Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to want to get married after 8 years and 2 kiddies

112 replies

twospecialgirls · 30/01/2008 21:14

i think i deserve a wedding and i really want to get married to him and have the same name as my children dp says we cant afford it

OP posts:
Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:01

also not being able to organise your partner's funeral

good god I would not want to be outranked by mil at a time like that

a friend of mine said that if you have enough money (not something that will ever bother me but still) you get saddled with inheritance tax as well

that is pushing her dp to the brink of one knee, thinking he will lose money to the taxman

Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:02

are you suggesting that by being married and believing it is a good thing, I am not a feminist?

fark orf

seeker · 01/02/2008 10:08

Note use of the expression "old fashioned" feminist.

I'd rather not be sworn at if it's all the same to you.

Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:09

I am very old fashioned I'll have you know

I am married and I bake cakes and I have doorstep milk deliveries

I even own thermal underwear

MrsMattie · 01/02/2008 10:11

We nipped to the registry office and went for chmapagne lunch afterwards. Didn't break the bank, but was very romantic.

seeker · 01/02/2008 10:13

Ah, but did you march down a street in the dark in the late 70s shouting "Reclaim the Night?

Have you ever worn a t shirt saying "Sisters Are Doing It For Themselves?"

Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:14

hmm seeker I would but I would have been about 7 so prob not let out that late

did it in late 80s if that's any help

motherinferior · 01/02/2008 10:22
Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:25

I'm not really trying to get into a debate about the subjective or political issues surrounding marriage

but the OP wanted to get married and I was trying to find out if she wanted a party (£5 grand! £5 grand!) or was concerned about formalising her relationship

there is no suggestion in her posts that she has been as thorough about setting up alternative arrangements as seeker and her dp or even that she knows that it is important make at least some arrangements, whatever these may be

marriage is often the easiest and cheapest way of doing this (unless it is going to cost you £5 grand)

Fennel · 01/02/2008 10:33

As far as I can tell, and I have looked into this in some detail, seeker is right and the widowed parent's allowance if your partner dies is the only thing you can't arrange as cohabitees in another way than getting married.

You can make wills, cohabitation contracts, next of kin agreements, parental responsibility, mortgage and finances in joint names. I have done all of those. And if you do those you are very close to having the same legal protection as if you are married.

Inheritance tax is the other thing which you can't get around without getting married (besides the widowed parent's allowance). But that's only relevant if your house and assets are worth over about 600K.

it is true that it might be cheaper and easier to get married than to do all those things in my second paragraph. but that's only if you aren't repelled by the idea of marriage.

Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:36

"they have their dads name it wasnt even an option to have mine"

says the OP

it suggests to me that the OP's partner is, well, unreconstructed, shall we say

I think the point here is not about the politics of marriage or not marriage but the ability of the OP to have a say in the formalisation of a union that can only protect her

it does not sound to me as if she and her dp have arranged any of fennel or seeker's options or that they have even considered it

motherinferior · 01/02/2008 10:42
Cappuccino · 01/02/2008 10:43

no MI categorically you must not

but not just because you haven't sorted your will out

the world needs people like you

Fennel · 01/02/2008 10:47

I do agree with you there Cappucino the OP should probably get married, certainly rather than change her name by deed poll instead.

MI you can die (not that I particularly want you to, I mean theoretically you could), just don't let your partner die without having nailed his assets in your name.

MsHighwater · 01/02/2008 12:35

Seeker, you said "some people get married for the frock and the party".

Sadly very true. Someone I know did that (imho) and the marriage lasted an embarrassingly short time (not celebrity short a la Nicholas Cage and Lisa-Marie Presley but still v. short). This irritates me, too, but I am of the opinion a couple who are truly committed to one another are more likely to get married and, also imho, have no good reason not to.

I am not my dh's property but we have openly declared our commitment to one another - for richer, for poorer, etc - by entering an agreement that we cannot easily or casually get out of. That, to me, makes sense in all kinds of ways. And I consider myself 100% feminist.

motherinferior · 01/02/2008 17:04

I find the idea of a nice frock and a party much more alluring than a life-long contract.

Tamum · 01/02/2008 17:07

As do we all, motherinferior, hem hem

seeker · 01/02/2008 18:26
pukkapatch · 02/02/2008 15:49

there is an expression, 'reinventing the wheel'
that is what all these laws giving unmarried parents rights to their children, pensionsn etc etc etc.
beign married or not does not ensure stability for children. all it is is a legal declaration that two people have decided to make a life togther for htemselves and all that entails. not making that legal declaration does indeed show a lack of commitment. however, having a big wedding does not show increased commitment. it just means you are more willing to show off about it.

i really dont see why legislative time should be takenup with reinventing the wheel. every society on earth has some sort of legal defintion of marriage, even if it was a case of jumping the broom together, as in the case of some slave societies in north america.

pukkapatch · 02/02/2008 15:57

fennel, imo, you, having done all those things, are actually more married than most people are. so saying that you are repelled by amrriage sounds hypocritical. since yo uhave actually gone to all the trouble of getting yourself the legalities fo being married.s o are therefore in the very state you say repels you.
very confusing.

motherinferior · 02/02/2008 16:44

It's not even remotely confusing. Fennel is stating an objection to the institution of the marriage. Arranging your finances in the event of your death, and ensuring that your child's father has parental responsibility, is very different from making a commitment to another adult.

If you don't believe me, try posting a thread saying 'today my partner and I made our wills and sorted out our parental responsibility orders'. You will get, I bet you anything you like, a radically different response from the sentimental outpourings that greet any announcement of marriage.

seeker · 02/02/2008 17:38

I have no desire to be anyone's wife - it has historical and and political connotations that I find unacceptable. But I do want to ensure that I, my partner and children are legally protected should our circumstances change. This is NOT the same as publically (or privately) entering the institution of marriage.

pukkapatch · 02/02/2008 20:43

seeker, that is exactly what getting married is about.
if people get sentimental about marriage mi, that doesnt mean that doesnt nullify the basic reason for it, which is to protect their legal rights and responsibiiities. just like the size of wedding budget has absolutleyno bearing on the couples future relationship.

i fear there is simply too much romanticism builtinto what is at heart, merely a legal arragement.

madamez · 02/02/2008 20:57

I'm with Seeker and co: marriage as it currently (and historically) exists in most of the western world is an institution with various rather problematic aspects to it for quite a lot of people even though the worst one (rape in marriage is now a crime) has gone.
And I won't hijack this thread to bang on and on about commitment ceremonies and ritual and having exactly what you want by way of a public declaration of yoru love etc because I want to make a metaphorical very rude gesture at whichever idiot was trying to suggest that unmarried partners are less committed to each other than those who have done the white-frock-vintage-car-coutnry-church bollocks. FFS I'm not even in a couple with DS dad but our co-parenting/family relationship is going to last the rest of all our lives - and anyone either of us takes up with or dates regularly (or in his case has more DC with) will have to accept me and my DS as 'family'.

madamez · 02/02/2008 20:58

BTW, OP, I'm another one who knows you can get a nice wedding day without having to spend a fortune - but if your DP is really resistant to the idea, have one big chat about how much it would mean to you then let the matter drop, because forcing a happy DP into becoming a reluctant DH(or DW) is a pretty good way to wreck a functioning relationship - especially if you're wrecking it just for a posh frock and a party.