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.

If they give up work and pension contributions to raise a child they're at risk if the father then leaves because she will have facilitated his ability to carry on earning unaffected by parenthood.

Again though, it depends on the situation.

Imo it's more old-fashioned to live together and expect the same legal rights as a married couple. Obviously if everyone is aware of the situation and happy then no issue.

Did your friend ask for your opinion on whether she should get married first?

Did your friend ask your opinion?

Do you know all the ins and outs of her finances? Not everyone is better off getting married.

Everyone should be appraised of the legal and financial benefits and ramifications of cohabitation/marriage/parenthood to decide if its needed for them. Not being on the deeds of a house while unmarried but contributing to the mortgage/renovations is a risky situation for example.

A blanket "marriage is always better" is incorrect.

Being married won’t necessarily mean that you don’t get fucked over if your relationship breaks down. Women can come out of divorces badly off.
I’m not from the UK but if unmarried mothers are so vulnerable (it’s not the case where I’m from), then shouldn’t the solution be for them to be better protected under the law than for them to have to get married?
You’re angry at society for convincing women they don’t need to be married? Why aren’t you angry at society for forcing them into marriage because otherwise they will be vulnerable to getting “completely screwed by their partner“ if the relationship ends?

Totally agree Rancid ... a lot of people just don't think about the future, I've been married 34 years and our pensions etc are all in place and sorted. I see so many women (and a few men) who reach my age - mid 60s - and haven't planned their financial future and don't realise the protection that marriage gives them.

Of course, if you are financially independent and astute this may not apply ... but it does seem to be mainly women who give up careers to 'have babies' and then realise, when it is too late ... that they are in a financially much worse position if they were not married.

If your partner died you would automatically inherit his share of the property and possibly his pension, and the same for him. Or do you want to pay taxes and others have a claim on your property.

If your child is unwell your partner can't give consent to treatment, it is all on you. I actually know a couple who got married because when their baby was born he was very sick in NICU and the father didn't have parental responsibility.

If you were seriously ill your partner would not automatically be the next of kin.

You can make a power of attorney but it could be challenged. I looked into this because my mother was very much, "life at all costs" and I was terrified of her being in control of my medical care.

You could move money and assets between you without paying tax.

She said "we're thinking about having a baby soon, what do you think?" And I said I thought she should consider getting married first.

@sashh adding only if your partner is life and death ill you may end up sitting in the waiting room while someone else makes the major decisions.

@sashh If your child is unwell your partner can't give consent to treatment, it is all on you. I actually know a couple who got married because when their baby was born he was very sick in NICU and the father didn't have parental responsibility.

Very dangerous and incorrect advice. A FATHER absolutely does have parental responsibility.
Utter horseshit that only mothers can consent to treatment and fathers cannot unless they are married.

If your opinion was asked for then she's walked into it. I dont agree with your opinion, each to their own. People can have babies and get married whenever they like.

While I agree with you, presumably OP isn’t in a position to reform these laws but she CAN warn her friend that she would probably be better protected legally if she were married

If she intends to be a SAHM and/or has less money/assets than him and/or the house is in his name only then you’re right.

However if she’s richer she could lose out. My cousin lost her lovely house through being married to some cocklodging twat who was awarded half of it.

m not from the UK but if unmarried mothers are so vulnerable (it’s not the case where I’m from), then shouldn’t the solution be for them to be better protected under the law than for them to have to get married?

Because often it protects the lower earner and caregiver, which isn't always the woman. And as pp have mentioned, there are benefits in not getting married if you want to walk away with no obligations. Obviously that suits a lot of people too.

The expectation is that if you want the aspects of a particular legal process, such as marriage, you would undertake that process, and if you don't, you don't. It's odd to suggest that any couple should be seen as married in the eyes of the law when they haven't chosen that!

I wouldn't have children unless I was married. My DH and I both earned around the same amount pre-children but I knew that I may end up going part-time during the early years and I didn't want to leave myself vulnerable.

If the woman has equal or less earning power than the man, then I would encourage marriage.

@sashh not all of whats in your post is true.

I don’t want to automatically inherit the other half of the property and I certainly don’t want him to automatically inherit mine. Or many of those things. If I do, there’s ways around it.

Lots of people are assuming the OP knows the financial details, but very few know mine. On the surface perhaps I look vulnerable, I have been a divorced single parent, a student for 4 years, and living in a shared ownership house on a rough estate for 5 years. On the outside it might look like my DP has come in and bought us a house when in reality he couldn’t do this without me whereas I could do it without him not my careers up and running.

I think if she will be financially struggling etc then yes you are prob right, but I also think that if she is able to pay her way then no she doesn’t need to be married and kids are protected anyway

i Really don’t think it’s your place to advise her on marriage.

I guess it depends if you recommend that in her situstion she would benefit from marriage before having kids. Or if you thibk every woman should be married and not having children out of wedlock. Wether marriage is a good idea afor her depends on her situation and her future plans.

& how many thousands of threads have been posted here by desperate women trapped in horrible relationships, dependent on an abusive man, but unable to escape because she's never recovered her career after maternity, he refuses to stump up for childcare fees, she's moved into his house but isn't on the deeds/tenancy?

& how many ditto, where the OP is hanging on for "him to propose" but during that wait, had DC, & is now becoming horribly aware of how precarious her situation is?

These are 2 really, really common situations.
Not sure why you are so aggressively pretending it doesn't happen.

Isn’t that the advice we should be giving rather than get married!

What extra rights do they have? I don't know of any.

I agree with you, but I can also understand that people don't see the protection it gives until things go south, so only see the 'not birthing a bastard' sentiment. I don't agree with that phrase, but I know deep down quite a few people do believe it.

If your child is unwell your partner can't give consent to treatment, it is all on you. I actually know a couple who got married because when their baby was born he was very sick in NICU and the father didn't have parental responsibility.

This is flat out wrong. As long as the father is registered, he has parental responsibility. The only difference marriage makes is in how (or if - sometimes it is important that a father doesn't have pr) the registering happens.

Scaremongering isn't helpful. Or feminist.

Sadly it may be something some women learn the hard way. I was so idealistic and clueless ,didn't marry ex but had 2 children with him , worked pt, put my family money, time and skills into building our home. When he buggered off with a 24 year old he actually smiled when he pointed out we weren't married.

So OP I tell women exactly the same as you... but I do follow it up with the fact that ex now lives with new wife in my wonderful big house and me and kids live in tiny crap house) and that helps to illustrate the point.

If it's a friend and coming from a good place - I don't see the harm. Sometimes we walk too much on eggshells around others. A good friend will offer advice with the best of intentions. It doesn't need to be accepted but friends should be able to deal with advice in a grown up way.