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 ?

Marriage is an insurance policy against not working. It shouldn’t be a financial goal in its own right and I can’t see any other reasons to bother with it

I do and don't agree with this. I think it can give children more stability - but leaving that aside, it is absolutely an insurance policy against not working. After my divorce (clean break - ex paid no child support/spousal support), I was able to continue to be a SAHM precisely because I had been married and ended up with a large share of significant marital assets. If I hadn't been married, I'd have been completely stuffed.

Marriage is an insurance policy against not working.

It’s so romantic.

Also I think about what example I want to set my daughters.

Do I want them to know I spend dad’s money because we’re married, so I can.

Or do I want them to see me hustling my own money?

Always the latter. They need to see a woman who earns well. IMO.

Marriage is a legal tool to confer rights between the parties. Whether or not it is in your interest to do so of course depends on your position at the outset. I would advise any woman having children with a man and who is not financially independent to marry from a legal perspective. Not just for divorce but also for death. It's the prudent thing to do. It comes with pros and cons of course, like most arrangements.

But other than that, I am not sure why there is this holy grail of marriage, that we should trade the rights to our body and sexual liberation for.

@KathyWilliams

it is absolutely an insurance policy against not working.

sure and if you’re not planning to work it’s essential.

I would argue that being financially independent in the first place and negating the need for such insurance is a much better option to buying an insurance policy which includes tolerating loads of shit from another human being who are legally shackled to and having to go through a lengthy, expensive and painful legal process to extricate yourself from.

who is not financially independent to marry from a legal perspective.

I don’t get this. Surely you should just be financially independent? You’re a grown adult.

I don't think there is anything wrong about showing you are a team or unit. Financially or otherwise. That is what a partnership is, joining together and working together towards a joint goal (in this case the family). I also think it's fine to talk about marriage and commitment as a sign of love. That, and teaching the value of financial independence are not mutually exclusive.

Yes, I am. And yes, general "you" should be. But the reality is not everyone is. And if you are relying on your partner's income to support a career break, or maternity leave, or whatever, then you need to have the fall back of marriage.

But again, it's also handy for death or illness, not just divorce. So sensible in many ways, legally.

There is merit in pooling resources and working towards a common goal. I would not say marriage is inherently bad. You have partnerships in business for the same reason.

Bizarre. When would you not work or severely reduce your income if you were not married. It's very risky. It's not always the man who doesn't want to commit, though. Marriage isn't for everyone. There are benefits of both.

@Thepeopleversuswork women’s Lib. Seemed to mark end women supporting each other and for us to start competing in yet another area of life. And the patriarchy would probably combust If we all started pulling in the same direction.

@EndlessRain

There is merit in pooling resources and working towards a common goal. I would not say marriage is inherently bad. You have partnerships in business for the same reason.

Of course and a good and equally balanced marriage is life enhancing and enriching, both financially and emotionally.

But marriage as a financial end in itself, targeting a man in order to get him to support you in order to remain at home with your children (which is a model I have seen advocated on here and hinted at on this thread) is a recipe for alienation, resentment and dishonesty on both sides.

Sorry, I should’ve said ‘one’ not ‘you’ but yes you get what I mean.

I agree with the pooling, it usually allows for a nicer life for all. But just don’t rely.

And surely if you want a career break, you need to save for / fund that career break. How is that the man’s job to fund your break?

I remember being on ML on SMP from all 3 of mine, in early 20s.
Never asked a penny from the dad, though we are a happy and committed couple. It just wouldn’t occur to me to ask him for money. That’s his money. I just budgeted well and then worked HARD to climb in my career. It’s just so much safer.

I was about to raise this that men can be disadvantaged in some ways too.
A dear male friend, probably some undiagnosed ASD, high functioning, extremely clever but rather naive and crap at relationships, had a whirlwind romance with a woman he met at work and married her. He had a high-earning successful career and assets before they met. It did not end well
She moved on and is now divorcing her third husband, having never worked full time but having claimed assets, pensions, etc from all of three
Sadly this seems to be a career choice for some women

All you need to do is joint own your house and set up a mirror will where everything transfers to the surviving partner. Unless half your house is worth over the death tax level (£600k I think) you'll be fine. Or if they run off with their secretary I guess.

Oh yes, I agree with that. I would NEVER encourage my children (genders aside) to marry with the aim for living of another person.

I'm actually all in favour of marriage for every possible reason (including my religion), and am very much in favour of pooling all resources and sharing a common goal. As it happens, I needed the financial protection too. It would be the same, really, if I were to go into business with someone: I'd want a contract with all our legal rights and responsibilities set out, including what would happen in the event of our going our separate ways. You hope you don't need it, but it makes everything so much easier if you do.

I was well educated, incredibly independent and self sufficient financially but also very naive in relationships and naive about the world. Alot of the pickles we get ourselves in can be down to ones upbringing, their role models and what they were taught, not taught. I was never taught any of this or talked about any of this and I learnt the hard way, the long way and now call myself very independent and self sufficient, but also wise now - it was only through the experience as you describe that I got there. Thanks s situation would never happen to me again ever because of what I learnt the hard way.

As a parent, I would be sure to convey the importance of these things to my children. Always be self sufficient, even in a partnership, you never know what may happen. Women are not generally positively encouraged to think this way, this is part of the problem passed down from generations.

This^^

This. So much this. I have friends who are APPALLED I knew what my ring looked like, what it cost (I refused to have an expensive one and set a budget for us to save for, as we had very little money). I knew a proposal was coming, it was at home, nothing fancy. But we had decided together we were ready for that step.

I often tell my friends who are complaining that their husbands/partners haven't done something or got a gesture wrong that if they want something from them, tell them what you want. Communicate. Sounds cliche but it's key to a solid, healthy relationship. If I don't tell my husband I want something or I'm upset, how will he know!?

That’s not the fault of feminism, it’s the fault of a still unequal society. What’s the alternative? Forced housewifery and needing a man to countersign your mortgage application?

@PurpleButterflyWings and @Coffeepot72 - wow! Such backward views. Do you really believe that women don’t want sex too? People have been having pre marital sex since the dawn of man. I wouldn’t want to marry someone because it’s the only way they could have sex with me. You must all be hanging out with some real Neanderthals if you believe this nonsense.

I got pregnant on the pill unmarried. YABU to imply that I shouldn't have continued with the pregnancy in these circumstances. Being pro choice also includes respecting women who don't choose abortion.

I was on microgynon and taking a seven day break in between pill packets. A gp told me a few years later that they have now changed the guidance on this as most women getting pregnant on this pill were getting pregnant on thier breaks and now a four day break is recommended instead.

OP wasn't implying that people in your situation shouldn't continue the pregnancy, they were saying that people in your situation shouldn't continue the pregnancy without legal protection. which is absolutely true.

I think it’s a really valid question. My exH wasn’t keen to get married but he did want a family. The idea of having DCs with a man who wasn’t willing to commit didn’t swing with me! He seen having children as a commitment enough. If I hadn’t insisted that we married first, I would have
been in exactly the situation that you describe. I became a sahm at his behest … I lost ten years of my career progression and income. To have walked back into a job at the same level post divorce would have been impossible!

So unless the father of the child proposes people with unplanned pregnancies should always have abortions? I don't understand how anyone thinks they've got the right to state what women should do in this situation. There is no right or wrong choice.