To not see the practical point of getting married?

[Queenofswords88]

My partner and I are in our thirties. We’ve been together many years and own a house together. We’re also hoping to have a baby together (currently going through fertility issues / treatment).

We’ve talked about marriage plenty of times and he’s always made it clear that he would marry me in a heartbeat if it’s something I wanted to do, but it’s not something he cares about enough to push for. I’m not convinced marriage is for me, for various reasons including expense/stress of a wedding and a feeling that the institution is outdated/anti-feminist.

My partner works full time in a good job. I earn significantly more than him even though I work part time in a flexible role which would accommodate having a child. I have more in savings, pension and investments and more equity in the house we share.

I hear a lot of blanket advice, especially on Mumsnet, about it being essential to get married before having a child. In my circumstances, I can’t think of a single practical reason why that’s the case. AIBU?

If you die in childbirth he can't leave the hospital with your child as no PR.

Marriage doesn't really impact much until sht hits the fan and then you'll realise how important those legal protections are.

This

I agree and I would pause for thought if I was the OP.

DP and I are not married despite having 2 children together. I feel similarly and also I truly hate admin and organising shit, so planning a wedding is my nightmare really. Yes, I know you can just do it with witnesses in a registry office, but if it's just for that then it's easier and more effective to do the paperwork a different way.

Some things we did that I recommend: we have financial and health power of attorney for each other. That makes them your 'next of kin' in a much more legal sense than marriage does. We are also named on each other's pensions, insurance and death in service payouts. You should also make sure the house is shared in the way you want it to be along with having a good will.

Like you, we don't reach the tax threshold for it to be a problem, so it's not worth it for that.

@Hubblebubble While I was pregnant, I wrote a will that named DP as the person who would get my future children for exactly that reason. It's not hard to fix.

Two 1 it covers you financially in case of split and main one ..your child would not be born illegitimate. Some may say that's old fashioned but I would not especially if your partner would marry you .like it or not it's best for family stability .

You are the higher earner now so you require no financial protection, but there may possibly come a time (I hope not) where you are unable to work at all or unable to work full time. In that case you would need the legal protection of being married or you could be left penniless if he ever decides to fuck off with some other woman. Never assume your health is bulletproof or your relationship is bulletproof.
If you have a child, you may even decide you want to be a SAHM, putting you in a vulnerable position without that legal protection.

Marriage isn't inherently misogynistic, but husbands often are. That's all the more reason why you need legal protection in case he decides to leave you high and dry.

Marriage wouldn't fix this. My friend is in a similar position but with an ex-husband who has skipped the country, doesn't pay a penny, and hasn't seen the kids in years.

I suppose practically it's one of those things that makes more sense when times are hard, not when times are good.

I'm also not sure one should have a child with someone you're not prepared to marry. Well, that's how I feel.

Exactly. And if it had been her house, they would have thrown him out, and he may have been made homeless. I've seen it happen in my own family, though not to me, thankfully.

Yes, we've done exactly the same. It is possible to replicate almost everything about marriage in other ways, it's just that most people don't bother.

The only downside I've heard of is that wills and pensions etc can be changed without the other's knowledge.

Yikes! You said the quiet part out loud 😂

If you both earn "well" then are you sure?

I'm not sure anyone really cares about 'illegitimate' children anymore 🙄 It's such an unpleasant way of thinking.

Don’t marry @Queenofswords88 unless post children you earn significantly less.

I am the higher earner getting divorced. I really regret it, should never have bothered. I’m giving away all my assets and the pensions accrued prior to the relationship to a waster as it turns out.

Honestly why would you go through all the cost and hassle of setting up a myriad of legal and financial arrangements when you can get married for a couple of hundred of quid and it is all sorted?

Worth repeating again that getting married is not the same as having a wedding!

It sounds like civil partnership might suit you? No need for any fuss or to tell anyone.
I’m always surprised so many dads are happy to have no legal relationship with their child from birth. Basically if no civil partnership or marriage they only get parental responsibility if mum names them on birth certificate. So for example can’t sign for any medical treatment for baby. If you die in childbirth unmarried then he can go to court to get parental rights.
Difficult situations sometimes bring out worse in people. My mil struggled to visit her boyfriend on his deathbed, his adult children told nurses she was just a friend. Plus people go on holiday abroad and have accidents and die, if that country will only accept spouses legal next of kin you are stuck.

We had a nice quiet £500 wedding with 16 guests when I was 6 months pregnant with DC2. In the May I said to now DH, we should really think about getting married if we’re going to have two kids. It makes sense financially. He agreed and we were married two months later! That was 9 years ago and not regrets, just benefits of security.

It's heart-breaking when you read threads on here where the DP has died, and the woman is left holding the baby and is financially fucked. Some have had the DP's mother take the life insurance, when the next of kin was actually the DP's child. Then there's pensions, Widows Allowance all to consider. If your Wills aren't sorted, that also leaves a mess.

Honestly, seeing so many women not be bothered about getting married before having children makes me wince and hope to God their DP doesn't die before they marry.

As others have said, a wedding is optional. you can get married without one - just go to the register office and book it. You don't have to tell anyone or make a big fuss.

You may be earning more than him now but things could be very different a couple of kids in. A disabled child, a birth injury, or just an overwhelming desire to spend more time with the baby and not return to work when maternity leave runs out - being married gives you protection. And whether you believe in it or not, it means something to have a man commit and tie himself to you legally, especially as you will carry the burden of pregnancy and childbirth completely.

It's a much smaller and less scary commitment than a baby. Marriage at least can be undone.

Unpleasant maybe but unfortunately legally true .your children are unfortunately not entitled to anything belonging you unless you leave them in will .if married to there mother you automatically get so ..if your girlfriend because that is what she is legally died in childbirth you are not legally entitled to said child unless you go to court and fight her parents .that's a lot of hassle for a bit of paper .

A will for assets and DP nominated person on your pension to cover the event of sudden death. Power of Attorney for the event you lose capacity. You don't need to be married to have protections in place when you are the wealthiest partner. If you marry, you may find yourself in a position where you want to divorce and have to take into account the potential financial losses.
If he was the one working part time and was doing this to enable him to do the main share of housework or childcare I'd say he is entitled to half of what is earned anyway. However, many men leave the lions share of childcare and housekeeping to the woman, if this is how it turns out if you marry and have DC it would be a shame for him to be taking money you have earnt if you were to divorce.

That's lovely and I'm glad it works for you, but I don't think the cost of the wedding itself is what's bothering OP. As she's the higher earner and has the bigger pension a divorce could end up costing the OP an awful more than £500 or even the cost of a more lavish wedding - it totally makes sense if her DP was going to give up work to care for the kids or similar for her to commit to supporting him financially as part of that, but if he's low income and low assets purely through choice, and she has a higher income and higher assets equally entirely through choice, and that won't change after kids, I don't really see what financial security marriage brings her or why she's under a moral obligation to her partner or kids to get married just to give him financial security? I'd say the same if the sexes were reversed btw. Of course it's possible to come up with some kind of Doomsday conjunction of circumstances in which OP is run over by a bus and her house is struck by lightning on the same day her partner wins the lottery and runs away with a younger woman whilst emptying their joint account and she ends up worse off unmarried than married, but I would say on the balance of probabilities and in the most likely scenario she's likely going to either have the same financial/practical outcome from being unmarried, or a worse outcome if she is married.

Like I've said of course if emotionally either party really wants to be married or feels a moral obligation that makes a difference but purely objectively speaking I don't think there is an imperative reason to marry...

I am a widow - DH died when he was 46. We'd only been married for two years, and I distinctly remember the solicitor saying 'thank goodness you were married' with real feeling when I went to see her about the probate. Being married protected a lot of stuff for me. I won't go into detail, but there were vultures hanging around waiting to take what we had built together (as well as what had been mine before we'd met) and it was the teeny £500 marriage that protected everything.

Now years later I'm in a very happy relationship and considering buying a house with DP, but after my experience as a widow I wouldn't do it without legal protection. I've done my homework and I can either get all the legal protections I need by putting in place multiple different expensive contracts (which won't protect me from IHT anyway) or pay £150 for a civil partnership that does everything in one go. I'm actually still undecided as I have more assets, but I still think CP is going to be the most sensible option.

Inheritance tax would be my main worry. £325k isn’t an awful lot of assets these days, I mean I guess if the house is in both names only half the value is counted?