To think getting married wouldn't have mattered.

[ThisPithyJoker]

Often on MN people are told not to consider getting pregnant without getting married first for financial security. I totally agree that if you're going to take a career break etc this is important. Likewise if you are going to earn significantly less or are bringing different things to the marriage (which is likely in a country with a gender pay gap).

I fell pregnant unexpectedly and we didn't marry. We make very similar amounts, brought little to the relationship and our house is owned as tenants in kind (both own half rather than joint own the property). We pay half of everything each and after maternity leave, I paid more into my pension (and less into the household) to make up the short fall there.

Am I being unreasonable to think it's possible to mitigate the risk of not being married and it's just a good general rule of thumb? Or am I missing something?

Thanks!

This. I believe it's different in the US but in the UK with no medical power of attorney in place if a patient is unable to make treatment decisions medical staff make them in the patient's best interests.

They do take into account what relatives say the patient would have wanted but in a hypothetical worst case scenario where you as established partner are saying he would have wanted one thing and his parents or siblings are saying the opposite having the marriage certificate is unlikely to be any kind of trump card.

As the higher earner I would say there's no point getting married as long as you make sure you don't end up becoming the lower earner, obviously take pensions into account.

If you have more children especially, you career probably will suffer but that won't increase your partner's income.

Depends what the discrepancy is to start with of course.

The main benefit is if one of you dies while the children are still under 18 - if married the widower or widow gets a substantial payout from the government

It's not always better. For reasons I am not going to say on a public internet forum, I did not marry and have no plans to do so. Plenty of women get pregnant unplanned and shouldn't marrying someone they barely know, or who is a complete arsehole. A woman who is better off financially may end up with less if she marries. Even in a divorce, there may not be added protection if there are few assets, or lots of debt.

I would suggest that marriage is necessary before becoming a stay at home parent, or reducing work hours drastically. Financial independence is a good idea for everyone.

This. You're an anomaly and you've got the perfect solution, until something happens and you realise the reason for marriage is to protect you. If you have kids, there are times where as the woman in the relationship you are the vulnerable party. Get married if you ever plan to have kids. I've seen the repercussions too many times.

Tenancy in kind isn’t a thing. Isn’t it tenancy in common

Generally the financial benefits of marriage only kick in when it’s too late, ie when one of you has died. However marriage is a commitment, if someone will own a house with you and have a baby with you, but won’t stand in front of a registrar and sign a piece of paper to make that commitment official, you have to ask why?

Gov.uk:

"You can pass a home to your husband, wife or civil partner when you die. There’s no Inheritance Tax to pay if you do this.
If you leave the home to another person in your will, it counts towards the value of the estate.
If you own your home (or a share in it) your tax-free threshold can increase to £500,000 if you leave it to your children or grandchildren"

And in fact, if both of a married couple die and leave their estate to their children, the IHT threshold is effectively doubled to a million.

You cannot take advantage of this as an unmarried couple by leaving the house to each other in your wills. It doesn't apply.

We weren't married for a long time, but did a quickie after nearly 20 years together just to keep things easy legally especially when one of us dies. No name changes, no big wedding, no rings, didn't even tell many people. It's just an easy legal agreement to have in place, easier than trying to replicate it all outwith marriage.

I wouldn’t be marrying anyone whose family was such a dysfunctional shitshow that this would happen.

I mean my family is dysfunctional but it’s a long, long way from giving me a secret funeral dysfunctional.

Yep, much easier. Some of it can't be done outside marriage (or CP) and what can be is usually more expensive. If you want the provisions that come with marriage, getting married is the best way!

A woman on here a few years ago found that having thought she got on well with her DP’s adult son and parents, the son’s loyalty was to his mum and the parents was to their grandchild and his mum. So the ex wife had priority over everything. She lost her home and was cut out of the funeral. Everything he had was left to his adult son. Including the house she lived in.

If they’re solvent you’re better to get married IMO.

You can mitigate against it by staying employed etc, but if you are married and spilt up the obligation to maintain you both will be greater, assuming you’re the main carer. You’re only entitled to CMS if you’re not married. If you’re married you have the potential to get a greater share of the house (being tenants in common has no bearing on this), potentially his savings, pensions attachment, spousal maintenance.

Yes but you knew what OP meant.

@ThisPithyJoker many people have already explained the financial benefits but marriage itself ( or perhaps, the type of people who choose to marry) creates a far more stable, secure state in which to have kids….“Whereas stability is the norm if parents are married (75% stay together), it is the exception if [parents are not married](30% stay together). As a result, among parents of teens who are still together as a couple, nine out of ten are married” . So unmarried parents are more likely to split…and seeing as six out of ten lone parents are supported by the state compared to one out of ten couple parents, the financial implications for society as well as individuals is fairly clear. Hence why I’m promoting marriage to my kids but also they are hopefully developing the skills to pick a good partner and sustain a healthy marriage…and part of that healthy marriage is to be able to discuss financial matters and plan how to support each other when the woman is in the vulnerable position of being pregnant and having young kids.

THIS!!! This happened to me!!! Thank god I’d got married pre kids because I ended up giving up everything when it turned out DS had very high support needs non verbal ASD.

You do not have an equal relationship OP, hate to tell you. You did all of the childcare, whilst working and earning, up to age 3. Now you do half of pick ups and all life admin. Doesn’t seem very fair to me.

Re the marriage question, my EXH is a complete deadbeat and is allowed to be, by law. Marriage doesn’t make someone not be a piece of shit when you break up.

Death in service benefits can be paid to anyone you choose. Most pensions can be left to whoever you choose too.

I didn't marry my ex - we had two kids. I was the higher earner and had the most assets. Being unmarried meant I got to keep my assets.

Marriage is only beneficial to the poorer party - that might often be the woman but it's not in every case. The idea that marriage is some sort of "protection" for women is deeply sexist

Another good statistic…married poor couples with kids more than likely to stay together than unmarried rich parents

Equally he can take your pension and your assets. Particularly for women who work in the public sector this can be significant

And another…children of married parents more likely to achieve maths and English qualifications than unmarried….which impacts on those kids future earning capacity .

That's a correlation not a causal link.

Again, a correlation not a causal link. Children of single parents actually don't have any worse outcomes than couples once you control for poverty and relationship breakdown.

Inheritance tax, particularly being tenants in common, and pension rights are the two things that spring instantly to mind.

What’s your point ? Marriage is repeatedly shown to be an important factor in economic and educational outcomes?