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?

No one has to take the financial hit. It's a decision.
Someone has to take the financial hit to actually care for the babies, if we are to have another generation. Yes, it is a decision to have children, a perfectly normal one, which men should fund as well as women.

Much like the decision to have children as a lifestyle choice.
To me, a 'lifestyle choice' is something like choosing one gym chain over another, or choosing to always have your nails done.
Bringing up the next generation is a choice, but deserves more respect than the derogatory term '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.
Lucky you. Do you have any idea how rare that is?
And even after a year's maternity leave, there is the gap until they start full time nursery/school to cover.

Relying on your husband or wife is a decision.
Of course it is a decision to have a baby and rely on a partner. No-one is saying otherwise.
I am just saying that when a couple choose to have a baby, it needs to be recognised that the woman (it is nearly always the woman) will take a hit to her career and earnings potential, and her pension. Marriage pools assets so offsets this loss to some degree.
There are some mothers who have successful full-time careers, but it is expensive to fund the childcare: pre-school, wrap-around before and after school, and the 13 weeks school holidays, plus random child sick days, inset days, etc., so you need a well-paid and flexible job to do that.
If you earn minimum wage, you won't be able to pay for all that childcare. And if you work shifts, including weekends, good luck with finding ANY childcare.

Let's stop peddling this narrative women have a gun to their heads. We're capable of better.
I'm not sure what you mean by this.

What if the man loses their job or is unable to work?
Non sequitur. What has that got to do with anything?
Presumably the woman will go to work full time and he will do the childcare, or they will go onto state benefits.

OP has said she wants to get married, even though she doesn't need to for financial reasons. Tbh, if I was you, I'd be massively pissed off at a) hearing about his 'proposal' from a 3rd party and b) that he can have 2 kids with you but not trust you with his money. Which is what this boils down to!

I'm perplexed at people saying that he's already fully committed - no he isn't. If he was to be fully committed he'd be proposing an actual marriage!

This.

With 2 children in the equation already I wouldn't be happy. I'd want to be sure that they're protected if the relationship should fail again.

Suggest you go and talk to him rather than his mates.

He’s proposing engagement not marriage.

If he still wants a long engagement after a house purchase and two children he doesn’t seem like a decent man.

Good enough to buy a house.
Good enough to carry his children.

Not good enough for a marriage certificate.

To be honest, I would consider myself to be beyond an ‘engagement’ at this point. If I owned a home and had 2 children with a partner then turned up sporting an engagement ring I think my family and friends would piss themselves about shutting the door after the horse had bolted. But each to their own. (We owned our house 4 years, had been together 8 years and had no children - marriage was discussed and the deed was done six weeks later.)
I know you say you feel protected, but - are you the beneficiary of his life insurance (to pay off his half of the mortgage), are you the beneficiary of his pension death benefits, if you are tenants in common (rather than joint tenants) are you sure there’s a will that leaves his half of the house to you. Not saying the marriage would solve all the above, but it bears thinking about. Maybe instigating a ‘review’ of how protected you and the children are might give you a better idea of where he stands then your ‘friends’ can mind their own beeswax.