Apparently I'm "old fashioned and anti-feminist"

[MVDC]

Because I told my friend who's thinking about TTC that she should seriously consider getting married first, even if it's just a register office job.

Apparently that makes me puritanical and woman shaming. Have directed her to the 4 threads I've read so far this morning where women had kids unmarried and are now getting completely screwed by their partners as the relationship breaks down.

I'm really, really angry. Not so much at my friend as at society who's convinced women that "cool girls don't need marriage" and I'm just... My coffee isn't Irish enough.

My reading of this thread is that more people have said it isn't always the best idea than have said it's always a good idea, but maybe I've missed some people claiming the latter? And of course there's a distinction between saying it will be advantageous for more partnered women than not, which it will, than by saying it's universally positive.

That’s sadly a function of any split though. While together your finances and resources are pooled so you can afford better housing and a better lifestyle. Once you split or divorce, both parties housing and lifestyle will be downsized. Financial security doesn’t mean the same lifestyle you had while together. But marriage/civil partnership does mean you are less likely to end up in poverty after a split than if you were unmarried.

No, OP, you aren't unreasonable. Marriage is basically a kind of contract that, in most cases, offers some protection to the person having the child, or caring for the child, if things go wrong.

People in that situation should look into it and be aware of the advantages and disadvantages for their situation. Though if the other person in the relationship refuses to do it, there isn't much recourse - I suppose that says something about how they see the relationship, though.

You might be right in terms of number of posts 'for' and 'against' I guess; but that could be because the rhetoric of the 'defaults' is so often inaccurate, and extreme ( " There is no way a "partner" of 20 years would have received a dime.*" etc)

I wouldn't welcome such comments at all. To get married would just be unnecessary expense and planning to us. Our properties are all in joint names, I earn enough to support all of us, to be honest, so definitely enough if it came to me supporting the kid and myself. Same for DP.
It may be a good idea for some people, but not something to advocate for every woman.

If you have multiple properties I’m surprised you’re happy for your estates to pay way more inheritance tax than they need. OK if you can afford to throw money away I suppose.

Still reading the thread but excellent post by @Needtoseethatbiggerpicture on unforeseen life events

Rental properties, not various homes used by us. They're really DP's thing, I wouldn't bother if I was on my own but everything goes in joint names. Maybe I'm wrong, but I understood that if everything is left to the children, they will get a tax-free allowance anyway, but there's no way to avoid paying tax on the remaining amount.
It's not a big problem, if marriage would significantly change it then we might consider it, but there's no other reason id want to go through the rigmarole of marriage.

To get married would just be unnecessary expense and planning to us.

It costs a few hundred pounds and takes less than half an hour.

I earn enough to support all of us

You never know what is round the corner.

I am not in any way suggesting that you get married if you do not want to, but for the accuracy of the information on this thread, the only thing that you have stated that you have sorted that marriage would have done for you, is the joint ownership of your properties. The legal benefits of marriage are far more than just this.

I’m surprised you’re happy for your estates to pay way more inheritance tax than they need. OK if you can afford to throw money away I suppose.

Point of order: paying taxes isn't 'throwing money away' ffs

Make sure you both have up to date wills otherwise you’ll half own those properties with your DP’s legal next of kin!

plus, marriage/CP is worth considering for health care decisions/hospital visitation rights and funeral responsibilities.

there's no other reason id want to go through the rigmarole of marriage.

Turning up at the registry office and signing your name is so onerous.

As joint tenants, each person owns the whole of the property with the other whether they are married or not. If one co-owner dies, their interest in the property automatically passes to the surviving co-owner(s), whether or not they have a will.

A will is no guarantee as a will can be changed at any time. If the wife is not a joint tenant, the husband is free to leave the house to whomever he wishes. Testamentary Freedom exists in England and this means a husband is free to change his will at any time and exclude his wife.

Just to add, I believe there are advantages to marriage and it is a generally a good thing.

However, it is important to point out that it is not just women who are cohabitees who are naive.

Many married women are under the mistaken belief that their the marriage certificate gives them far more entitlements than is actually the case.

I think your wrong for assuming it’s the woman that always needs the “protection of marriage” and that they’re silly for not marrying but having babies whilst unmarried.

Some women earn more than men ( I earn 3 times more. I put down the entire deposit for our house and many more things to list!) some woman actually do have better jobs and earn more money than their partners.

Whilst traditionally this wasn’t the cause, I think it’s sexist and very old fashioned to assume otherwise now.

Perhaps you should tell the government then They obviously don't know the law as well as you and are giving the wrong information.

www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities/who-has-parental-responsibility

Marriage offers a wife and their children many legal and financial protections. Children who live with both married parents are less likely to have psychological problems, use illegal substances, and commit delinquency. Why wouldn’t you want the best for yourself and your child if the father isn’t a hopeless mess?

Marriage doesn’t require an expensive party. A simple civil ceremony shows the world your commitment to each other, which is the important bit.

My friend currently lives in a lovely house in a good area. She's never worked any job for long and now has given up work and has a toddler and baby with her dp. He gives her 2k a month to buy groceries, kids stuff and spend on herself. He owns his own business and is doing very well. They both have expensive new cars.

However since the new baby has arrived their relationship has taken a turn for the worse. In part due to friend constantly spending extra money in ridiculous amounts, i genuinely think she has a shopping addiction. If he were to decide to leave she would be absolutely fucked. She has zero money, it's all his. But she would be entitled to none of it and probably have to live at her parents.

I really do worry for her.

OP I am a massive, almost radical feminist and I agree with you.

Your friend risks far more poverty than the father if she is not married. It is feminist toacknowledge a very unequal society and urge a woman to protect herself a little.

@LottiePa it is genuinely great to hear you are doing well. But look at statistics. You are unusual. Most people in poverty in the UK are women.

"Radical" feminism isn't about how extreme you are, the "radical" means you believe oppression can only be changed by changing the "roots" (where radical comes from) of society. Ie systemic overhaul... as opposed to liberal feminism.

I didn't know this until recently...

Who are you replying to? A lot of people have pointed out that the woman isn't always the lower earner.

@sashh I'm confused, why did they have to get married when their child was in ICU? Surely if he went to register the birth (which I imagine most involved fathers who are with the mothers would do) he would have had parental responsibility?

How is he going to jointly register the birth with the mother when she is in a hospital bed? And do it within the first few hours of birth? The point is there is a gap between birth and registration during which an unmarried father has no parental rights.