Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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

New laws/rights for cohabiting couples

127 replies

jasper · 06/04/2004 22:54

Heard a bit about this in the news yesterday but was not listening properly. Anyone got any info or a link? Thanks

OP posts:
misty · 06/04/2004 23:24

Jasper

I did hear something about new rights for gay couples, and remember thinking how unfair they were bringing in new laws for them, and not heterosexual couples cohabiting (I'm not married). There is something about it here

Tinker · 07/04/2004 10:09

misty - why do you think it is unfair? Heterosexual couples have the option to marry surely.

harman · 07/04/2004 10:12

Message withdrawn

Tinker · 07/04/2004 10:15

Hmm, that's true harman. But guess the new rights for gay couples would only apply if both wanted the same as well.

sis · 07/04/2004 10:49

I thought the new rights for same sex couples were for those who had, in the absence of the right to get married, registered their relationship. Don't think that is unfair to hetrosexual couples.

katierocket · 07/04/2004 10:53

fundemental difference between rights for hetro couples and the new rights for same sex is this:

"It means same-sex couples will be entitled to a range of property rights, the same exemption as married couples on inheritance tax, social security and pension benefits, and also the ability to get parental responsibility for a partner's children."

have no argument whatsoever that gay couples should get all of this BUT I am in a hetrosexual couple - we don't want to get married so why shouldn't I have the same inheritance tax rights as gay couples?

Tinker · 07/04/2004 12:56

But I guess the argument is that you could get married. Honestly, don't feel over-strongly about this - not married, never have been, don't know if I ever will.

stace · 07/04/2004 13:29

feel exactly the same as you katie rocket perhaps we can campaign for a register of cohabiting couples who just dont want toor cant get married then maybe we can have the same rights too!!!

Or does anyone think we should make a mockery of marraige and do it just for the beneficial rights it brings!!!

OOh better get off my soap box befor i have a go at someone as am having a bad day today!!!!

misty · 07/04/2004 13:34

katierocket - my thoughts exactly. I've absolutely no objection to gay couples receiving the same rights as married couples, but why then are unmarried hetero couples not included in this? I know we have the choice of getting married if we want to, but there are loads of reasons why people don't, and why should we be singled out? Any couple, living together in this way, should be protected by the Law.

Heterosexual couples will be the only people without rights. Whilst not married, we are expected to support each other through times of unemployment, but come death we don't have any property rights, face large inheritance tax bills and get it thrown back into our faces because 'you are not married'.

If anything happens to me, my partner does not gain automatic right to our children - yet if you are a gay couple this is now recognised. How can that be fair?

kiwisbird · 07/04/2004 13:36

I'm co habiting with view to getting hitched soon if not eventually... the whole debacle bores me shitless... if I could get married online I would.
WE drew up legal agreement to entitle me to marital rights with house and money and support etc.
This was drafted by a lawyer and protects me, no way was I having another child without some form of safeguard!
If your dp refuses such an agreement and will not get married then wonder what they are avoiding...
As a non married with kids and no name on a mortgage and no income, then you are truly able to be left a kipper, high and dry

misty · 07/04/2004 13:38

Just had a thought - what about hetero couples living together, where one is married to someone else and is unable to get a divorce for whatever reason (the wife/husband of your partner won't agree to a divorce or can't be traced)- you have to wait 5 years to be able to divorce someone without consent. Are these people going to be included as well? They can't get married until the divorce comes through.

misty · 07/04/2004 13:40

kiwisbird - getting married online now there's a market!!!

suedonim · 07/04/2004 13:43

It could be argued that the proposed new rules for same-sex couples discriminate against, say, two friends sharing a home, or siblings living together. Why shouldn't they have the same rights??

Tinker · 07/04/2004 13:43

But misty, these rights are not automatically conferred on gay couples. As I understand it, they do have to register, in pretty much the same way as heterosexual couples get married. To me, it looks like gay marriage by the back door - which is a good thing.

I'm surprising myself getting drawn into a debate about marriage, something I always vowed I'd never do (get married)

Tinker · 07/04/2004 13:45

suedonim - they are Peter Tatchell's objections to the new legislation. I can see that point when there is no legal ceremony/whatever available

misty · 07/04/2004 14:01

tinker - fair point. How do the costs compare for getting married (cheapy at the registry office) and the gay couple registration I wonder? Bet it costs more for the marriage

aloha · 07/04/2004 14:35

Getting married is v v cheap and v v easy - it only takes about 20mins too! Otherwise draw up a cohabitation agreement with a solictor and make sure you have the house, savings etc in joint names. Nobody gets an automatic right to someone else's property - gay couples have to jump through administrative hoops too. Otherwise why not get married - you don't even have to tell anyone.

aloha · 07/04/2004 14:44

You can get married at Chelsea Register Office (quite glam actually) for £67.

Snugs · 07/04/2004 14:54

The gay couple registration will in effect be a civil marriage ceremony - it requires a registrar and 2 witnesses (so why can't they just call it marriage and have done with it?) Only then would they have the rights re inheritance tax etc.

aloha · 07/04/2004 14:56

The only reason it's not called marriage is to get the legislation on the books without arousing a huge fight with the family lobbies, the religious lobbies and the right wing lobbies which would inevitably delay it. It is basically a marriage in all but name.

Snugs · 07/04/2004 15:07

True aloha - which is why I can't understand all the unfair comments in the press (and on this thread) re heterosexual couples cohabiting, siblings, friends etc.

Personally I think it's about time they gave gays a legal option. A good friend of mine was banned from the bedside (after a car smash) of his long-term (20+yrs) partner because he didn't have next of kin status and his partner's cousin was anti-gay. He never got the chance to say goodbye to his soulmate because of a lack of legal status (and a git of a relative)

150percent · 07/04/2004 15:16

Looking at what the BBC says it does seem very similar to marriage, especially in that you have to go to court to get the pertnership dissolved, and there are obligations to pay maintenance too.

Also read that it was unlikely to appeal to all couples - the take-up rate in Scandinavia was much lower than anticipated.

aloha · 07/04/2004 15:24

It's a big step I suppose, and if you don't have children, which gay couples are less likely to have, it's not as important. I do think it's a good thing though, esp for cases such as Snugs' friend.

lou33 · 07/04/2004 16:52

I got married there Aloha, it was lovely.

aloha · 07/04/2004 17:12

Me too! But I was greedy and had two ceremonies - one at Chelsea and one (Humanist ceremony) in Somerset. Aaah!

Swipe left for the next trending thread