Would you accept a very long engagement after a partner’s difficult divorce?

[Sally20099]

I’ve heard from one of my friends that DP is going to propose soon. (She apparently knows this as she is married to one of his friends who is in on the secret). DP and I share two DC together and are very happy and I would definitely want to get married. However, my question for you all… he went through a messy divorce before we met, and apparently doesn’t really want to get married again for a long time. As well as the emotional impact, he lost a lot of his long standing family money in the divorce and seems quite scarred by this. Despite this, he is supposed to be “desperate” to show his love and commitment by proposing and getting engaged, but only with plans to marry a long time in the future. (1) I feel this level of knowledge seems rather detailed and I wonder if I’m being sounded out to see how I feel?. (2) I can’t decide whether I want to be engaged in that way. I’m curious on others opinions please?

Tell your DP that his friends have blabbed.

Ask him why he wants to get married? Are you his first relationship since this messy divorce? Why can't you just carry on as you are?

But to answer the question. I would not accept a proposal in these circs.

Edit: i missed that you share DC.

posted too early: OP if you are the wealthier partner don't marry. Just carry on as you are.

The point of this comment is to try to prevent the OP from continuing to be a passive passenger in her own life, hearing from third parties about her partner’s intentions and meekly wondering about whether to ‘accept’ his failure to protect her economically.

I had a messy divorce from ex before I met now dg. He proposed me three years into relationship but I said no. This was when we found out I am pregnant with dc1. Fourteen years and one more dc later I finally felt ready to marry. I just informed Dh that let’s get married. He was straight away into it and we got planning, and finally married.

I don’t really see a difference in your current situation and an engagement? You are already both committed to one another, I see this as good as engaged. So you're already in a long engagement in my eyes, whether a couple decides to marry or not, there’s commitment there.

You’ve not stated in your OP whether you are wanting the proposal otherwise you will rethink the relationship so I still don’t see what a proposal and/or long engagement will alter or ‘trigger’ in you to suddenly be unhappy.

If you and your DP were happy to carve a life out together, I really don’t see what adding an engagement (long or short) will change about this. There’s clearly been no rush beforehand so why would a proposal change that.

So, I would be inclined to say that YABU.

I wouldn't bother marrying him in your position. Unless you're doing it for financial protection which you don't need, or for some romantic urge which you don't seem to have, just stay as you are. If he does propose, tell him that's lovely, thanks for the ring but let's stay as we are.

Are you very young? I think that makes a difference. We got together at 18 and were married at 27 which felt about right. We had bought a flat together during that time but no kids until marriage.

This.
Completely agree.
He's trying to manage her.
Shut her up more like.
After two children?
Because he doesn't trust after his divorce?

I think it is so deeply sad just how low the relationship bar is for some, and just how little some women are prepared to settle for.

He's no prize.
I would think a long engagement only further humiliation, publicly.
The idea of sussed out.....after two children?
Teenage stuff and so cringe.

The OP deserves so much better but has settled for so little.

Because historically woman who have children and are not married have been left in a terrible financial position if they break up

You have two children together. The time for healing from his previous relationship was a long time ago. That horse has bolted.

I wouldn’t have a child with someone who wasn’t ready to marry me first. But someone who has had two children and still needs years of being engaged to get up the nerve to get married doesn’t really want to be married to you. It’s both feet in or nothing at all for me.

This is very relevant info, OP. For many women their financial security is very much tied to their male partner, especially if they had children and moved into a 'lesser' job to look after them. They earn less, have a worse pension etc.

That's not the case for you, so you have to consider if/how being engaged would improve your relationship and your life. Or not.
And whether or not being married sooner rather than a very vague "later" is important TO YOU.

I had a long engagement, a child before getting married so I’m not against them. But I don’t see the point in purposely going into a long engagement. It doesn’t show any (to me) additional level of commitment than having 2 kids. Being engaged also doesn’t protect you against splitting up. Being married however does protect you against inheritance tax and all of the possible logistical nightmare of a spouse dying without marriage (it happened to someone in our family and it was a pretty rubbish thing with the additional stress of not being married). If he’s worried about the financial side, can’t you do a prenup?

I’d be really annoyed with your DP, your friend and her husband, though more annoyed with your DP. It feels like they are talking about you behind your back and that’s not a nice feeling.

Your DP talking to his friend about how he would propose but would want a long engagement (bit like dangling a carrot), his friend for discussing it with his wife and she went running to you with the story.

At the very least I’d be telling your DP that you heard via his friend’s wife that he is thinking of proposing but no intention of actually marrying and that you want to preempt this by saying no thanks. Find someone else to insult and horrible to be told this by your friend.

When he proposes I'd tell him my answer depends on when he wants to get married. It's yes if he's prepared to do the deed within 2 years (or whatever your preferred timeframe is), but the answer is no if he's planning a very lengthy engagement.

Given that the rumour you are hearing is true, and not exaggerated in any significant way in the telling.

It sounds to me like he values what he's got with you, doesn't want to lose it, but isn't ready to full-in commit. So he thinks getting engaged is the compromise. It takes you off the market, gives you a promise that you'll eventually get the full deal, but with no full commitment from him.

If you are currently able to finance your own life should you split and have a fair financial split in your current arrangement, and you and your children would be taken care of should he die, what would be in it for you to have your status downgraded to Waity-Katie fiancee instead of upgraded to wife?

He sounds like he wants his cake and eat it - to pretend he's really committed to you, and gaining your true commitment in return for a ring, while all the time keeping his options open and his financial commitment to you limited.

I'd be insulted if my long-term partner pulled this sort of move, especially blabbing it to acquaintances to get their feedback before having a serious discussion with you, which he seems to be avoiding.

Do you want to be married to him? You have said a lot about him, but not so much about how you feel. You said you are not sure about a long engagement, but how sure are you about wanting a marriage?

Do he was divorced before you met and you have been together long enough to have two children together? How much longer does he need to get over it?

And… have you ensured you are on the title deeds/mortgage of any shared property etc, because otherwise you are completely vulnerable if he decides to end the relationship at any stage, leaving you homeless with two kids and no legal rights?

Not at all strange to expect a man to commit financially, when the woman has to take the financial hit of maternity leave, often followed by years of part-time work around the school pick-ups. This can affect her career and earning potential, and thus pension, for many decades or even the rest of her working life.

You are the exception. Most women DO need financial provision from the man they have children with.

An engagement is an engagement to get married.
It's non genuine if marriage is not intended.

That is one possible interpretation.
But we don't know if OP even wants to get married, or if she is in need of 'shutting up', i.e. whether she has been hinting / nagging about marriage.

If she is the higher earner, and they own their house jointly, what benefit would marriage bring now? And why is she 'settling for so little' if she chose to have DC because she loved him?

I do agree that a long engagement is just public humiliation once you are both beyond your twenties. Better to keep your pride intact and remain unengaged and let friends assume that is a positive choice on both your parts.

@Sally20099
Don't get engaged.
Do consider marriage further down the line, as it is above all a legal contract, with implications for things like inheritance and tax, not just some romantic fairy tale wedding day.

Read up on the law.
Make sure you both have wills in place, with power to make medical decisions for each other, and plan who would care for your children if the worst happened to you both.

I honestly don't know why people get married. Do you really feel any different? If you need marriage for protection, you should take a long hard look at why you can't protect yourself without a man.

I'd take an even harder look at any man who's willing to put the woman he apparently loves, in a vulnerable position.

But clearly you and I have different standards when it comes to who we choose to father our children.

No one has to take the financial hit. It's a decision. Much like the decision to have children as a lifestyle choice.

My company made the decision to pay those on maternity their normal wage after 5 years service. I made the decision to wait to year 5 to start a family. I haven't been down a penny.

Relying on your husband or wife is a decision. Let's stop peddling this narrative women have a gun to their heads. We're capable of better. What if the man loses their job or is unable to work?

Where is her vulnerability as the higher earner?