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marriage is for me, for various reasons including expense/stress of a wedding and a feeling that the institution is outdated/anti-feminist.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?

What are you talking about? I am a mother, my child is entitled to everything I own. My partner is obviously on our child's birth certificate and the same applies.

Ok, having read your post a few times I think you mean the thankfully rare possibility of a mother dying in childbirth without being married? In that case yes, technically the child would go to the mother's parents... but a man left on his own with a baby will need as much help as possible, and most families would muddle along together. I can't see my parents fighting to take on a baby in their mid-70s!

As an aside, I would ask that you really think very hard about whether you want to have a baby when you are already worrying that the relationship won't go the distance.

You can get shot of him, but children can't change their parents.

I was never bothered about marriage until very recently. Now I’d quite like to get married because I’m an expat and I wouldn’t have a baby with DP (who is a local) without getting citizenship first.

Our eldest is disabled, needs 24/7 care. I didn’t work for 18 years and before that only part time since he was about 3. He’s an adult now and settled in residential but I’ve found it so so hard to find a job with me being out of work for so long. It’s not always easy to just go back into full time work .

I’m struggling to see - with all of the very PRACTICAL advantages mentioned - you are still resisting.

We don’t have kids, never wanted any. But we were married within a month of me finishing uni. Partly because my DH was military at the time, so if we wanted a married quarter, we had to be, well, married.

But aside from that, we are both kids from successful marriages that only ended with the death of a partner on each side (my mum 2 weeks after we married, but it had been planned since before she had a diagnosis; his dad in 2019, almost 21 years after we married). Throughout my childhood, amongst my wider family, I have been surrounded by successful marriages. For us, it wasn’t even a discussion. We were together for 4 1/2 years before we married and engaged for 3 of those while I finished uni.

Since then (1998), my DH had an accident which lead to him developing PE’s in his lungs and he almost died. My access to him was unfettered because we were married, and I have had 2 major surgeries, same thing on his part.

We have a mortgage on our house, owned jointly and a bunch of different policies to protect each other in the event of the other’s death. That was more important when he was still in the RAF; now a civvie with BAE.

Most importantly, there will be no wrangling when one of dies. I think that is worth far more than the cost of a marriage licence and half an hour with a couple of witnesses at the registry office.

@Notateacheranymore your last paragraph is spot on. The potential wrangling when one person dies is what has terrified me into saying no to a joint property with DP if there is no civil partnership in place. Yes I could lose out significantly if we divorce, but it feels like at our age widowhood is more likely than divorce, and I have no intention of either of us having to go through all that wrangling and the threat of homelessness on top of bereavement. I know how hard it was before, and I had the protection then. I hate to think what it would have been like without it.

Death admin is massive and painful. Marriage makes it less complicated. You will die. Your partner will die. Usually one before the other. Make it easier on whoever is left behind.

You asked for practical reasons to get married. To me this is the biggest. Yes, you may assume it’s a long way off. But death is the one thing in life that is 100% guaranteed and you can’t actually anticipate how and when.

OP, read this:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-marriage-legal-differences/

I'm surprised no-one has shared it yet.

Actually I don't think even the scenario of the mother dying in childbirth (which is admittedly one of the more compelling reasons in favour of marriage in this scenario) is all that straightforward. Yes unmarried fathers can't usually register the baby's birth if the mother has died, I think in that instance the family court would have to intervene to issue the birth certificate and formally confirm parental responsibilities, but in reality it would be unlikely (not impossible, but unlikely) that a baby would be taken from its surviving parent to be raised by hostile in-laws. It's another common misconception about 'next of kin' laws that children can be passed on through the laws of intestacy, i.e. that your next of kin automatically gets guardianship of your child if you die. This just isn't true, the assumption is they live with their surviving parent but if there is none or the surviving parent is unable or unwilling to look after them then a court will decide what is in their best interests (taking into account any will left by the deceased as well), which could mean living with grandparents or aunts/uncles - but they're not property to be gifted to anyone.

I guess worst case scenario if there was a dispute particularly if mother dies before the birth can be registered and therefore parental responsibility of the unmarried father confirmed, there would need to be an urgent court application for genetic testing and a court order to establish parentage before the baby could be discharged from hospital. Probably only would happen if social workers weren't 100% on who the father was or if the baby would be safe with it's father, but even so the court can move quickly for these things and in the scheme of terrible disaster of the death of your partner and mother of your child AND having an entrenched dispute with her grieving family, is the additional disaster of a legal issue that much more terrible, maybe it is I guess but again I do think it's something that can be forestalled by a good will and/or legal agreement in advance of the birth...

Yes there’s a mechanism where dad can go to court but it’s probably last thing he wants to spend time and money on while newly bereaved and caring for newborn. Pragmatically baby would go home with the alleged father but there’s potential room for shenanigans if granny doesn’t like the bf and insists he’s not the dad or extra stress if baby needed treatment consenting to and no one with parental responsibility to consent.
Same with dad dying before baby born. Married mum can just put him on birth certificate which will be needed for insurance payments etc. Unmarried she needs to go to court for declaration of parentage. Bereaved with a newborn and perhaps money tight as lost his wage it’s an added hurdle and may delay money paid out.
A lot comes down to your tolerance for risk.
It also potentially gets even more complicated if there’s ‘ex’ spouses, some people separate but never bother divorcing and go on to have relationships and children with new partners.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7334313/amp/I-never-felt-marriage-important-day-Paolo-died.html
This is slightly out of date as unmarried couples get bereavement support allowance now but the hassles with bureaucracy are quite well explained.

The other issue is the surname given to children.

Presumably you'll want to have the same name as your children to avoid being constantly questioned on flights etc if you are their parent?

If so is he prepared to double-barrell his name or is he content for them to have your name?

What if your DC is born with needs that require you to give up work and focus on your family? You need the security of marriage then. I was a sham and at one point in our lives both our DC were poorly. I had hospital appointments coming out of my ears and there is no way I could've juggled a job and looking after my children. By DH supporting us all financially it was such a blessing. Marriage makes that unit more secure.

Something else to think about..:you say you’re going through fertility treatment. Obviously this is very individual and may not apply to you but if you end up using donor sperm, your partner will not automatically become the “other parent” if you are not married. They would have to adopt your child. As a same sex couple, that was one of our main reasons for getting married.

Do whats right for you. I was never bothered when i first met my partner with being married. At the beginning i earned more than him, financially in a better position with house buying. We had a child, got married, had another child, bought a house.

Through those child rearing years i reduced my salary and regardless of what is said it impacted my career, nursery fees working part time.

That small wedding i did 22 years ago, has meant we are entitled to a fare share of the home and pension if we did split, but also while i was busy on maternity leave and working PT he continued with his career and pension and associated protection as his wife if something happened to him.

We are still happy together, i use my maiden name, whether i agree with marriage or not it has given each of us a level of protection.

This. As a former IFA I have seen people (usually women) made homeless because property went to a partner's children and not them.

A marriage certificate provides more financial and legal protection than any other single piece of paper I can think of.

If you don't want to get married (or enter into a civil partnership), fine. But you'd better make damn sure all your paperwork has been completed and kept up to date because when one of you dies, the survivor could be in for some unpleasant shocks. I've seen it happen.

If with you op. I did a fair bit of research and concluded that, until we reach the threshold for the inheritance tax break, there's no real advantage in marriage for us, and certainly not a big enough advantage to overcome my dislike of the narratives are marriage.

We have wills, both earn fairly equally, have registered as partners for pensions and other insurances.

I think, if you aren't going to get married, you have to think about things a bit more, but it's absolutely doable. But only because neither of us quit work to be a sahp. I wouldn't consider that without marriage.

I think the standard convention is that children have the surname of their mother whether they are married or not? It certainly is the default when a baby is born. Also you can be married and keep your own name obviously!

Couldn't you just do a quick civil partnership and not bother to tell anyone?

I was the higher earner before we married, but I was well aware that this might change after having children. I have seen women in my life permanently disabled from childbirth, and I have also seen women suffer with severe PND and postpartum psychosis. Aside from all else, these things impact your earning potential !! I’m aware it seems odd to think about these things, but when you’ve seen it happen up close you don’t forget about the risk of it, even if the risk is small.

What would be feminist about deliberately taking on the physical risks of childbirth whilst leaving myself vulnerable by not ensuring the man who impregnates me is legally bound to share his assets with me?

As it happened, life was kind to me and childbirth was no problem. However, I am no longer the higher earner by any stretch, which is something that many women find after having children for one reason or another. I am glad that my husband has been paying our mortgage, saving money, and paying into pensions - all of which are mine too, despite the fact that I didn’t earn the money.

Really agree with all of this.

I think one thing that's hard to comprehend when you're an ardent feminist without kids and your whole world is oriented around the working world and what success means there...

...is how much your own, strong will might end up deciding that children and family are where you want to focus your energy!

I had this mental model which told me the only reason a woman would ever need to "lose her independence" was if "the Patriarchy" or "internalised misogyny" wore her down. I knew I was strong enough to defeat whatever the Patriarchs would throw at me...

...I had not prepared for how extremely cute babies are. Broke through all my defences ;)

Yes and how hard it is to have a child with two full time working parents. Something usually has to give and it's often either the mothers sanity or her working hours!

But if you don't think that's going to be an issue for you and you are happy to do extra paperwork then there probably isn't any need to get married yet. Lots of people do it post kids or later in life. I know three couples who did it in their 50s purely for tax reasons (older so more assets!).

We got married recently and we’re now TTC. I wouldn’t try before because I wanted to provide as much security as I could for any children.

Marriage gives so much protection if things go wrong as others have mentioned. The most important thing for me though was that my partner was so sure, he’d stand up in front of all the most important people in our life and commit to me.

My parents had a fraught on/off relationship growing up which hugely impacted on me so I want my child’s life to have a more solid foundation. We could end up divorced but lots of things could happen, we’re at least starting from a place of hope and optimism about our relationship which is the best you can ask for really.

If you choose to cohabit rather than marry, you're much more likely to split before your kids grow up than if you do marry.

So it's worth exploring the reluctance to marry before having the children, I'd say - not because marriage is some magic thing but to think about what your motivations are and how you'd feel about single parenting it it came to that.

Im with you on this op. You are the one who is in a much better position financially.
Why would you risk losing half in a divorce ( the reality is that divorce rates are high). Pensions generally allow a partner nomination, you can write a will etc. Even if you couldn't work in the future, you have a higher stake in the house ( which you wouldn't lose just because you were no longer working). You also have your savings and investments to fall back on. Next of kin is whoever you want it to be. There's always lots of talk on here about family members taking ' decisions' away from long term partners if you end up in hospital. I've never encountered this in over 25 years. Plus, you know your own family and the dynamics. You can do a power of attorney for health if this is something you are worried about.

I have friends who were the higher earners/ in a better financial position than their spouses and when they divorced, bitterly regretted that they had married in the first place. Handing over half your pension, savings etc is a bitter pill to swallow. Especially when your ex just never bothered to pay into a pension themselves and spent their money on crap, as they coasted through life.
Marriage is not always the best decision for everyone.

There's a correlation between marriage and long relationships, no evidence of causality. But since the research lumps casual flings together with long term committed unmarried relationships, it will look as if fewer of them last.

I personally sit in a situation where, if a relationship is toxic or abusive, I think it's much healthier to split than feel stuck together. I'm not really sure the romanticized narrative of staying together whatever is everything it's made out to be.