Children before marriage

[Marvelftw]

Extremely pragmatic post incoming. My partner and I are in a really great, loving supportive relationship. We’ve been together for 2 years and have had all the talks about our plans for the future which includes marriage and children. Since I am getting on in age fertility wise, I told him I wanted to have a baby first before we got married. We’ve now successfully conceived but I’ve since started reading slightly horrifying threads about what a bad idea children without marriage is. I’m now wondering if from a security pov we both look into tying the knot a bit faster than anticipated but just wanted some opinions on this based more specifically on our situation.

-I’m the higher earner out of us two
-We live in a house my parents helped me buy and the mortgage is in my name
-I have more in savings
-After having a baby I would want to return to work part time as my job is quite full on

Giving all the above would we need to look into getting married sooner rather than later? Please note as I said this is a very pragmatic post that isn’t outlying our feeling and commitment to each other at all but I just want to think about what’s best logically!

Where is all his money going ? If the house & mortgage are in your name, he’s not paying toward that (unless he has zero financial awareness)… yet doesn’t seem to have much in savings.

Thanks for the advice everyone! Have gotten the advice and answers I was looking for.

@Unexpectedlysinglemum haha definitely not. Surely not that unusual to find a couple where the woman has more assets?? Also I work as a teacher so my career prospects will be fine so long as I don’t stop teaching altogether.

I would advise you think carefully about this, get a free legal advice appointment (by yourself) with a view to drawing up a will for when your child is born. It is a personal choice which us Mumsnetters can’t advise what is best but do think about what would happen if you died young or your partner leaves you, if you are married and die your estate usually automatically goes to your spouse unless there is a will (even with one there is often a claim for spouse). If you are married the starting point for divorce settlements is usually half of everything- even where you put more in. If you were the one with less assets it is usually in your interests (financially at least!) to be married especially if your income is going to drop with maternity leave/ part-time work etc. if you don’t get married you and your partner could still get “mirror” wills to protect your children’s interests. Good luck.

The advice only changes when it’s a man because majority of time it’s the woman who’s reduced hours/given up work and will also be the one doing majority of child care following a break up!

Marriage or not, you need a financial agreement about the amount of his financial contribution is and what it's for. There needs to be openness to discussing income and spending so you are on the same page from the start.

I also strongly encourage you to do shared parental leave with your partner. It's definitely a way to ensure he understands the demands of being a parent and reduces the risk of you becoming 'default everything' once back at work.

As well as sorting out wills, make sure both of you have sufficient life insurance so your child is protected if one of you dies. Especially if that's the one who is working part time or a SHAP and surviving parent is juggling work and increased childcare costs.

I have a self employed male friend who took ages to sort this out and whilst he had cover he couldn't see his SAHM wife needed it too. It wasn't until I asked him how he thought he'd continue working 6 days a week in a job that requires very long days, with 2 kids under 6, that he realised the need.

Get a prenup then get married.

Even married women can end up screwed over if they don't have financial independence. The man could be hiding money, could deny handing any money over and have the funds to hire a good solicitor for the divorce whilst the woman has nothing. I think the importance of marriage is very over exaggerated on here and always goes on the assumption that the man has all the wealth.

I was in a similar situation. Higher earner, more assets in my name. We did eventually get married, but it took us 16 years. Our daughter was 11 when we did it and was our bridesmaid. But it gave us time to know we could live together and we had several life changing experiences before we got married (bereavement etc) so by the time we did get married there were no surprises.
Tbh we ended up deciding to do it in the end because we wanted all our remaining loved ones to be there and also so if anything happened to either of us there'd be no issues with things like making decisions at hospitals etc. We were perfectly happy just living together but figured In future it would make sense to be legally joined.

If not married I’d not work PT or make any compromises on working time / pattern / travel etc not also made by DP.

The ‘motherhood penalty’ at work can be a huge deal, especially if working PT, eg affects on long term earnings.

In your situation …being the higher earner with house in your name and more savings absolutely I would NOT get married (and I used to be super judgemental of kids before marriage….until I was you and got married and took a significant financial hit in the ultimate divorce)

2 years you are still at the lovey dovey stage. It's time to start using your head.
For God's sake don't get married. If he decides he doesn't enjoy family life like so many men and goes off you can kiss goodbye to your house.
Marriage is not a sweet and lovely celebration it's a legally binding contract.
Don't romanticise a relationship, it may not last. Always be self reliant. I learnt this the hardest way you can imagine.
Enjoy the relationship but don't hand everything over free to him.
I have to ask why hasn't he provided a home for you and your children?
A man who Iives off a womans higher salary and lives in her house isn't a man in my opinion.
Couldn't you find anyone better?

If you are not married, give the baby your surname.

Make sure you always keep documents that shows what you put into the house before marriage. If it's a short marriage you'd be in a strong place to keep it all. If it's a long marriage who knows. But if you are still earning as much as him you may do well to keep funding the house and not marry.

My partner and I aren’t married, we have a one year old and another on the way as it’s never been a worry for me! Like you, I’m the higher earner with a guaranteed job to go back to and the house we live in was (and still is) technically mine as he moved in with me. It’s never been a concern for me because my partner has always shared all of what he has and I would do the same

What’s your current set up - do you contribute equally / proportionally to day to day life?Have you discussed your financial setup as a couple when you go on mat leave?

At this stage, if you were to separate right now, you’d be financially better off not to be married. However, the situation could become riskier if:

1. You use your savings during maternity leave, you split up then, and you can’t afford the mortgage (all a bit drastic but babies d change relationships)!
2. In the long term, you put your career on hold to care for the children while he continues working and building significant assets, pension and income—potentially outpacing your financial position, you’d have no claim on any of it.

Since you own your home, the key factor is ensuring you can continue paying the mortgage independently if you were to split. Additionally, I’d confirm that he has no legal claim to your property which he may have if he’s been contributing to the mortgage.

But at the moment, it doesn’t look like marriage will offer any additional financial security. But that doesn’t mean romance isn’t dead 😊

Not so.
As the house is yours, there's not much advantage to you getting married, in fact it would be a disadvantage. It would only be worth doing if he started earning considerably more than you AND contributed to the equity, eg by paying you a lump sum.

Stats below may be of interest. However, it also suggests cohabiting (versus married couples) couples may be fundamentally different. Meaning that even if they do get married, the end result is the same. So marriage doesn’t keep families together, but families who stay together are more likely to have married:

‘Kiernan and Mensah (2010), also using the same data source, document more detailed trajectories of couples that are married or cohabiting when their child is born. They find that 88.1% of parents who were married at the time of the birth of their child are ‘stable’ at least until their child is 5 years old...

By contrast, around 66.6% of couples that were cohabiting at their child’s birth are classified as ‘stable’ at age 5 (43.4% remain cohabiting and 23.2% get married), 5.7% experience periods of separation, 20.5% are lone parents and 7.3% have re-partnered.’

https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/outputurlfiles/bn107.pdf

This 100%

Becoming an SAHM without being married is a bit stupid. But if you’re not planning on doing that I don’t see that having children without being married is a problem.

I think the part you are missing is that you don’t know how you will
feel when the baby comes. I have seen very career minded mums change their mind and stay home and then as others have said you are in a more vulnerable position. This might not be you but having a baby is completely life changing and being in a marriage gives your that reassurance if you choose to stay home. If not, you have not earning practically for months and then are in a more vulnerable position.

If you are committed and want to get married why wait? Have a registry wedding and then a bigger wedding if you need to later.

Personally I wouldn’t have a kid out of wedlock as I do think it’s playing with fire potentially and I would want my kid to know its parents were married before. But each to their own so it’s for you to decide.

From your perspective, not getting married sounds like the more sound financial decision.

And sadly, it IS a reality that post children, it IS often the women who take on the bulk of the load, who often land up financially out of pocket. which is why on MN we're prioritising what is best for women.

If I was HIS friend, I would be recommending to him that he makes sure that he is not out of pocket. eg if you're living in your house he should absolutely be contributing financially (and more than just half the bills), but there should be savings of living together rfor both of you and his should be used to save for himself in case things go pear shaped down the line.

Ditto, once you swap to workin gpart time, there will be a financial impact for both of you but you should be making sure that's fair.