Marriage vs not

[Welshmermaid]

Hi all!

Is it important for a couple to get married? Or is it ‘just a bit of paper’?

My parents never married each other(they didn’t want to get married)? so I didn’t think marriage was needed, but since meeting my other half, I would love to get married and have that commitment to each other.

So can I please ask you - what were your reasons for getting married or not getting married.

Thank you

@lassofthenorth that doesn’t really make any sense. Are you financially worse off by marriage or not? Given that both of you are still alive and you have split up, it must be one or the other.

As for the next of kin thing - it’s not true, there is no such concept in English law.

I am definitely financially worse off by marriage - not prepared to bare all here but yes, sadly, absolutely, definitely.

In reality marriage in itself doesn’t compel one party or the other to input equally into the relationship or to share income and wealth. A spouse can have no access to the other’s income or wealth. A spouse can do little to compel the other to input into bread winning, home making or the upbringing of children. Divorce or death is what allows a spouse to legally gain a share of assets. Always supposing there are assets.

Well first of all, it isn't 'a bit of paper'. Unless you think all legal contracts are a bit of paper. Make sure to ignore anyone who tells you that, because they are being a fuckwit.

Marriage is a legal contract. That part's not a matter of opinion or circumstance. It can put people who've entered it into quite a different legal position than they'd be in without it, and it isn't possible to replicate all the provisions of marriage whilst not being married. That's not a matter of opinion either, but how important it is and the difference it makes does depend on your circumstances. Sometimes having been married makes an individual worse off. If for example you have a home you want to leave to a child from a previous relationship, think carefully about marriage.

I would say to anyone that either marriage or long term cohabitation should both be active choices. People who get into problems are often people who've sleepwalked into living together without giving any thought to their legal and financial position.

Then in terms of commitment in non-legal ways, that actually is a matter of opinion. Some people see it as very important, others don't. There's also a religious aspect. There isn't a right or wrong answer on these.

For DH and I, marriage was basically the gold standard for what we wanted. We were both happy with the legal and financial position it would put us in, so there was no point paying to have contracts drawn up that wouldn't do the same job. We also wanted the public ceremony and the knowledge that our union would be recognised just about anywhere in the world we might choose to go. So, marriage made sense.

Why do you want to get married OP?

I got married because I loved him.
We wanted a life together.
15 years in and it all ended.
I don't regret it.
I got everything and am able to help my daughter out now.
He's lost everything.

I'd never marry again though. Everything I have and have worked for is for my DD and no-one else.
And there really wouldn't be any point at my time of life.

But if you are young and want marriage then you should.
If you are planning on having DC then marriage gives you that protection.
Although you can also draw up legal paperwork for that as well.
Just remember it's now up to 50% of marriages that don't work out.
But for security - yes - get married!

It's a contract - it gives rights and responsibilities. It has lots of significance of course but ultimately it protects both parties however of course to break the contract requires a legal process too - divorce.

It's a personal preference thing - just don't confuse marriage with having a wedding, which happens so much now. Wanting to be a princess for a day isn't a reason to marry

If I found myself on my own again I wouldn’t instance on marriage but I certainly would insist on not being put in a position where I ended up massively financially disadvantaged or at risk of being homeless— if I moved in with someone I would actually insist on a lump sum so I could rent somewhere else etc if needs be— I kid you not , I would insist

It certainly isn't! Conversely, not wanting to be one isn't a reason to avoid marriage either. You can have a big party without the legal marriage contract if that suits you better, and you can be married after a bare bones basic procedure that you don't have to make a fuss about should you prefer.

I think @hellsbellsmelons comment sums up the dilemma, especially for second marriages

I got married because I loved him.
We wanted a life together.*
15 years in and it all ended.
I don't regret it.
I got everything and am able to help my daughter out now.
He's lost everything.

I'd never marry again though. Everything I have and have worked for is for my DD and no-one else.
And there really wouldn't be any point at my time of life.

But if you are young and want marriage then you should.
If you are planning on having DC then marriage gives you that protection.
Although you can also draw up legal paperwork for that as well.
Just remember it's now up to 50% of marriages that don't work out.
But for security - yes - get married!

Marriage is definatly a legal contract that gives protections to the weaker party. This still tends to be the woman but increasingly the man. I do find it amusing whereby MN community err towards the fleece the bastard when he has left her, but when a woman is left having to pay the ex h and losing a lot of her pension then the sympathy is greater.

I would be extremely unlikely to remarry if something happened to DH as we are reasonably well off and would be much greater so if life insurances came into payment. If I remarried and it failed, basically I would end up paying the majority to the new husband unless he was also a high earner with considerable assets which would compromise the security for my DC

I do think that marriage and what happens on divorce needs reforming so there is less of an emphasis that one party can be left broke. I have observed over the years that things are gradually changing but it is happening without conscious decisions, more by the judiciary developing judgments. For example spousal maintenance is becoming increasingly rare, whereas a colleague of my who divorced a fair few years ago had spousal awarded against him when he was on an income that spousal would never ever be awarded today. Although I support it, it seems wrong that it is left to judges to develop the system to more sanity and realism as politicians haven't got the bottle and pander to pressure groups

Most important for me if an accident is to happen touch wood I can go to hospital and demand to see/know my husband's condition. Also make decisions for him in case of inability for any reason and we have mortgage together. Noone is to gain from the other as we both contributed equally but as a wife you get automatically the other's share if something happens while if you are not married family (legally next to kin as you are not) can try to get a share. Been together 14 years married for one. Our love is the same, nothing changed. I am lucky.