this drivel was trotted out. 'Single women are much happier than married women' is a myth created by single women to make other single women feel better.

I know about 9 or 10 single women (over 25) and they're nearly all pretty miserable half the time. Always broke, struggling financially, no-one to help when they're sick, and always feel a bit left out at big social events where most people are in couples. And at LEAST half of them are ALWAYS going on dates, desperate to find a man!

I was single at that age and confirm it was grim for all the reasons above. All my friends were settling down, some already having their first baby, the film of the year was ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’ (showing my age here) and I was on/off dating the man who became my first husband. By the time I was 30 he was still embarrassingly commitment-shy and looking back it was a dark period in my life.

What bunch? I was married and have always worked. Apart from mat leave, I have always worked full time. I do think women should retain their own careers. However, many simply don’t want to. They want to be at home but do not look at the potential negative impact on them. And often simply don’t believe that would happen to them. Married women should still look at the potential impact as well.

If you are going to give up work, or take a hit to your career to bring up children you are better off being married in the vast majority of cases. Even when there is no assets. Just incase the main wage earner dies.

No one claimed married women are absolutely fine and completely protected in all circumstance. All women should always be aware of their financial position and the risks. Everyone should.

It’s not about the morality of being an unmarried mother. That’s not the discussion at all.

What complete and utter bollox !
I started this thread. There is not one word of 'bashing' unmarried mothers.

In fact the complete opposite. I have been advocating for a change in the law that financially compensated separating parents - who are not married.

With the hope it provides two outcomes.

1. Children from cohabiting families are not less well off - because one of the parents have refused to offer the legal commitment when the mother made the commitment to childbirth and child rearing .

1. That men are more circumspect with regard to their own fertility and rely less on women taking care of contraception. If it's going to cost them a large percentage of their assets then perhaps they will be bothered to wear a condom or get the snip .

I would also want to empower ALL young people with knowledge of the CURRENT legal position. Mostly so that young women understand that shacking up with a man and having kids with marriage. Is a decision that needs to be made from a financial view point with all the facts.

Don’t worry OP, the vast majority of us completely get what you’re saying

That men are more circumspect with regard to their own fertility and rely less on women taking care of contraception

Men should use a condom if they don’t want a baby, but to be honest we can’t pretend it’s equal - ultimately women have a much wider choice of contraceptive methods, that are much more effective, less hassle, last for years and are free. If she then gets pregnant, her body her choice. As it should be.

But the amount of women who still don’t seem to realise, a few kids in, that a quickie can cause pregnancy, amazes me.

Controversial as it sounds many women choose this. From their own career/work choices, to getting together with someone who earns more, to marrying them, to giving up work or going part time when they have a child. All of it is a choice. Not working due to childcare costs may seem like the only option, but it is often the preferred choice of the mother to do so. The sensible choices would be to earn enough to support yourself in the first place, then maintain that ability to be independent throughout meeting someone, marrying and raising a family.
I wish society would educate young people better regarding life choices, particularly young women. Maybe then women wouldn't be left high and dry when their feckless spouse disappears off

BeautifulWar - and for the sake of transparency as far as possible in an anonymous thread. I have never hankered after being a sahm. I would last about a fortnight before being bored witless.
I have had three children all now grown and also helped raise 4 dsc. I have worked full time without any breaks except Mat Leave since my eldest was 6 months old. I am financially secure and whilst raising kids , more financially secure than my DH. This is not about me.

7 years ago my closest friends life imploded . Her partner who she had met at 17 decided in the course of 8 weeks to meet and marry a woman he met on a business trip to Dubai.

They had started at the same economic level. He worked as a photocopy clerk in an investment bank. (Shows how long ago this was) she was a nursery nurse. They moved in together aged 21/22. First baby at 23. She gave up work as he had got promotion as a trainee in the bank.

At the point of implosion he was a senior partner. She had helped that meteoric rise by playing the 'corporate wife' to perfection. Running the home, entertaining clients looking after their joint kids. Their house was worth £750k there were savings of about £100k. There were 5 children . However at the time of this happening only one was left at school. He insisted that marriage was just a piece of paper and 'knew too many people where it had jinxed their relationships' .. I heard him say on numerous occasions. 'We don't need a piece of paper do we babe. ? We're solid. We've got 5 kids . It doesn't get more committed than that. ..

He married his girlfriend quickly because he didn't have to go to the trouble of divorce. He married because his new wife blamed her Catholicism and the fact that her parents would be unhappy if she wasn't married. (Seemed to skip over the bit where you don't have sex before marriage -if you are going to play the religious card)

My dear friend was blindsided. Her entire world crumbled and none of us could believe how little she of that life she was entitled to.

She got ; 8 months of child support until the youngest child left full time non advanced education. At which point she was required to leave the house. He 'gave her' £10k from the savings to rent a property.

7 years later at 63 years old . She works full time in a garden centre and relies on her kids to help her with her rent . She has a 3 bed cottage so kids can come and stay but costs more than the 1 bed entitlement on universal credit.

Her ex DP lives in the family home with his wife. (Who very swiftly produced a baby to secure the situation. ) Something he apparently didn't want - but hey ho we all know how terribly unreliable contraception is these days.

This can't be right. Situations such as this surely require a law change ?

These threads really show how sexist MN is. Women who do well should never marry, why should she risk having to give 50% of her hard earn cash in divorce. It's not fair. But the other way around....

How about raising our girls to aspire to what they are capable of, not have children until they can afford it, become self reliant and only marry for love if they are prepared to lose 1/2 their wealth.

How about bringing up boys to aspire to what they are capable of, raising them to understand that housework and looking after kids is not a woman's job, to marry only for love and be prepared to lose 50% and to watch out for women who are looking for the well off SAHM lifestyle, never intend to work and will always calculate how much they can get in divorce and wait until they get enough to file.

These threads really show how sexist MN is. Women who do well should never marry, why should she risk having to give 50% of her hard earn cash in divorce. It's not fair. But the other way around....

Yep! 😅

This can't be right. Situations such as this surely require a law change ?
Why? She chose to have a baby before building a career. She chose to go and have 4 more. She chose nit to go back to work when the kids were all in senior school.

She chose to enjoy a very nice life as a sahm and be dependent on her partner. It's her choices that made her vulnerable. She chose the best lifestyle in the present time without thinking of her future.

It's not that simple. In my case:

WE chose to have a baby (can't make it myself!). I gave birth to a medically complex child who meant WE decided I wouldn't work in paid employment due to care needs. Said child is now 18 and still has care needs. WE feel it is best if I remain carer. While caring I have achieved four degrees and started working when things looked better - only to have them crash again so WE decided I was best at home. Being home doesn't feel like a choice. I could go out and get a full time job easily tomorrow, if needed. I can leave. But my earning capacity is not the same as my DH's because of all the years of caring. These were decisions made together. Why should he get to walk away and leave us with less because of joint decisions relating to children we both created together?

This can't be right. Situations such as this surely require a law change ?

Why? As shit as it is for your friend, she wasn’t a helpless passenger in her own life, she was an adult woman responsible for herself. She chose to accept not getting married. She chose to give up work. She chose to have five children. She made bad choices, and now she has to live with that.

The merging of finances with another independent adult should remain an active choice someone makes, not something drifted into.

The key point for me is that while marriage will provide some protection in terms of assets it gives you no protection in terms of income.

You get a share of assets, CMS, and a pension share and that's it, he sails off into the sunset with his salary, usually more time free than be had before to work more hours or pursue a relationship and his ability to get a mortgage.

This is what women need to understand, marriage isn't total protection.

I was able to negotiate a 70% share of the house equity without compromising on pension share, and then remortgage to buy my ex out, the number of people who've commented that I "got the house" as if it had been generously gifted to me by me exH is ridiculous and drives me crazy (they are corrected) there's still this narrative that the wife is receiving assets from the man and not that marital assets are being divided.

My Fiancé is much keener to get married than me, I wont get married until we've seen a solicitor and my assets (and his) going into the marriage are secured for me (and his for him him) on divorce or my dc (and his dc) on death.

He married his girlfriend quickly because he didn't have to go to the trouble of divorce. He married because his new wife blamed her Catholicism and the fact that her parents would be unhappy if she wasn't married.

So maybe his first partner should also have insisted on marriage (maybe her parents would have preferred it too?)? Please don't think I am blaming this poor woman, far from it, but she also had the chance to set her stall out and put her foot down?

Come to think about it, I wouldn't mind the income drop if I was on my own. I don't need much. It would be harder on DH. I could make sure he does 50/50 of the care and I'd have more free time than I've ever had. He would be on a sharp learning curve that I've had years to learn as far as caring for the needs. He will have the be making career adjustments to accommodate the care, which he will find hard. His anxiety disorder will make it really hard for him to manage and he doesn't cope well when he needs to fit in care and work at the same time. It's just been easier to let me do all that adjusting. I honestly think, even though I'd be income poorer, I get the better end of the deal and his life gets harder.

These were decisions made together
Indeed, and that implies that it wasn't a decision imposed on you, you were participant to it with the consequences that comes with it. Having a disabled child certainly changes the decision making process, but it still involves an agreement.

What I don't understand is how MN is always promoting women to have similar rights and entitlements to men, yet here we are with promoting women to marry rich instead of taking their lives in their hands and creating their own security just like men are expected to.

When is a choice not a choice? I don't feel like I made a choice, though I suppose I did. Put my child into a full time care home? Not a choice I would make. DH couldn't cope and his mental health can't cope with doing the caring and trying to work at the same time. All the emotional labour falls on me by default. His genes carry the medical issue btw. Didn't come from me. I don't regret the choices I've made at all but I do think the circumstances and limitations (and his contribution to those choices) should be taken into account. Fortunately me and DH consider ourselves partners and he's more than fair.

Also really concerned about the massive number of contraception failures . So many women taking the pill finding themselves pregnant and deciding to continue the pregnancy with no legal protection ..is the pill /implant failing

Nope. It’s generally the woman thinking if she gets pregnant it will somehow force him to commit - except that doesn’t often occur. It’s controlling behaviour that backfires. They should instead be leaving and looking for someone who will commit. All of the ‘but he strung me along’ is bollocks, it’s allowing yourself to be strung along rather than calling it and leaving.

Bah, it's not complicated. Get married if you intend to have children. It's not complete protection but it means that you may have some recourse if you stay at home and reduce your income.

If that sounds difficult, it is not as difficult as having less rights to assets and income and steering the ship all by yourself with no support.