to wonder why so many people don't get married before having DCs?

[EveWasFramed]

I promise, this isn't meant to be judgemental!! But, my DH and I grew up in pretty traditional families, where you got married first BEFORE having kids...it was kind of a negative thing to do otherwise.

I wanted to get married before my DCs just because I thought there should be some kind of (legal) committment to make it more difficult for one of us to bugger off if we got fed up...if kind of 'makes' us work things out if we ever run into any problems.

Don't know...thoughts, please? I am curious...

Not everyone has been unfriendly or judgemental...

Wasn't the point of the thread.

it could be a nice little earner, not quite as lucrative as a visa wedding, but with the advantage of being perfectly legal

I think I'll pass on it anyway ... night all

I come from a family where the happiest relationships have been between people who either didn't get married, or got married after 20 years or so togeher, so I see getting married before before having children as an indicator of a weak relationship. I also don't think that being in a better position if your relationship breaks down is a very good reason for getting married.

Now, further to my posts already on this topic, I should add that not being married has had a big legal and financial impact on my life over the past few months.

OH died last August and I cannot claim Widowed Parent's allowance, even though we'd lived together for years, had a shared bank account and mortgage, one child and one on the way - all that proof of a long-term commitment is not enough to qualify. Also, I'm going to have to go to court to get OH's name on DD2's birth certificate because if you're not married the father has to be present at the registration of the birth. Bit difficult when he's dead. Of course if I'd been married to OH, DD2 could have been the postman's and no one would have questioned it.

Sorry, this is now making me angry and distressed [takes big, deep breath].

These details did not occur to us. Still, we had our reasons - good ones, that I still stand by - for not getting married, so I shall not be bitter. Repeat, shall not be bitter...

I am sorry for your position, ArsMamatoria BUT it can't be any other way, really.

And, yes, it pisses me off that the dwp will treat a couple "as married" when it suits and NOT when it doesn't- THAT needs to be rectified. Couldn't agree more.

For a long time now in our culture, people have married to signify their committment to one another- it's what is usually done.
Problem is, people have tended to forget that this "signifier" is the PRIMARY reason for it and got it mixed up with things which are, frankly, red herrings (religion, bourgeois institution etc).

Marriage is a sociological construct designed to make a couple's relationship clear to the outside world.

It's OK to say that if a couple have a child, mortgage etc they should be viewed as married but what of the couples that are ideologically opposed to it?

What of the couples who cohabit who wish to have no legal or financial ties to one another?

The nature of a couple's relationship should, imo, NEVER be subjective to the views of others- that's open to all kinds of injustice, it is for the couple THEMSELVES to explicitly declare the nature of their relationship.

My ds wasn't planned and my dp was already married (although his wife walked out years ago). I had been told I couldn't have children and anyway, I was 45, so had no reason to think it could happen.

Having said that, I'm not sure I want to get married. I've watched so many friends make themselves hugely unhappy trying to mend something that is too broken, and then the whole thing deteriorates into a awful bunfight over money. Or worse, with my parents generation, staying together unhappily because that what you did then.

For me, I feel more comfortable knowing that we stay together because we want to. But what suits me probably won't suit other people.

marantha I'm sorry for my position, too.

It makes me very angry that, as you say, the DWP regards us as married when it comes to taking money, but not the other way round.

We made our choice, though, and I agree with what you say. Very well put.

Still have to remind myself to be objective about it, however, and not get bitter...

arsmamtoria - i am sorry for your loss

there is a well known mumsnetter who was suddenly widowed a few years ago. she became aware that many of the other young "widows" she met who were NOT married were in an even worse situation than her, legally and financially

she has posted here urging couples with children who are co-habiting to get married, or get similar legal protections in place ( insurances, wills, property, leases etc)

you don't HAVE to

wear a ring
change your name
refer to yourselves as husband and wife
regard yourself as soemone's posession
have a religious ceremony
wear a white dress
have any type of celebration
spend a lot of money
get an engagemmet ring
believe that now you are staying together because you " have to" rather than because you want to

blah blah blah

in fact you don't need to tell anyone at all

you can just go down to the registry office, pay about £75, go back and get married.

i can understand that some couples are ideologically opposed to marriage but put similar legal and financial protection in place for each other and their children

i cant understand who some women have kids with a man, live in his house ( bought or rented), give up their jobs and become totally financially dependent on someone who doesn't want to make any kind of legal or financial committment to them or to his children. and yes, i do understand that having children with soemone in itself is a committment. But in 90% of cases when a relationship splits up, its the woman who is left holding the baby

It's interesting isn't it KristinaM, that the only serious legal benefit that I can see to getting married is that things will/would be easier if one of you dies suddenly. Organised cohabiting parents can do wills, joint parental responsibility, joint mortgages etc but you can't do much about pensions and widowed parents allowance.

So it's sensible to get married in case one of you dies. Hugely romantic.

We have been together 10 years, have two children and are not married.
It wasn't a political decision, it just doesn't seem necessary. I can't think what difference it would make to us to be honest.
I am a sahm and DP works, but we have a very happy and secure relationship, so the legal side doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Neither of us would do anything to harm each other legally/financially or our children.
Lots of married couples I know have a much more fractious and unhappy relationship compared to us

Fennel The act of marrying has NOTHING to do with romance. Or, rather, does not have to.

Marantha, I know that's what lawyers say (I work with family lawyers though I am not one). But if you try and talk to non-lawyers about getting married and separating it totally from romance, people get utterly confused. In everyday life people do totally conflate marriage and romance, and think there's something weird or sick about people who don't.

fennel - i think it affects capital gains on transfers of property as well

i agree with you and marantha, its primarily a legal contact ( so i am obviously weird)

AFAIK most of the time it offers more protection to women and children than cohabiting. which is why i am pro marriage. nothing to do with religion/ love/ fluffy dresses/romance

My mom was not married and I didnt have a father either. I was always made to feel the odd one out (but this was 30 years ago and things are different now).

So this is what made me ENSURE that I marry before having children. Then I reached 39 and said, my God, I better get pregnanat quickly with my partner of 8 years.

I got pregnant, not married.So I thought Oh well more important to be able to have a child. Then in the last minute I decided to get married before the birth and I am glad I did.

I cannot tell the reasons. It is just a feeling I got after having married of connection of unity. Now I know all couples have that even unmarried. It just felt right to me and I am glad I did.

It rather pains me to admit it, as I am not very comfortable with the decision, but we actually did get married a couple of years ago after 12 years cohabiting, we really didn't want to but did it for those boring legal insurance reasons - just in case one of us died, basically. Because I'd been working with family lawyers who were trying to change the law in favour of cohabitees' rights but I could see it wasn't about to happen anytime soon.

Our experience does, I think, show how hard it is to treat marriage just as a legal precaution.

We booked the registry office, told them we just wanted the mininum necessary, went along with our two witnesses. And the registry office people had real trouble coping with us. We said we just wanted to do the minimum, get the forms, that's all. And the registrar woman got really snotty with us. First they wouldn't believe we were the bride and groom because we weren't dressed up at all. Then she told us firmly that she always inserted extra promises beyond the legal minimum, stuff about loving and commitment. "No", we said, "we just want the legal minimum". She was upset by that but had to agree. So then we had the "ceremony". She kept glowering at us as if we were a group of naughty children not taking it seriously. Which was totally out of order, I think, we'd been very explicit about our reasons for getting married as just being about the legal issues.

And then at the end she said "now you may kiss". "No thanks", we said. as in our opinion love and commitment and kissing are personal things and not things we do when permitted by an outside body (we already had 3 children together, I think we have gone beyond being permitted to kiss). And that was it. But it definitely wasn't "just a piece of paper" to the people in the registry office. Not at all. Even though it was to us.

That's so unprofessional! i hope you complained about her! its none of her business why you wanted to get married, or indeed to judge your motives. She just has to perform her legal duty

i have heard so many stories about the opposite - where the couple have wanted an element of "love and romance" and the registrar is insistent on "just the legal minimum".

BTW Fennel - how are the lovely Dds? My ( late) April baby turned 6 yesterday

I am frequently tempted to start a thread saying 'DP and I made our wills today!' to see if I'm flooded with the joyful congratulations I'd get if we'd got married, from those people who tell me that really it's jsut a piece of paper.

Following the Reproofs I received on this thread yesterday I did ask Mr Inferior if I should release him to look for a Better Woman, one who would accept his hand in marriage and agree to be his wife. He looked bemused and said of course not you silly old bat. But I am just toying with you, I pointed out, they say so on MN. He looked quite chuffed at the idea of being toyed with, but otherwise unperturbed.

We didn't have the heart to complain, we just hared out of there and tried to forget the whole thing. We hid the offending document in a filing cabinet and tried to pretend we never did it. But the disapproving official did make us feel we'd made the wrong decision.

The dds are lovely, all in a good phase, post todder and pre-teen. My baby dd3 is just 6 too and not really a baby at all any more of course. how are yours doing?

MI , i have just read down thread and spotted the bolloking gentle reproofs you received. LOL i dont think some Mner are familiar with your...ahem...sarcastic style

i could toy with my OH too after the kids are in bed. If only he could stay awake ......

I blame Labour. If it meant you were taxed (much less) by being married then it would be better for society.
But they have leaned so far over to help single mums that it has penalised the familly unit.
Taxing pensioners should be scrapped as well.

I want to get married, DP doesn't and it's very difficult to reach a compromise in that situation. I don't doubt his long-term commitment in any way though.

I am pregnant now (very much planned) and suddenly the marriage issue has become more pressing and I would genuinely have the very minimum ceremony just to be married, the actual wedding is not important at all. I think if it isn't important to him, then he could do it for me. I think I might be getting somewhere (slowly) so hopefully we will be married before the baby is born.

We bought a house, then had kids, then got married. All three were things we wanted to do - the order didn't seem to matter. After 13 years together (3 of them married) we seem to be getting along fine.