Marriage

[Mrsmcgeeh]

I was single for a long time before meeting my partner. I have two DC and he has one. I currently earn 2.5 times his salary, and own my own home which I've reno'd split into two self contained flats and am renting out. I want my children to inherit this.

I also jointly own a rental property with my siblings. Myself and the children live with my grandmother who has dementia, so a familiar face (me) while she remembers us is with her all the time. She always told us not to put her in a nursing home and we promised. the children go to schools nearby and I work from home to stay with her, and she has carers through the week but not one full time, and sometimes she gets agitated because she doesn't recognise who they are. She is mortgage free, I pay bills.

My partner is renting a flat with his best friend and pays a lot with his ex for childcare for their under 5. I don't pay any childcare as my eldest is a teen and babysits my youngest should I need or my wider family help to care for my children as I am caring for our grandmother. I have savings, no debt except uni student loan. He has credit card debt.

Anyway my partner would like us to get married and move in together. He also wants another baby so we have one together. I'm not so sure. I do love him very much but not sure if it's practical financially to get married? Or am I being too harsh. He says I'm being too feircely independent. I'd love a wedding just the party but not the legal side. Is that a thing?!

Your primary responsibility is to protect your own children - I wouldn't touch this situation with a barge pole tbh. All the risk is yours, all the benefit is his.
Marry him and you'll come to regret it as will your children and bank account

It sounds like he just want to trap you with a house, marriage and a child. I wouldn’t do any of them. If you don’t desperately want a child don’t feel like you have to “give” him one, you can be a family without a joint child. How weird of him to be so possessive

This completely misses the point.

The entire point of marriage is to provide financial insurance to the partner who will struggle to earn while having and raising small children. Almost always the woman.

It is not designed to allow an able bodied man with the capacity to support himself and his dependents to mooch off a woman who has been through the experience of having her financial autonomy impacted and come through it.

You have nothing to gain from getting married OP and you would be a fool to do so. Or to have a child. Date him, live with him by all means but don’t link your finances with his.

Don’t be too sure of that. We just finishing dealing family members estate where the only copy of the will was the paper copy they held.
the solicitors’ had to tracked down the original solicitor that drew up the will and get them to check their diary and sign off that this was the document the drew up. Then the courts had to sign it off.

My dad’s will was in with his paperwork. We didn’t need to find a solicitor.

It’s a tough one. Marriage isn’t just about “what will you benefit from this?” Sometimes it’s about marrying the person you live, and not everyone is equal when they meet a new partner or get married. I also think it’s natural to want to move in/marry someone you love after a couple of years. My husband brought much less financially to our partnership/marriage than I did, and had a son from a previous marriage. But he’s been a great partner in many other ways and has brought much to the marriage over the past two decades. Yet on paper you guys would probably told me to have walked away!

But it doesn’t sound like the OP has any desire to get married or live together. It doesn’t sound like he’s someone she couldn’t live without. He’s just a “ok on the side” type of boyfriend. Which is fine if you’re both happy.

But there will come a time when grandma isn’t there anymore and the kids have grown up and you might feel different…

How much does he know about your financial situation? You have far far more to lose if he turns out to be a gold digger.
I would continue the way things are without rushing into anything, especially not having a baby.

Did you dh live in a flat share, have a child that he could only just afford, debt and generally looking to make his own life easier?

You brought more financially to the marriage. But you also had more costs due to your child. There was a mutual benefit.

This man can’t afford the child he has, doesn’t like that the Op is independent, is trying to leverage his religion as a reason they should marry when the situation only benefits him. He isn’t concerned about any risks the Op would be taking.

’When grandma is gone and the kids have grown up you might feel different’ makes no sense. She might be happy she didn’t tie herself to a man that she has to finance. She might be really happy she didn’t have another baby, be financing her husbands child and enjoying the freedom. She may meet someone who enjoys her independence and doesn’t want her to take big financial risks to be with him, who enjoys the freedom they both have.

It’s not this man or no man. It’s not this man or unhappiness in later life.

I don’t think you’ve understood my posts at all!

No my husband was living with his mum because his ex wife cleaned him out (very rich father in law hired too lawyers that my husband’s regular divorce lawyer just couldn’t compete with). And no my husband hadn’t cheated, his ex wife ran off with someone else. She even took my husband’s late father’s furniture that was in the house). And the child was his, not mine. I earned more and had two properties. I had much more than him.

And I didn’t say it’s this man or no man! That was my point, most couples WANT to move in together after two or three years, so this man might not be the one.

But that could have been, still could be, a decision that ultimately bites you in the ass.

You can love someone very much and still not consider it to be a good idea to make yourself financially vulnerable. Similarly, choosing to wear a seatbelt doesn’t mean one is an inadequate driver.

Do not marry him.

You and your DC will be negatively impacted.

It’s nothing to do with double standards. I’d tell a man in this position not to marry (or have more dc) either.

Op don’t do it. Your dc’s lives would be completely uprooted and they would lose out financially to another dc (and potentially his existing dc as you have stated he’s not finding it easy to pay for childcare already. It would be downright irresponsible if him to add another to the mix). You and dc are financially secure with assets and savings and your life is fine as it is, why complicate matters?

It’s great that you’re happy and this was the right choice for you. But op has two dc to think about also and she is quite right to be seriously considering her options and the impact on them before rushing into marriage.

TeeBee · Today 05:40
In a word 'no'. I wouldn't be getting married, I wouldn't be leaving my grandmother, I wouldn't be forcing my children to live with a 5-year old and then a baby that I wasn't sure I wanted in the first place. You have way too much to lose and little to gain.”

TBh, I wouldn’t force my children to live with a great grandmother with dementia either.

He's not exactly a catch on paper is he?

A grown man in a flat share. Earns a fraction of what you do. In debt. Struggling to pay for childcare fees for one child. Wants his religion to dictate your timeline.

If you love and enjoy him keep dating him, but you'd be mad to risk everything you've earned for him.

I don't agree with accusations of 'double standards' in here. Women predominantly make themselves vulnerable by having children in that it's their body and usually their time out of the workforce and then often returning part time. They take the career and financial hit- so there is a great argument that they should have financial security by virtue of the child's father- who is usually able to continue working and earning just the same (often better as he now has a partner at home cooking his dinner and washing his socks).

It's not the same.

This !!!

If you get married half is his. If you want to get married and want to ensure your kids get your property straight off (so before he dies too) then you need a prenup and legal advice first to see if that's possible.

I'd go and get legal advice first.

But if only for your grandmother I think it's a bad idea

And I don't wish to be ghoulish, but will you inherit her house if anything happens to her? It is your home...

^THIS!!

I’m not remotely saying she shouldn’t. Obviously I seriously considered mine too. I don’t actually think this relationship is enough for the OP. I’m just saying that if everyone disregarded everyone who is not financially quite on the same level, as most people are suggesting, sometimes you could miss out on something good. Not everyone poorer than you is hoping to gain financially from you..

Don’t be too sure of that. We just finishing dealing family members estate where the only copy of the will was the paper copy they held.
the solicitors’ had to tracked down the original solicitor that drew up the will and get them to check their diary and sign off that this was the document the drew up. Then the courts had to sign it off.

Hoosemover In the above scenario it is an issue, that's why I also said 'a legally binding Will is held by the solicitors who draw it up and you should make sure your beneficiaries know where that is.'
For the OP making a Will now, in the circumstances she's in, it would be vital that her beneficiaries knew the details of where the Will was kept in the event of her death.

I get what you are saying but women are disadvantaged often if they choose to have a family. By earning less on mat leave. Working part time to raise kids. Taking on more of the household responsibilities. If one partner is doing that and therefore supporting the other partners career they rightly shouldn't be disadvantaged . Often in these cases mn will encourage the person to return to full time employment to protect themselves.

This scenario is different partly because of the complication of the grandparent but also because of her partners lack of funds/debt. So if she goes on mat leave /puts career on hold he will struggle to support her. Also she already has children so there's protecting their inheritance.

My advice is as I have been through something similar. Let him move in but have a clear agreement and write this down that he pays for a contribution to the living costs only (so not the mortgage or renovation costs) and each month work them out and keep the calculation (you do not need to tell him you keep them). This way he cannot make and claim to your house. It's almost like a lodger. It will protect you incase.

I wouldn't get married. You can phrase that as expensive and a waste. Even a cheap wedding is setting you back 10 to 15k these days. I would have the baby as women usually end with that in there favour in family courts anyway. Sorry men it's not meant as controversial just a fact.

I hope all goes well for you.

Why didn't he marry his ex OP? It sounds like he ran out quite quickly after the baby arrived. I would be very worried about his motives now - especially as he asked to move in quite soon after the relationship began. Be careful OP. I wouldn't marry in this situation - or have a baby. It complicates everything for all the existing children in this situation.