Is there something to be said for couples who don't get married but stay together?

[Mamabooksbabynumber2]

My dp and I aren't married. I have often heard all the pros for getting married and am thinking on reflection if their are any benefits to not getting married.

Such as.. I was thinking if you stay together for say 40 years but you never got married is it perhaps because you want to be together rather than being together because it is easier perhaps than getting a divorce.

Can anyone think of any?

There's something to be said for it if the couple concerned are familiar with all the legal and financial ramifications of their choice, prefer it that way, and have taken legal advice to protect themselves as best as they can in the absence of the provisions you can only get by being married. Then it's absolutely fine and dandy.

Obviously people can get married or not get married for whatever reason they choose, but fear of bitter divorce sounds like a pretty stupid one. If a couple have children and property together, as unmarried cohabitants typically do if they stay together long enough, they can make each others plenty miserable if they want. That's more than enough to get bitter over!

I think it is quite expensive to put in place all the legal equivalences of marriage

Not just expensive but impossible!

But anyway OP, this is a very difficult question to answer. You ought to see a solicitor, and they'll be able to tell you what would be better in legal and financial terms, the advantages and disadvantages of both.

It's much harder to call in relationship terms, because people have such varying views of marriage. There's the full spectrum from people who don't want to get married because they're not actually very committed to the person they're with, right across to people who are in incredibly committed relationships and just don't believe in the institution. Unmarried couples are more likely to split up than married ones, but that isn't necessarily the best way to look at it either. Because averages are meaningless if you're different to the average, and some committed unmarried couples end up getting married anyway.

He needs to be very comfortable with the fact that until you put his name on the birth certificate then he has no rights whatsoever towards the baby.

If you want to call a baby boy “Tinker-bell Stardust YourSurname” then he will have a son called Tinks.

If you decide not to put him on the birth certificate then he will have to go to court and have a DNA test before he is the baby’s dad.

I would also strongly recommend you use your surname for the baby assuming that you are likely to be the main carer.

Yes, don't be swayed by any talk of tradition or similar. Actually the tradition is for the child to have the mother's name when unmarried.

Our children have both our surnames. I was a SAHM for many years. I can't honestly see that being married confers that many extra benefits. Actually the main protection against being left high and dry by a man is taking a lot of care (and time) to choose a decent one. Rather than angsting over whether he wants to buy you a ring.

We were together 10 years before children. I owned my house so never fretted. With kids I always wanted the legal protection of marriage. It’s a contract at the end of the day with pros and cons. I would get proper advice. Not sure if there is such thing as a widows allowance any more should one party die. Inheritance tax is certainly something to think of if you are not married.

I’ve just had my silver wedding, been with DH 32 years. I don’t think marriage is necessary, I’m glad my family all share the same name and that’s about it. A divorce wouldn’t keep me in the relationship if I didn’t want to be in it.

What are the pros of getting married anyway? Apart from cake and presents

My DP and I have been together for 26 years. We are not married and have no plans to marry. We remain together because we both want to, not because the law or society says we should. We understand that most people choose to get married, but we are not 'most people'.

Seeing as our relationship has already comfortably outlasted most of our friends' and families' marriages, we think 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' applies.

lizababes

Legally - simplicity. We can inherit from each other without a will. No one is going to argue that I am not dh’s next of kin in a medical situation. No inheritance tax. Simpler with each other’s pensions / life insurance - no need to prove financial interdependency. Dh is legally the children’s father from the moment they were born - not from the moment I put him on the birth certificate - and if the worst had happened and he hadn’t survived to when they were born I wouldn’t have had to prove he was their father to get him on the birth certificate.

Socially -again simplicity. Different people define a “partner” in different ways with some defining a very new boyfriend / girlfriend as a partner. Husband is easy. There is no doubt to either one of us (or to anyone else) that this relationship is permanent, committed and monogamous. We all have the same surname. My parents know where they stand with him. It is clear that dh is the kids’ dad and I am mum when dealing with doctors, teachers, sports coaches etc.

And I got to wear a gorgeous dress.

What’s not to like?

Just to add - I believe that when things are going well then it doesn’t’t really matter if the person you are with is your legal spouse, your partner or “the fit bloke I met last Wednesday”.

It is when the terrible happens that suddenly having hundreds of years of laws behind you that stops the terrible becoming even worse.

We got married when the tax and legal benefits outweighed the hassle of having to organise a wedding (even
a small, simple one takes a degree of organisation). Prior to that, we had done everything we could to tie everything up legally but nothing is as tight as marriage.
The unexpected benefit has been that no one bothers to trot out the "unmarried couples are more likely to split up" line at me any more, a line I've never quite understood as "unmarried" in this context covers pretty much everything from one night stands to a couple who have been together a decade or more/

Your question is a bit weird actually.

A person chooses to get married for the benefits that such a partnership has. The corollary of staying single to not get those benefits is one that doesn't really have an answer.

This is nothing to do with whether it is better to get married or to stay as an unmarried couple. But if you wish to ask that question you need to frame your point to a specific principle.

Marriage is essential if you or your partner have to move abroad. Most countries don’t offer a visa to a non-married partner.

We know a couple who we thought were the epitome of the long term together but not married types (25 years or so) and were surprised to find out that they are legally married because the female partner took a job in the US and the only way for him to come along was to get a spouse visa! But they always made out that they weren’t married and even made jokes about how boring DH and I were getting married

I think that @Beentherelefthimgotthetshirt was right, ). "It's the actual break up, the grief and splitting of finances and assets that's difficult and you have to cope with that married or not"

Emotionally, I don't that committed long term partnership are different from marriage. May be I think that because DH and I lived together for many years, owned a home together, and had our first child before we married. Eventually, the fact that I'm American and he's British came into play we and we legally wed. Legally things changed, but in emotional terms they didn't.

None the less, when people have been together for years and years, have children, have joint debt, and their lives are very interwoven, they will still go through ups and downs in their relationship and will still have to work on their relationship (or put up with it) because breaking up is a really, really big deal even when you aren't married. Even when a couple isn't married, ending a relationship can still involved solicitors to sort out finances and child arrangements.

Marriage doesn't really offer security. Plenty of marriages fall apart, plenty of married people cheat. Any relationship is only as good at the two people in it chose for it to be.

However, do check into the laws where you are before having a child making sure that you are well protected. Then make a decision about what is really best for you. May be some relationship counseling with your sweet heart to help you two come up with something where you both feel safe.

the hassle of having to organise a wedding (even a small, simple one takes a degree of organisation) - booking a registry office, making sure you both have time off together and getting a couple of witnesses - off the street if necessary - is probably a lot simpler than doing your end of year tax return, booking a holiday or renewing your house insurance .

I work with a lady in her fifties - been with her partner years, two grown up DC’s. She was a SAHM when the kids were small and now works for just about minimum wage. He owns a business and has a pretty high earning power. She confessed to me recently that she has no savings in her name as she doesn’t earn enough to put money aside after paying her share of bills and expenses.

She wants to marry to protect herself in case her partner dies or leaves her. Luckily the house is in both names and their mortgage is paid off but she feels incredibly vulnerable. Her health isn’t great but she needs to work to maintain her pension and to make sure she can survive financially should something happen to him.

He’s not interested in marriage after so long. He won’t marry her and she’s stuck. She can’t afford to break up with him and start again at her age and with her health problems. It’s quite sad really and I think she wishes she’d pushed the marriage issue before they started a family.

I personally would view it as a bit sad if after 20 years, kids, and houses together, a couple couldn’t commit via ‘a piece of paper’ that affords them full legal and tax privileges / security. In my experience it’s rarely a choice on the part of the woman - the man doesn’t want it, so often makes her believe she shouldn’t want it.

I cannot see any benefit in getting married for a second time, if kids aren’t involved. Waste of time

Got to be aware of the financial side of not being married and ensure you have some form of protection in a long term relationship. I had a client who had everything in his name (£1m plus) and he and his partner had not married despite being together 20 years. She would have got nothing had he died.

Thank you everyone for your replies. So many of them that it's given me plenty to think about financially.
Can't remember who asked but I am sure I want to be with him, hence why we are ttc. I just was pondering the differences.

I work full time and we have our own bank accounts. We split our finances in half after bills so we have equal share of money.

I will sit down with him and say I would like to update my will and would like him to do one too and for us both to take out life insurance.

Are there any other things we should be doing to cover ourselves?

We remain together because we both want to, not because the law or society says we should.

I'm always interested when people list this as a reason not to marry. Obviously do whatever you want, but do you think the law says a married couple should remain together bonnie? If so, how do you reconcile this with the existence of divorce?

OP, if you're looking at it from a purely legal perspective, what you 'should' do is going to vary depending on your circumstances and what you want. I would always tell anyone to get a will and also life insurance. It's particularly important if you have a partner you're not married to and want to benefit from your estate. This is because the intestacy provisions, ie the rules used to distribute the assets of someone who doesn't have a will, don't cover unmarried partners except in very limited circumstances.

But there are other things that depend more on your particular views. For example, you and your partner can of course make wills naming each other, but you can also change it without the other knowing, and they're unlikely to be able to challenge it. Whereas they could if you were married. You might see that as a good thing or a bad thing, that's personal, but the thing to remember is there's nothing you can do about it either way.

I would also thrash out financial issues before you TTC. For example, will either or both of you be reducing your hours for childcare? That's not something an unmarried partner of either sex should do without careful thought and/or their own assets. Because if you split up, there's no possibility of spousal maintenance and getting the non-earning contribution recognised in division of assets is infinitely more difficult. You will also need to think about who funds any maternity leave.

Also do you rent or own? If you own, how is it split? This is particularly important with unmarried couples.

Thank you onions for mat leave my work pay full salary for 6 months. And we were intending on splitting some of it so he takes some pat leave.

We rent and I would go back to work 4 days a week.

My will is about 4 years old and needs updating. I think doing wills and life insurance is a good idea. I've always been very financially independent with separate bank accounts and full time work.

In regards to dp not wanting to get married I can't change that which is very disappointing. I want to get married for security as I think when u marry someone u r making a Promise to that person to spend the rest of your life with that person and I have a history of men leaving me in the lurch so it would just make me feel better.
Dp thinks marriage doesn't mean anythi g and he would feel suffocated to be trapped legally as he hates the idea of not being independent and being bound. I know he may get flamed for this but I understand him and his personality, and that he doesn't like to feel tied down. I did explain to him that it wouldn't be any diff to how we r now. I am not expecting him to not want to get married because he is wanting to leave whenever he feels like it.

He just associated marriage with being old, static and trapped.
I may not be painting a very good picture of dp but his actions for the last 7 years are quite opposite o his fear of commitment where he is very loving and caring. He looked after me amazingly when i had ptsd and is very active as a df.

My mum has been with her partner for 20 years, was married to my father for 19. Shotgun wedding when she was 16. She has no desire to marry her partner as they consider themselves already married.

She is very happy as they are.

Dp doesn't want to get married. He doesn't believe in marriage as he has seen his psrebts go throigha bitter divorce and I am learning to accept this.

Which is fine, but you both need to take precautions, such as lasting powers of attorney, wills, joint property ownership, joint savings accounts and investments (or separate savings/investments of amounts agreed between you), ensuring each of you is the named beneficiary on life insurance and pension policies. Marriage or civil partnerships give each party rights in case things go sour, without that, you need to take your own precautions to protect yourself - quite simply you can't rely on the law to protect you if you don't get married and havn't taken basic precautions to protect yourself in case of relationship failure, critical illness or death. This becomes even more important when you buy a home together or have children together.

What impact is going back to work 4 days a week likely to have on your career, OP? Will you be less likely to be promoted if you’re up against a full time worker for the same position?

If your career is affected financially, and you and your DP split up later, then you will suffer the full impact of this. Whereas if you get married it’s more likely to be shared between you (in the divorce settlement).