To be feeling upset, annoyed, angry that DP does not want to get married????

[3peasinapod]

We are 14 years together with 3 kids and i feel at this stage i would like to get married. I talked to DP about this a while back and he agreed, i went ahead and rang regitery office and got appointment to set date etc. On the day before we were due to go to to the appointment at the registery office i sat and asked DP about setting a date etc. He just said i dont care when we do it, and by his tone he just really didnt care. So i cancelled the appointment had a huge row. It has been brough up a few times since but when i told DP how sad i felt about the while situation he said he would organise the registery office ~(he never did)
AIBU to feel upset, angry, annoyed!??

I utterly, utterly, sympathise with you!

I had had baby number 1 and number 2 was on the way before I got an engagement ring and this had taken 12 years (been together since I was 17)

It took me to pack me and my son's stuff before he relented...(truth be known I didn't actually have a plan b so thank god he gave in or I'd probably have gone to live life as a hobo in the shed for a while!)

so that was the first hurdle. Then he was pissing me about with a date so I went and booked one and started organising it all by myslef. He was being a proper twat about it and after another blow out we finally booked a week in the Caribbean at a Sandals resort and took 17 of our closest mates with us. His parents don't travel and mine wouldn't come either so they all looked after our kids while we were gone.

It was superb. No family stress, just our mates and a fantastic resort. Everything taken care of for us and I'd reccomend it to anyone.

My husband didn't want to do the whole wedding function thing. He hates functions and as time went on he got more funny about it. It is a shame that there was no family there, but we did it and had a great time with our mates.

I hope you manage to persuade him it's for the best!

I agree with above two posts, actually.

I think that most men are highly neutral about marriage, tbh, I think 100% will marry their partners if that is what their partner really wants . Perhaps it's not a case of NOT wishing to marry you, maybe it's a case of not really minding/caring either way.

marantha I think you're right about plans being put on the back burner re cohabitee's rights, and for the record, I agree with you that if you want the legal protection of marriage, you should just get married. It doesn't have to be a big deal. However, my point about the article was that it seemed rather unpleasant to me to be in a relationship with someone whilst also keeping in mind how best to fuck them over should you split up; it reminded me of Anna Nicole Smith being left with nothing after her husband died and, whatever the rights and wrongs of that particular relationship, what contempt he must have had for her.

I think it's rather greyer than "you leave with what you came with". An obvious one is someone who's made improvements to the house when they don't own it, or a partner who has put their own career on hold to further the other person's (eg, though not necessarily, by providing free childcare). Plus let's not forget that a huge number of people in this country believe in common law marriage and have no idea that they have no rights, let alone have systems in place to protect them.

Apologies OP for the hijack

Not at all DitaVonCheese, great reading.
They need to look into the laws for co-habiting and married couples with children. The inheritance tax for co-habiting unmarried mothers it wrong i feel.

Just waiting for him to come home now. God melt down of an evening DD3 really played up!! peace and quiet at last.

Well, I don't know DitaVonCheese, a few weeks ago a judge ruled in the case of two former cohabitants (who bought a home in which BOTH partners were on the deeds but the male had left 17 years ago and not paid towards the mortgage) that he (the judge, that is) could not reasonably know who paid for and who did what in the home thus reverted to the rule that:
Whoever's name (names) is on the deeds gets the house.

So, to this particular judge, it WAS clear cut- i.e. if it's in black and white (on paper) it matters, if NOT written on paper; it doesn't.

As regards the free childcare issue, it can be argued that the SAHP was "paid" by virtue of having bed and board provided for while partner went out to work for money.

To be honest, the reason the "common-law" wife myth persists is because society in many areas sees marriage and cohabitation as the same.
My view is that it shouldn't: not for any moral reasons but because LEGALLY it is very different and, frankly, that's where it really matters.

3Peas, also bear in mind that you've been stewing about this, planning your conversation and waiting to pounce, while he's probably been planning to come home, and slum infront of the tv with nothing more challenging than a quiet beer . Hope you don't have another row...

Just a suggestion if you haven't brought it up yet - can you tell him you'd like to make an 'appointment' to talk about a few things?

You could even put them in writing.

Waitrose: but surely having one's name on the deeds/tenancy agreement means one cannot be thrown out of a shared home with no notice. There have been various threads about relationship breakdowns where posters have been advising 'change the locks and dump the other person's stuff in the garde4n' and it has had to be pointed out that you can't evict someone from a home they part-own or are a named tenant of, unless they have been violent, so violent that a court order can be obtained against them.

SGB, I wasn't talking about joint tenants, or co-owners.

I was talking about women who do not own any part of the home, or are not on the lease. Or women who have purchased/been given the home within 7 years of the cohabitee's death.

For those women who own part of the home, the partner's part of the home would not automatically go to the woman upon his death. It would go to whoever he designated in his will - hopefully her. But if no such will, it would go to his children, to be split equally. So potentially a man's grown child from a previous relationship could force the woman to sell the house or buy his/her portion.

If the man were still married to an ex, his assets would go to her and their children, and not a penny to the current partner whether or not she had been living there for years.

Cretaceous, you seem to have an unnverving insight into the male psyche - are you a man?!

3peas, no one has ever batted an eyelid about my children having a different surname to me. I would guess half the children in DS class at school have mothers with a different surname to them, either because they are married but have kept their surname, are co-habiting or divorced. I wonder if this depends on where you live? I am in London, perhaps the population here is not typical. Or if you would like to be married perhaps you feel that a straightforward, routine question to establish relationship is a criticism? I sometimes look at peoples ring fingers so I know whether to say 'partner' or 'husband'.

On the subject of parental rights, does your DP have parental responsibility for the children? If I understand this correctly, that is one area where men may have significantly less rights if they are not married and do not have parental responsisbilty.

I am just vaguely sympathising with your husband because I wouldn't really want to get married either.

Curly, funny you should say that, I always come out as a man in those magazine quizzes . And my (male) OH is a bit of an old woman. But I'm definitely female, despite being marriage phobic!

slouchingtowardswaitrose I am sorry, but in response to your scenario I am tempted to say, "That's Life".
The intestacy rules are straightforward enough- if a person disagrees with them they can make a will.
You can't legislate for people's ignorance and, in any case, aren't you making the assumption that the late partner DIDN'T wish to leave it to his/her children?

What if your suggestions come into force (which I don't think they will) and a partner who dies intestate who really WANTED to leave their share of the property to the children doesn't because of your assumptions?

I would rather have a black-and-white system of whosever name (S) in on deeds gets property
OR marriage is taken into account
than have a system where bloody annoying busybodies decide "what is right" when it comes to the divvying up of the spoils of a failed cohabitation.

Thing is, waitrose, I think women would be better advised to insist on getting their name on the deeds/tenancy agreements rather than marrying if they do not want to marry.

ThursdayNext
DP is legal gardian over the children.

I would have considered myself being marriage phobic 2 years ago!! O how its all changed...

Regarding people being asked if they are the child's mother by doctors etc just because they have a different surname, well, duh.....what else have they got to go on? The fact is if you don't share the same name as your child, from the point of view of a stranger meeting you for the first time, you could be their step-mother, a legal guardian, a childminder, aunt, neighbour, anything. Of COURSE they have to ask if you're their mother! Surely having the same surname as your child just makes daft things like that easier......

Although technically, you COULD have the same surname as the child but still be their dad's unmarried sister taking them to the doc or wherever, and then they'd assume you were the child's mum anyway I suppose.

Sorry, OP, overthinking that bit I think. I agree with others that your DP is probably just being your average bloke who isn't bothered about the silly details of a wedding and will just turn up to whatever you arrange cos it's the least hassle for him to do it that way. Doesn't mean to say he doens't WANT to marry you. He just can't be arsed with the trivial details.

slouchingtowardswaitrose Living with someone has no meaning in law (in itself) and nor should it.
It should not be for you (or me) to make assumptions about what two consenting adults get up to behind closed doors.
If they wish to have certain "rights"/agreements it is up to them to declare them in writing or get wed.

Marantha, I am making the assumption that the late partner was ignorant/in denial enough to fail to make a will which would have made everyone's life clearer, easier and less expensive.

SGB, getting one's names on the deeds does not automatically mean you don't have to pay inheritance tax though, and doesn't address the pension issue, next of kin medical decisions, etc.

My point is really just DON'T assume things. Don't assume you will be protected just because it seems right and logical. There is no such thing as common law marriage.

But of course, we are mostly in agreement, because all I'm really saying is: women, please, be informed when you make your choices.

However, with more than 50% of children in the UK born out of wedlock, it does seem to me that the laws for co-habitees with children deserve re-thinking.

Perhaps the outcome of fresh thinking will simply be a big debate that informs the public just how vulnerable they might be should they shack up and make babies before getting hitched!

I used to be vaguely anti-marriage. Then I started working in family law and was absolutely flabbergasted how few rights unmarried partners have. Personally I would never have children with someone without being married to them.

If my DP built up a multi-million pound business while I provided free childcare, I'm not sure I would consider bed & board to be just recompense

3peas, what suddenly made you so keen to get married? Obviously, it may make logical sense to ensure you have rights, as Waitrose and others point out. But something must have made you change your views. Do you feel less secure in the relationship?

Cretaceous
I dont really know, i was alway anit marraige hence not being married 14 yrs later. I would just like to marry the man i have my children with, to have the same name as my children, In some mad sense i now feel its time.. If that makes any sense at all.

A good answer . I just know a couple of people recently who have got married after living together for years, only for them to get divorced shortly afterwards. Perhaps they got married in an attempt to salvage their already broken relationship??? It doesn't sound like that's why you want to get married, which is good.

I'm not sure why you'd want to change your name, though . I think I'd get confused if I changed my name after all these years!

Well we chatted and we will be getting married sometime around Xmas or before..

I asked dp had he thought anything more on us getting married he said " yes I have but not sure which hotel to use" me picking up my chin that lay on the floor said great.. He also apologised for acting the way he did when I asked him about the dates the last time. He said he has now had time to think about the whole thing. Both still agreed on registery office, meal with family and a simple day in all.
I asked him wil I go ahead and ring the register, he said ya same plan as before..

Do u know only for I posted this and listened to u ladies, I would still be stewing. Many thanks

Well done and congratulations!

Congratulations, OP!