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...

Lcukily my OH's pension scheme was more enlightened and allowed for a named partner to recieve a widows pension (the kids get one too). We had wills and were not affected by inheritance tax.

So it's only the widowed parent's allowance I miss out on - not insignificant though.

I can get his name on the birth certificate, but will have to get a court order.

We would probably have done exactly what Fennel did, had we had any inkling what would happen. We wouldn't have even told anyone about it. Hindsight's a wonderful thing, eh?

Still, we did love not being married.

Fennel I say this as an unhappily married woman and someone who sincerely appreciates that cohabitees CAN- and often are- more committed than married people, however, I really, really hate the idea of cohabitee rights.
Should I cohabit with someone in the future, I want to have the freedom of choice to just walk away if things go sour, without all the hassle of a "divorce".

I dislike intensely the idea of the state telling me that I will be legally tied to someone just because I've had a relationship with them under one roof.

Don't mind them assuming it if I'm wed- after all, I DID make a declaration to the effect.
I also think that most cohabitees themselves are against it- I mean, if they wanted the legal ties of marriage (for cohabitee rights are marriage by default- nothing more, nothing less ) they'd get wed, wouldn't they, so who exactly benefits from such rights?

My first marriage ended in divorce after 2 years. If I think back I could have predicted that really but I did what I thought was the "right thing to do" and ignored my doubts. I think I was young and wanted to please my family who are very conservative about relationships etc.

13 years later I married dh when I was pregnant with ds . I did it because it was important to dh for us to be married. I'd have been happy not to and tbh I needed a lot of persuading. I have quite a few ideological problem with marriage - most of which have already been outlined by other posters. However 6 years later I am perfectly happy that I was persuaded by dh.

So you could say I did it for dh because I loved him and have no regrets though when I made the decision I did worry that I would have regrets so it was a sort of leap of faith for me.

Nowadays I like the thought that dh and I are married but it really isn't a deal breaker for me one way or another.

An added plus is we don't have to have quite so many formal legal agreements between dh and me with regard to wills and money etc. This suits my fundamentally lazy nature.

motherinferior lol

kristinaM why id it always a question of the man 'not being willing to commit'

with us we just don't want to...we know a lot of crap married relationships and we are happy

it is nothing to do with not wanting to commit. I am not secretly waiting to be asked - i am more than happy as I am - please do not infer this

we have a mortgage together, which is harder to get out of than a marriage i'd think!

we just have never got round to it, we're engaged and did plan to but i found out i had pcos and the consultant told us to try for a baby asap and we didn't have the money to get married as well as we'd just bought our first house together. i guessed having a baby was more important than getting married. we've been together 11 years and have ds aged 2 and i'm happy enough now not being married!

Looking through this thread more carefully my views on marriage as an idea are very close to those of MI. I found it difficult to make the decision to marry. The decision was actually very fraught for me and I found myself in tears (and not of happiness) a few times at the prospect.

Dh who is normally the most placid and easygoing of men was however in this matter (as he is in a small number of things that are important to him) very emphatic about it.
He managed somehow to convey quite how important it was to him without making it seem like an ultimatum. In the end as I say I made the leap because he wanted it so much.

It is true that my view of marriage changes somewhat depending on how dh and I are getting on at the time. But generally speaking being married this time has been a revelation (a good one) for me and I cherish our marriage.

Many people do not want to get married, full stop. That is their choice.

OP... you are aware that divorce is also 'legal'? Marriage doesn't mean you'll be together forever...

We've been together 9 1/2 years, have ds aged 2, an enormous mortgage and 2 businesses together as well as a joint pension plan, life insurance to make sure each other is safe whatever happens, money invested together etc....

is that legal enough for you?

and with regard to your first question, I can't understand why some people can't understand that sometimes other people have different priorities to themselves. We may get married one day, we may not (seems hardly worth the bother now.)

I adore my dp and he is utterly committed to me and to our son. And I can't quite believe that you would genuinely expect us to see your post as non-judgemental

pauline etc - I didn't infer anything about your relationship - i don't know you

i also didnt say that " its always a question of the man not being willing to commit"

I was talking about situations I know if where there is an IMBALANCE of committment . One partner gives up her home and gives up her career , or at least puts it on hold/jeopardises it by taking maternity leave and then going part time. The other partner doesnt want the comittmment of marriage . he wants to be free to walk away or ask her to move out with " no ties" when it no longer suits him and with no obligation to support the children

i struggle to understand how this type of situation is to the benefit of the main carer who is econimically disadvantaged and the children

Its perfectly possible that this situation exists in same sex couples of the other way round with men/women, its just i don't know if any

most of the same sex couples i know who have children share childcare and paid work more equally. and they have a civil partnership and other similar legal protections

i also DID NOT say that you were " secretly waiting to be asked" or not being happy as you are - why are you suggesting that i did??? In fact i didnt mention love or happiness AT ALL

"The other partner doesnt want the comittmment of marriage hmm. he wants to be free to walk away or ask her to move out with " no ties" when it no longer suits him and with no obligation to support the children"

yep, no judgement there, none at all

no but you did say

'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'

which makes assumptions about couples - may be its the woman who does not want to be Mrs - it happens

as a feminist i really loathe the supposition that we are all 'wannabe wives'

as mamsparkle says

'Colditz and the rest of you who doth protest too much...you all make me laugh,because I bet if your DP came home tonight with a little box and a proposal you'd bite his hand off!'

ginhag - i have never pretended not to judge a parent who walks away from their child/ren and takes no responsibility for caring and financially supporting them

I'm unclear - are you supporting such behaviour,regardless of gender?

and as a feminist i have concerns that soem womens roles as carers make them economically dependent, vulnerable, less able to compete in the workplace and more at risk of becoming homeless.

i have not said anything about feelings, love , romance, fluffy dresses and rings on this thread

i am concerned about money, power, choices and boring things like security of tenure. some people in our society have more of these things and some have less. And those who have less are disproportionately female. Sorry if that seems sexist to you but its a fact

kristina... it's the sweeping way that you 'know' that this is the reason why a man (or anybody) may choose not to get married. I simply can't believe that you have such an in depth knowledge of so many relationships that you can make such a grand statement.

Yes, you may have a friend or friends that are in this specific position. And I agree that is awful. However I think that most human relationships are bloody complex things and it is dangerous to decide that something such as not choosing to get married means a lack of commitment.

My partner is very anti-marriage. I would marry him if he wanted to marry, but it is soooo far from a deal breaker, as he has illustrated his commitment in legal, financial, and emotional ways. Oh and because I love him. So it is not always the case that one person being more anti-marriage than the other means they are going to fuck their partner over.

I don't think Kristina is saying that, she's saying that all to often that's what happens, not that it's the case in every couple.

It's a feminist dilemma whether to protect the vulnerable (often women) or to encourage freedom even if it might backfire disproportionately on women. Some women are in a position to make choices about cohabiting and won't be financially worse off if the couple splits or the man dies (say with separate pensions, joint names on the mortgage), but many women haven't really thought about it, which is quite a different position.

(actually I just popped in to try out my new election name )

KeeptheRedFennelFlying . I don't see any dilemma I'm afraid- it's simple: marry/make provisions in spite of not being wed OR maintain single status and take your chance in the event of a break-up.

There are advantages and disadvantages to being married and there are advantages and disadvantages to being UNmarried.
That's not a dilemma; that's life.

I do think it should be made clear to cohabitees though that unless they make their own financial arrangements amongst themselves they're on their own in the event of relationship breakdown.

And the way society perpetuates the myth via the social security system and the media that two people can be "as married" without actually being married does not help at all.

I feel sympathy for those women who didn't think about these issues, yes I do. But I don't want to be legally tied to anyone without my express consent.

When a friend of mine left her abusive partner the one consolation she had was that she didn't have to go through the rigamorale of formally separating - I wouldn't want to take that consolation away from people.