Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Conception

When's the best time to get pregnant? Use our interactive ovulation calculator to work out when you're most fertile and most likely to conceive.

Original poster

Marriage before children?

78 replies

May90 · 18/11/2016 16:24

Hi I'm new here!

My OH and I have been together 4 and a half years and recently bought a house. Since buying the house and having an empty spare room it is like switch has been flipped and I am suddenly very broody. We have talked about it a lot the last few months and had decided to start trying next year - after the summer which gives us time to finish the house. When I told my mum she very seriously asked when the wedding would be as we 'cannot have children out of wedlock'. I did not expect this at all!

I explained that what with buying he house we cant really afford to get married right now. We made a decision a few years ago that it was one or the other and the house was the better option for us. We have both said we definitely want to get married but that having our own home felt more important right now.

What are peoples views on this? I know it is totally old fashioned to judge anyone either way and people should do whatever is right for them but has anyone else had this issue with family members?

OP posts:
Writerwannabe83 · 18/11/2016 20:46

My DH felt quite strongly that he wanted us to be married before having children.

My sister had two children out of wedlock (with her now-ex-partner) and my grandparents were not impressed at all. I'm pretty sure it's just a generational thing in my family's circumstances and on one occasion my nan actually referred to the children as being bastards. I went ballistic at her and she never said it to me again.

I do think it's more common to have children outside of marriage these days though as opposed to being married first.

eatsleephockeyrepeat · 18/11/2016 20:59

We went for a baby over a wedding here. But that was an easy decision seeing as I'm the one with all the assets and the higher income. Even taking into account maternity leave and depressed earning potential it'll be a good few years before being married would leave me better off in the event of a split. Plus I've been married and divorced so know a bit about the pros and cons. I second the advice to consider your legal and financial security pre-reproducing.

Gini99 · 18/11/2016 21:10

I do think it's more common to have children outside of marriage these days though as opposed to being married first.

If you mean then there are more people who have children outside of marriage than in then no that isn't true. If you mean more people are having children outside of marriage than in the past then it is true. I linked to the data above and there is more detail here In 2014 (latest figures for the Office of National Statistics) 53% of births in 2014 were to married couples, 32% to couples living together unmarried and the rest either to parents who were living apart or only registered to the mother. There's a strong age difference though: for mothers under 20 almost all are unmarried and for mothers in their 30s around 2/3rds are married.

newmumwithquestions · 18/11/2016 21:11

2 points:

Get married for you not your relatives.

Seriously think about getting married now. I'm a total hypocrite here as I'm not. I was never bothered about it before having kids, now I am. I've put my career on hold, I'm not paying into a pension, I'm looking at part time work, and whilst I neither want or expect to split up with OH, financially I now want to safeguard things - not really for me but for the kids. However we're still too sleep deprived to consider getting married at the moment! If I had my time again I'd do it pre-kids (and spend what I could on a lovely honeymoon somewhere totally unsuitable for children!)

Jellybabie3 · 18/11/2016 21:35

We are trying for no.1. Not married but been together 14 years. We have house split 50-50 and life insurance etc. We are not getting married because we are happy just the way we are. We made a choice between baby and wedding and we both chose baby. Call me foolish but i am not worried about the law. We are happy right now and a bit of paper wont change that for us. Its 100% your choice what you do. Very interesting thread!

Jellybabie3 · 18/11/2016 21:36

And btw we spent the last 2 years going to adults only holidays in far away destinations that we called retirement before kids! We had the honeymoon without the stress of the wedding Grin

oatybiscuits · 18/11/2016 21:56

It depends how important it is to you really; if it's not that important, fine, leave it til later. But if it is important then do it while you've got the time, energy and yes, money to do it because I have to echo what others have said about how things will get a lot harder and more complicated financially after you have children. Plus, who wants to wedding dress diet post-partum Hmm

annandale · 18/11/2016 22:05

Our marriage certificate is a bit of paper, yes, but so is my passport, my NHS medical card [old gimmer] and my vaccination certificates. They are a paper (or plastic) representation of something real, and I wouldn't be without any of them.

Having said that - yes, your mother is being unreasonable. Nobody cares. It's only for your mutual protection as a couple.

MyWineTime · 18/11/2016 22:56

There are legal differences that make you both more vulnerable if you are not married, and we both agreed that we would not consider having children without being married because of this.
Getting married does not need to cost a fortune. It depends how you prioritise things.

OohhThatsMe · 19/11/2016 16:07

I agree, annandale - nobody calls a cheque "a piece of paper"!

OohhThatsMe · 19/11/2016 16:44

OP, here is an example of a thread where things would have been much more straightforward if the couple had been married.

Dozer · 19/11/2016 16:47

Marriage can be just a few hundred quid.

If you're not married, it'd be very risky to go PT or SAH.

specialsubject · 19/11/2016 16:48

treat the wedding as a cheap way of getting the legals done. Book a weekday at the registry office, take a couple of mates, job done in 15 minutes.

frilly frock party at your leisure.

and don't tell mother in law if she will chuck the toys at this idea.

expatinscotland · 19/11/2016 16:50

I think we're teh only couple I know who got married before ever having any children. I would definitely get married first.

harrietm87 · 20/11/2016 13:58

If you disagreed with the concept of marriage (as plenty do) my advice would be different, but since you do actually plan on it at some point I agree with the others - do it now! Once you have kids you'll feel about the wedding the way you did about the house - i.e. It seems pointless to spend on wedding when you could spend on your kids/family hols/a bigger house. Even if you are determined to have a big party later, nothing to stop you having private registry office ceremony now to get the legal protections pps have mentioned.

We started ttc while engaged, planning to cancel the wedding if I got pregnant, but after a mc realised we wanted to relax and went ahead with wedding. The day and honeymoon were amazing and it really does feel different being married. If you have kids you won't have that chance again.

BethanyCourt · 21/11/2016 16:31

I certainly think it's a generational thing. I'm 25 and quite a few of my friends have had children out of wedlock, but they are great parents. One of my close friends was in a very similar situation- had been with her dp for 15 years, Spent the money they had saved on a mortgage rather than a wedding, rhen had her child. As she said to me marriage doesn't change the way she feels about her dp, and both her parents and his are no longer together so she feels it doesn't guarantee happiness. It's all about personal choice, if you want to get married make sure it's for reasons you want and not for anyone else's

expatinscotland · 21/11/2016 17:27

That's a very foolish attitude to have when it comes to the legalities that are conferred by marriage, Bethany. It's frightening how many people don't realise how utterly fucked they will be if they split with their 'partner' and they have jacked in full-time work to look after children. Hardly a week goes by on this site without some woman who finds herself in just such a predicament.

Or this whole 'we can't afford to get married'. It costs about £75. You don't even need rings. And you don't need to tell your family if they're the type to get pissed off. £75 to confer a great deal of legal rights.

BethanyCourt · 21/11/2016 21:50

I didn't mean to criticise anyone expatinscotland, I was just simply saying that marriage means different things to different people these days and you shouldn't do something just because it's what other people want for you. That goes to all aspects of your life.

Autumnsweater · 21/11/2016 21:56

I totally fine with people having children "out of wedlock" BUT am extremely pro the legal protection marriage gives. I personally wouldn't have bought my house without being married and probably ditto having children. I didn't spend a lot on a wedding though as was prioritising saving for a house deposit/some savings aside for maternity - registry office and close family only. The way I see it we'll hold a big bash on our ten year anniversary if that's what we want to spend money on.

KERALA1 · 21/11/2016 22:09

I will be advising my dds not to have dc before marriage. Not for moral reasons - legal protection

RitchyBestingFace · 21/11/2016 22:18

If you have your name on the deeds, mutual wills, a pension in your name and you and your DP will share parental leave and childcare before you go back to work in a highly paid job (or if you have an independent source of income outside work) then you'll probably be just about OK without marriage. If not, spend the £70 quid and protect yourself.

RitchyBestingFace · 21/11/2016 22:20

marriage means different things to different people these days

It doesn't matter what it means to different people - it only matters what it means legally. Which is that you will be entitled to financial support and assets if you are married and sweet fuck all if you're not.

raisedbyguineapigs · 21/11/2016 22:37

AA Gill is marrying his long term partner and mother of his 2 children now he has been diagnosed with cancer, because of the legal protection his partner will get when he dies. If, at any point in the previous 20 or so years they were together he had dropped dead suddenly, she would have been financially fucked and may have had to lose her house to pay the inheritance tax at a time she and her children were grieving. Seems a bit silly to wait until you are terminally ill and just hope you don't have a heart attack in the meantime.

Gini99 · 22/11/2016 09:39

I agree raisedbyguineapigs. If people really object to marriage then fine you can put wills, trust deeds, contracts, insurance etc in place to deal with most things but there are still things that you can't change like this kind of case or inheritance tax (though you can try to plan for that).

It amazes me when people assume that they won't need legal protection because they are going to carry on working or because it's just a piece of paper. If you're not going to marry then fine but look at the legalities seriously and plan for death, serious illness, having a child who needs long term care, redundancy etc most people's lives will throw unexpected problems at them at some point. It seems like much more effort to deal with all of that rather than just pop down to the register office.

user1471496670 · 22/11/2016 09:46

Well me and DP would both love to be married before having a baby but sadly I'm still married to someone else and I'm really too old to delay TTC until the divorce goes through.
I'll have to risk it as rather that than leave it too late and risk not being able to have a child.

Swipe left for the next trending thread