Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 13 14

Original poster

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

342 replies

EveWasFramed · 03/05/2010 10:43

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...

OP posts:

4madboys · 03/05/2010 10:57

tbh dp and just cant be bothered, we have looked into it, but even if you 'just' get married at the registry office, its not that cheap!

we have four kids, one more on the way! we have a mortgage, wills, life insurance etc etc and have been together over 12 yrs now, we are happy and see no need to get married, it wouldnt change anything for us, tho my mil would love it.

and as an aside, i dont like the tradition with marriage that the father gives his daughter away ie giving his property to the man marrying his daughter, same with changing surnames, so IF i ever did get married it would have be a non traditional wedding where we wrote our own vows etc as both dp and myself are not religious.

but tbh we have neither the time nor the inclanation to get married.

colditz · 03/05/2010 10:57

because I am not property, and never will be property, and I refuse to subscribe to the psychological hangover of an outdated and irrelevant method of controlling female fertility.

That's why.

LittleMrsHappy · 03/05/2010 10:57

Marriage at the end of the day is a piece of paper, the person can still leave, still be a anal gland etc... but my children are with me for life, and in my heart,no matter what they put me through! if dh cheated on me or done something that I considered to be heart breaking, then all my feeling for him would be gone, as he was not the man I believe he is, or the man, I thought when we had our children together.

One child was out of wed lock and the other was, no piece of paper for me personally decides to why we have children, WE do that together from our love for each other!

When we got married, we were making a commitment to each other, not our children!

VinegarTits · 03/05/2010 10:59

getting married before having kids doesnt always work out that way, unless you dont have sex until your wedding day

they havent developed a contraceptive that is 100% effective yet

Bonsoir · 03/05/2010 11:00

You are deluding yourself if you think that marriage makes it harder for one of you to bugger of if you get fed up. It really, really doesn't. What it does do is provide a financial and economic framework and various commitments to one another, during the marriage and if it fails. You may or may not want those commitments, which is why some people choose to marry and others don't.

One of the biggest eye-openers to me on MN has been posters' general naivety about marriage and the degree of mutual commitment it affords. Marriage is not a commitment - a commitment is something that happens within a relationship. Unless your relationship is already sound, marriage will not make your OH more committed...

shimmerygoldglitter · 03/05/2010 11:00

I have been married twice. Having children was way more of a committment than marriage. I stayed a long time in my second marriage even though unhappy for the sake of my dc. I was off like lightening from my first when things didn't work out so I will be honest I see marriage as utterly pointless.

hobbgoblin · 03/05/2010 11:01

This is a vote Conservative post.

castille · 03/05/2010 11:02

My father used to remind us that marriage is reversible but being a parent isn't.

When and if to have children, and who with, is a MUCH more important decision than getting married.

mysteryfairy · 03/05/2010 11:03

I didn't say it was weird to want to be lagally bound. I said it was weird to feel that this would be what made it difficult for your partner to "bugger off" as you posted.

I am well aware of how easy it is to dissolve that legal commitment and would hope that what would keep my partner with me if things got rough would be his commitment to our children - not a contractual obligation I had imposed on him.

pantspantspants · 03/05/2010 11:03

Firstly I find it very interesting that in your reason for marrying you are already considering "buggering off".

I'm not married, have no intention of marrying but would never consider "buggering off" from my relationship, what we have is a natural commitment that we would never consider breaking from. Our commitment if far more permanent than marriage in my view.

you say you think not marrying before children is negative, I think having children with the idea in your head that one or both of you may "bugger off" is far more negative.

Lindy · 03/05/2010 11:04

I am always amazed at the people who have children but don't sort out all the 'legal' issues - yes, that sort of thing can be dull but I know of a number of sad situations where an unmarried partner has been left (or partner has died) and sorting out all the legal issues is a big hassle if you aren't married. A male partner is often far worse off as he might have no 'rights' to see his own child. of course you can sort all this out without being married as 4madboys says.

Getting married does not = big expense, unless you choose to have a great big bridezilla day.

The other point about not changing your name (which of course you don't have to when you marry) that interests me is why so many women are happy to have their father's name but not a husband's name ???

ScreaminEagle · 03/05/2010 11:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster

EveWasFramed · 03/05/2010 11:04

Okay...maybe I should clarify a little?

I didn't always want to get married. I wanted to marry my DH...before then, I wasn't bothered, really.

I am not religious, so that wasn't a factor.

I didn't care about a big wedding (but my family did, so we did an affair that they loved, and I tolerated...again, a marriage ISN'T the wedding)

I wasn't given away, I kept my surname, and I don't buy into all that crap about being property.

I liked the idea of making a formal committment. I like that there is something else that 'binds' us other than our children. I guess it's that simple.

I don't want to wind anyone up...I know lots of couples who didn't get married, but none of them have DCs...I am just trying to see another perspective, that's all!!

OP posts:

OnnaStick · 03/05/2010 11:05

Me being in love with my partner and him loving me back, and us planning to stay together until we are windy and toothless is a private matter. It is a precious thing and nothing to do with parties or legalities or John Lewis gift lists or tax breaks or invisible pink unicorns.

Our children are the result of our loving and committed relationship.

Where do you get off thinking that your way is better than mine?

Can I have a better reason that "it was kind of a negative thing to do"?

wubblybubbly · 03/05/2010 11:05

Because it's totally and utterly unimportant in the scheme of things.

We did get married eventually but I can't honestly see why it's important to get married or why the date should be particularly relevant.

Each to their own.

colditz · 03/05/2010 11:05

Marriage used to be a legal contract in which the man said

"I am buying you off your father, and therefore will continue to provide for you"

and the woman said "I acknowledge your continued financial contributions by only allowing you to fuck me, by subjugating any opinions I might have had of my own in favour of yours, and by trying to have lots of sons so you feel like A Big Man."

And the father of the bride said "Here, you have this vessel for my DNA. Look after it."

How in Hell is any part of that relevant to 2010? The father of the groom has no place in a wedding ceremony, because men never were thought of as a woman's property.

I do not buy this new funky post-modern church, that says "It's ok, you don't have to say you'll obey him" - because the whole set up of the ceremony implies that a wife should obey her husband,l because he owns her, body and soul.

ScreaminEagle · 03/05/2010 11:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

CaveMum · 03/05/2010 11:06

I don't have an opinion on other peoples choices - that is up to them. Personally for me marriage came first - after 6 years together - and now almost 2 years down the line we are on the verge of ttc our first child.

The thing that bothers me is people (with or without children) who say marriage is just a bit of paper or will make no difference to their relationship so why bother. If that's the case why not do it anyway?! Being married puts you in a better place on a legal basis - ie if your partner died suddenly with no will there is no guarantee you would be considered next of kin - and surely the peace of mind is worth the piece of paper.

No one says you need to have the big ceremony and party - you can get married for as little as you like, the only cost need be the marriage license and the registrar/church fee.

My personal opinion of course.

expatinscotland · 03/05/2010 11:07

I wonder, too.

We eloped. No big wedding or that.

I suppose as long as you protect yourself and your children legally in the event of death or split from a partner, some have reasons of conscience for not marrying.

But it's easier to marry to get that, so we did.

Original poster

EveWasFramed · 03/05/2010 11:07

Also...not conservative...I have never said it was a negative thing...I said my FAMILY viewed it that way.

Nor am I planning to bugger off, nor is my DH!!!

Good lord...now I know why I don't ask questions V. often on MN!!!

OP posts:

OnnaStick · 03/05/2010 11:08

X-posted with you OP.

So, YOU like the idea of a formal commitment. My dp and I hate the idea of a formal commitment. Honsestly, to me, to formalise it would be tacky and icky. IT makes me cringe. (Don't fret, we have the legalities tied up - I see this side of things as being on a par with sorting out our mortgage and insurance).

I agree - there has to be something that 'binds' you other than your children. For us, it is the simple fact that we love each other and have agreed to spend the rest of our lives together.

bronze · 03/05/2010 11:09

out of interest all the unmarried people
have you sorted wills etc? I know its important if you are married too but more so if you aren't.

said · 03/05/2010 11:09

"I liked the idea of making a formal committment."

Well, that's probably the main difference. Those not interested in marriage aren't bothered about a formal committment. I do think you should get the legal stuff sorted though and can see when marriage would be teh easier thing to do.

Original poster

EveWasFramed · 03/05/2010 11:10

I don't believe I am better than anyone I AM TRYING TO SEE ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE!!!!! That's all!!!! I was brought up in a family who valued marriage...that you did that no matter what, and I don't necessarily hold that same view...I just wanted to know WHY SOME PEOPLE CHOOSE what they do, and why some people don't.

Geez...I am NOT ATTACKING ANYONE!!!!

OP posts:

colditz · 03/05/2010 11:11

How is a husband like a father?

Is he in a position of authority over you, able to change your name, your living circumstances, able to mould your personality and 'improve it?

A father is a parent, and has parental responsibility. A husband should not have that! Why should I change my name because I love a man? I'm not a chameleon, I don't have to hide in my environment.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 13 14

Swipe left for the next trending thread