Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Why did you get married?

135 replies

FatFaced · 11/09/2012 21:05

Why do people get married? There's someone on MN at the mo being told to give her DP an ultimatum because he's not keen on getting married, there's one woman having an affair after 22 years of marriage and someone else who might leave the bastard because of his drinking.

So why do so many people want to get married? I was always a bit anti marriage - didn't think it was necessary. My DP felt similarly. However I now quite fancy it but I don't know why... Is it the contract? The promise? The wedding?

Just curious really and interested in people's thoughts :)

OP posts:
CailinDana · 12/09/2012 08:57

Because the best financial and legal protection available is marriage, oldgirl, and a lot of people who aren't married don't take the trouble to sort out wills etc. It's not that their relationship isn't serious or important, it's just that in the eyes of the law it isn't the same as a married couple. And rightly so, if a couple doesn't want to be perceived as married then they shouldn't be. But to expect a married and non-married couple to have equal rights in the eyes of the law doesn't make sense - the whole point of marriage is to confer rights that non-married people don't have.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/09/2012 08:57

this - I'm not belittling anything. I feel belittled because you're saying that I only 'think' I feel secure, when actually there are excellent reasons for me to feel more secure being married than I was before I married.

There is nothing legal I can do, other than marriage, to decrease the chances of getting separated from DH by visa regs.

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 08:58

Yes, definitely agree with you there LRD, it's a shame more women are not more clued up about the law.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/09/2012 09:00

True, thisold. It's a good thing about this place, I've seen so many threads where someone will talk about 'common law marriage' and be corrected quickly!

exoticfruits · 12/09/2012 09:01

it's a shame more women are not more clued up about the law.

Exactly-never assume. If you don't get married and have DCs, a house etc, make sure you have proper legal advice and make sure that DPs parents are on your side.

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 09:01

"the whole point of marriage is to confer rights that non-married people don't have."

Except why should a certain group of society have this protection that's denied to others in identical circumstances, but without a piece of paper.

I'm not slagging off anyone's marriage, by the way, and certainly not my own, I'm just questioning why it's made out out to be a somehow superior state of existence.

CailinDana · 12/09/2012 09:04

Because you have to choose to avail of those rights oldgirl, and rightly so. "Married people" is not an exclusive group (apart from when it comes gay people, which is another issue), any man and woman can choose to get married and have those rights. If they choose not to have them, fair enough, they don't have them. Would it be right for a couple who've been living together for two months to have the rights of a married couple, even if one of them doesn't want that?

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/09/2012 09:05

I think it's because when people get married, they consent to a legal situation, explicitly and with witnesses. So IMO it's not 'identical circumstances' to anything else.

Some people want to co-habit, but don't want to be tied into a situation of legal responsibility - eg., if you live with a personal who gets themselves into horrible debt all the time, there might be a good argument for not getting married, mightn't there?

I think there's a lot wrong with marriage and it is archaic, but there needs to be some process whereby you make a conscious choice to become legally tied to someone else, it shouldn't just be assumed that everyone who cohabits wants to be in that situation.

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 09:06

No, as you say, Cailin, you have to choose to avail of those rights, and rightly so.

But once you've done that, why is your relationship nonetheless still judged as less secure and committed by others than marriage, including several women on this thread?

CailinDana · 12/09/2012 09:08

I'm not sure I understand your question oldgirl, sorry. Could you clarify a bit?

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/09/2012 09:11

I don't care for the 'committed' bit either. Some people are just more private than others and making a public ceremony like a wedding doesn't appeal.

I think views are changing, though - when my parents were married some landlords wouldn't rent places to an unmarried couple, now that's unimaginable. So I expect it will keep changing.

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 09:12

Sorry Cailin, too early in the morning for me Blush. Supposing you've got your house in joint names, bank account, next of kin declared etc. with your LRP who's been in your life for, say, a decade.

You're just not married.

Why is your relationship so often judged by others to be less secure than a marriage of, say, two years?

MrsJohnDeere · 12/09/2012 09:13

Mainly because it brought huge health insurance and life insurance benefits via dh's work.

We were also didn't want to have children without being married even though it took us another 8 years to get found to it

N0tinmylife · 12/09/2012 09:14

DH and I got married because we wanted to stand up in front of our friends and family, and make a commitment to each other, and have a damn good party! I certainly felt like it added something to our relationship, although I'm not sure DH did in the same way, I think he just enjoyed the party bit!

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/09/2012 09:16

this - well, would people know you've done all those things?

I don't think you can stop some people being snotty, as well. Some people will always think their way is best and anyone who does different is to be sneered at. And if you know that type of person, naturally their attitude will extend to marriage. I have family members who regularly give me 'helpful advice' by pointing out that my marriage isn't really 'proper' because I'm not MrsHisname. I think if someone wants to find a reason to have a go, they will find it! I don't let it get to me.

CailinDana · 12/09/2012 09:17

It's all about assumptions I suppose. It is assumed that a couple who isn't married doesn't have all that legal stuff sorted, which IME is usually the case. Whereas if you're married then you automatically have it sorted. Not a fair assumption to make, I agree, but often true.

The one thing that still holds though that if you're married and want to break up you need to divorce, which is a difficult legal process and not one entered into lightly. If you're not married you can walk away, albeit with some difficulty if your financial affairs are tied. Plus if you're not married then the higher earning partner has no financial obligation towards the lower earning spouse in the way married couples do, so you can just cut ties and leave a partner penniless.

I suppose the question I would ask is, if a couple is availing of all the rights of being married, then why aren't they actually married?

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 09:19

LRD I broadly agree with you, but such attitudes do get to me for the simple reason that if you don't pull up people on prejudice (and I really do believe that is what it is), they continue to perpetuate it.

ithaka · 12/09/2012 09:20

I got married because I was wildly in love. It was nothing to do with wanting to have children, financial security, legal stuff - we didn't even discuss any of that.

We were young & had nothing but we knew we wanted to be together. Many children, mortgages, pets & jobs later we still do.

thisoldgirl · 12/09/2012 09:21

Is that really right about higher and lower earning partners, Cailin, in the issue of a legally recognised relationship versus a marriage. If so, it's very blatant discrimination.

CailinDana · 12/09/2012 09:26

It is prejudice, I agree, but more in the sense of lazy judgement rather than negative judgement. If a person you don't know well says "This is my husband" you automatically know for sure that they are next of kin, etc etc. You know their lives are legally joined and you can assume they've been together for a while and are serious about each other. If a person says "This is my partner," you can't assume the same things - they might not even live together. They might be just as serious and connected as the married couple but you can't assume that.

Of course all that changes when you know a couple well - you might then know that the married couple hate each other's guts and are out to screw each other over while the unmarried couple are committed for life. Everyone is guilty of lazy assumptions - they're not malicious but they are pointless.

Sosmum · 12/09/2012 09:26

First marriage - I thought it was the done thing - we'd had a baby, thought it would make him the man I wanted blah blah blah! Was a bloody nightmare...........lasted less then 3 years. Best thing I ever did was leave him.

I'm getting married next May to DP, (possibly sooner if we just go and do it) I'm marrying him because I love him, want to spend the rest of my life with him and want to be his wife. It feels like the most natural thing in the world.

Mumsyblouse · 12/09/2012 09:28

thisoldgirl- why is it discrimination when you can get married if you want those rights? They are conferred by marriage or by civil commitment (which I think should be available to everyone anyway, it's ridiculous to have a different legal ceremony based on sexual orientation).

There isn't a legally recognised relationship versus a marriage for men and women, there's no such thing as common-law partners.

If you want to have legal rights, you need to sign stuff in front of witnesses, which is in public (so others can protest/first wife turn up/public declaration).

I fail to see why this is dicrimination when you can easily have what you want, by having a civil marriage with takes 5 minutes with two complete strangers as witnesses.

marshmallowpies · 12/09/2012 09:30

Because we wanted to be married to each other.

I had been in a LT relationship before DH with someone who was anti-marriage, said he didn't believe in it. I loved him, and as far as I was concerned we were in a lifetime relationship, so being married or not was not important. I liked the idea of the dress & the party, but I didn't NEED to be married to him.

However, the not-wanting-to-be-married bit also led to not wanting to make a proper home with me or have a family - he wanted to carry on being 'boyfriend and girlfriend living together' in a rented flat indefinitely, never wanting a proper home where I could grow a garden or raise a family. The drifting from one day to the next and never ever planning ahead together for a shared future made me so sad.

So in the end, after I met DH, I did begin to realise the importance of marriage, the idea of what it really means to be a family with someone. My ex could never and would never have given me that.

CailinDana · 12/09/2012 09:30

No, it's not discrimination oldgirl. Under the law a lower earning married partner can apply for a financial order that forces the higher earning partner to pay maintenance in the event of a breakup. That's one of the legal protections of marriage. If you are not married, you don't have that protection because you have chosen not to have it, by not getting married. Of course you could draw up an agreement with a solicitor but without marriage you can't force a partner to pay maintenance. That's just the way it is, it's not discrimination, the law is clear and you can choose to have it or not have it, it's up to you.

Mumsyblouse · 12/09/2012 09:31

And- I don't agree with changing the law so that you get marital rights just by living together for 2/3 years or more, because if you wanted those rights, you could go and get them- it should be possible to live with someone as a trial experience, which is not marriage, without being financially committed to them for the future.

That's why I support civil ceremonies for all, if you want to register the legally binding nature of your relationship, without the cultural baggage of marriage, but I don't think legal rights to each other's money should be conferred by living together for a while.

Swipe left for the next trending thread