Pregnant, unmarried

[Cavapoo1998]

good morning everyone

me and my partner are 26, we have been together for over 8 years now. We have a house together, both named on the mortgage. Both have good jobs. I’ve been in my job just over a year now.

I have recently found out I am pregnant (I was on the pill), very happy about it though.

we are engaged at the moment but not married yet. Is this something we should do before baby arrives? I have seen threads before about unwed mothers being vulnerable but I can’t see us being able to plan a wedding before baby is due…

Thank you

Unwed mothers is quite an old fashioned term

You don’t have to get married pre children but absolutely do not give up your career or let it take a back seat to his unless you do get married.

There are reasons why you are legally in a better position if married once you have a baby. You have plenty of time to get married before baby comes though and the “wedding” bit can come later

I’d think about him paying into your private pension while you are not earning, if you take time off for baby.

On Mn people like to make out that if you're an 'unwed mother' then you're in a mess with your life and your world is basically over - but that's not true!! We got married when ds was a few months shy of 3 and then started trying for another once married. We planned it that way - the horror!

I couldn't wait to be a mum but being married - while also important to us - wasn't this burning, time critical issue.

I'm now a married mum of 2. It's all come good. Do things in whatever order you please.

Ds was a page boy on our big day and looks adorable in the photos. We are very happy with our choice.

It’s not really an issue unless you earn less or have fewer assets than him, and then you split.

Which isn’t the case at the moment but do think through scenarios - what happens if your baby is disabled and one of you isn’t able to work? What if you have another and the cost of childcare is prohibitive? What if they are just standard snotty toddlers and one of you has to take lots of time off work and irritate your boss?

If that will be you rather than your DP you might find yourself accidentally becoming a low or non-earner. And don’t bank on your other half being ok with getting married at that point.

It does give you some protection legally if you were to split - and particularly if you have lowered your earnings during maternity leave / when child is young. Completely your decision through-perhaps have a discussion. You could always do registry office now and party later.

Short answer is yes, legally it is better to be married once you have DC.

If you absolutely don’t think there’s time before the wedding I’d consider booking and arranging one now for 2 years time. I know lots of couples who were engaged before they had DC but never actually got round to getting married because once you have children finding the time to arrange the wedding and justifying the cost gets much harder.

If you got it booked in and ring fenced some of the money then atleast you would have some confidence that a wedding would actually happen.

We got engaged a month before our first was born so we were unmarried. We were buying a house together at this point so I felt fairly secure.
We booked a wedding when our first was here but in the end, ended up getting married just before they were 2, just in a registry office as couldn’t justify the prices and we didn’t want a huge, attention on us day in the end.
We tried for our second after we were married so when she arrives we’ll be married and baby won’t be ‘baby my maiden name’ in hospital this time.

Well there’s no such thing as common law in the U.K. So you won’t be entitled to any of his assets if he left, that includes pension and there is inheritance tax if he dies. You also aren’t legally next of kin. A lot of women leave themselves financially vulnerable if they give up work or go part time. Especially if finances aren’t discussed.

Legally you have more financial protection if you are married (assuming you're going to be the primary carer and all other finances are equal at this point).

The relationship boards are full of women who were expecting to get married to their partner some day but didn't, had a couple of kids, maybe reduced their hours/earnings fell behind/weren't able to save at the same rate, and then 10-20 years later the relationship is over and financially they're not entitled to much.

If you're engaged anyway why not do a registry office quickie - you could get randoms as witnesses, and then have a wedding you need to plan after the baby is born.

Marriage isn’t always the best option. You need to look at the risk vs reward.

Will you become a sahp or work part time? How long for? These things can be predicted just yet, but (I’m the majority of cases) it’s better to be married.

What legal steps have you taken to ensure his half of the house goes to you, should he die? Or vice versa. That’s quite important when you have a child.

if something did happen to one of you, would you be ok without the payments that you would qualify for if you were married?

Not nice things to think about, but they do need thinking about.

How much do you earn VS him. And are there other assets in only yours or his name?

This isn’t an exhaustive list but some examples of how you should be thinking.

And there is enough time to get married, if you feel it’s the best thing. My Cousin is getting married in early January. She only started planning 6 weeks ago.

As others have said, it depends on the circumstances. I am in your position too, but I am the higher earner by a long way so it’s not a priority for me right now. However there are other considerations too - if something awful happened (god forbid) you wouldn’t be your partner’s next of kin which I’ve heard can be really difficult, and you also wouldn’t be eligible for things like Bereavement Support Payment which could be really helpful as a single mother. A bit morbid sorry, but I’ve heard some sad and difficult stories about that side of it.

Your house is 50/50 no issue there . If you value financial security and career keep working .

’Unwed’ mother sounds so Victorian. My DP and I are also 26. We don’t own our own home yet. I will take a few months of maternity leave before I return to work. I earn more and have loads more savings so I’m not in a rush to marry.

As I said on another thread there are basically two models and need to choose which one suits you.

Remain unmarried don’t compromise your career one iota (or you are independently wealthy) straight back to work both of you scrupulously 50/50 on child care chores etc. Child ill he takes time off work. Baby has your name. You are basically two units so if he bailed you are fine.

Option 2 you step back even in a minor way from your career, compromise your pension, give the baby his name. This model you have to be married.

The issues arise when some men think they can pick the best bits that suit them from each model 🙄. That way the woman gets stuffed.

Some of these answers 😭😂

If you ever split up and he tried the whole baby has my surname thing you can change yours by deed poll for pennies.

Secondly if you are engaged and own a house it’s clearly a pretty steady relationship I’d be very shocked if he suddenly decides to leave you post baby.
I’d also rather see what my partner is like as a dad and how we work together when raising a child before committing to marriage considering the awfully high divorce rates these days (although I’m sure he and we are going to be amazing as will you and yours 😊)

Weddings are also supposed to be a time of celebration not a rushed job for legal benefits.

I’ve taken out life insurance and written a will that ensures my child will be taken care of no matter what happens and my partner is in the process of doing the same.

We will get married when the time is right not because we have a baby on the way.
I want to enjoy my wedding day and would love to hopefully have my child there too.

I’d also rather see what my partner is like as a dad and how we work together when raising a child before committing to marriage

This is actually hilarious. Why wouldn’t you aim to be 100% committed to each other before having a child? Having a child is a life long connection to that person.

Totally depends on your situation. Me and DH have been married just over 2 years, but we've got a 17 year old and a 6 year old, we've been together 19 years. I've never felt vulnerable 🥴

Unwed mother 🤣

It sounds like you are in a pretty secure relationship so I would just do what feels best for you timing/ cost wise. I think it's more of a concern if you are planning to take a big step back from the work place for a long period of time and become a stay at home parent.

I've been with my partner 10 years, had first child after 6 and married after 8. I am by far the higher earner and we were 50/ 50 on the mortgage when I had mine. I didn't consider myself vulnerable but I wasn't planning on giving up my career.

My children have double barrel names because we wanted them to have both! But then I didn't take my husbands name when we married anyway..

I've been with my partner 30 years,we have children and grandchildren and we are not married 🤷‍♀️
Personally I can't see the point

@PinkPlantCase is a piece of paper is 100% commitment to you?
The current divorce rates would rubbish the theory marriage is 100% commitment and I’d rather lower my chances of become part of the divorce club.
I’ll stick to a mortgage, wills and life insurances rather than rushing to waste money on a piece of paper that has no value to me unless I’m after his assets which I’m not or surname of which I’m also not in a desperate rush for and we will marry when the time is right if it ever is and not for the sake of having a child together as to me personally that’s an awful reason to wed 😊

@firsttimelondonmummy your post made it sound like you wouldn’t be committed to someone enough to marry them but you would be happy to have children with them. Which I find very strange, considering that as you say marriage could end but a child sticks around for the rest of your life.

I don’t understand why anyone would actively choose to have a child with someone if they had doubts about whether they wanted to be with them long term.

And been as you asked yes for me marriage is a 100% commitment, my DH is a very good man and we have made a great life together which we very much enjoy living together! We are also Christian and the vows we took before god are very important to us. But this thread isn’t about me and my relationship or Christian views of marriage, those aspects are very much down to the individual.

For the OP becoming ‘part of the the divorce club’ would likely leave her better off financially than if she was unmarried and her and her partner split or if one of them died. There are aspects of the legal system in this country which are much easier and cheaper to navigate in case of a relationship ending or death if a couple are married.

Traditionally it is women who suffer the biggest losses in terms of career and income upon the arrival of children. There are studies that show they are then overlooked for promotion for instance. Whereas having children enhances mens career prospects.

We all hope to have healthy children and be able to continue on with our careers, using childcare. This isn’t always the case. I don’t know any men who have given up their career in order to care for a child with special needs. I do know plenty of women who have.

The major issue is that you and your partner might discuss how you are going to handle things moving forward. But words are just words. You can’t force someone to do something just because they said they would. Marriage is a legally binding contract. It gives you rights in a way that words do not.

A baby tends to bring issues relating to money, house work and contributions to the surface. There are many threads on here where men do not value their partners unpaid contributions to their lives together. For example they expect their partner to use their savings to contribute to bills while on maternity leave.

Many men assume their lives will go in as normal and their partner will be responsible for the mental load, covering days when baby is poorly, limiting their work hours to cover child care, turning down travel requirements or training opportunities to be there for the DC.

Even if you decide not to get married, spend some time reading threads on here about financial abuse and really think about what is fair for everyone. Don’t sleepwalk into sacrificing your career and your free time.

@PinkPlantCase as you mention you being religious is personal and irrelevant for 40.2% of us in the UK who are Atheist and don’t believe in god.
The OP said she has a mortgage with her partner that already leaves her well financially protected.
It’s also weird so many women are assuming woman need financial protection and that women taking on the lion share of the childcare (this certainly isn’t happening in my house nor does it in the majority of my friends).
I am the breadwinner and all being well will go back to work after 6 months at which point my OH will take over as primary caregiver.
I won’t ever be relying on needing to take my partners assets if anything happened because I have my own 😊