unmarried stay @home mum separation advice please

[fridaysforfuturemum]

My partner asked for a separation in January.
We are joint owners of our home and have been living in a toxic atmosphere since then. We have two teenagers at High school. We're not married and I know I have no legal rights on anything but half the house. It was a joint agreement that I leave my job to be a stay@home mum. My partner now says it was my decision and legally he does not have to give me equal share of the savings etc..
I have no money as we just had a joint account. I really want to stay in my home with my kids. (they will stay with me one week, then him the next...)
The solicitors I spoke to were not interested in helping me because they said I was a cohabitee and had no rights. Appeal to his better nature was their top tip!
Can anyone suggest what kind of professional would be able to help me put a financial settlement proposal together that is fair and equal,takes into account what I have contributed to our family over the last 16 years and splits everything 50/50?
I'm saying to him it's about doing the right thing and what's morally right rather than what I'm legally entitled to. I asked him to treat me as if we have been married. We have been together 26 years :(
I've been a trusting fool like so many other women before me...

@category12

I think people should be free to decide they do not want to be married or in a CP I do not think people should be forced into marriage because of where they have chosen to live for a while.

I agree, but I think there could be ways of doing this while allowing a form of common-law marriage to exist? Eg. say it became common-law marriage with attached claims on each other after cohabiting for 5 years. But if you decide to jointly sign some kind of official waiver, that would override this. Potentially you could extend it to people who would like to marry, but don't because of the legal/financial implications.

I massively dislike this.

Marriage is a legal document - it shouldn't be something you just fall into unless you choose otherwise!

We don’t need a form of common law marriage.

If someone wants the protection of marriage then it’s cheap and easy to just get married.

[quote Kornflake]@fridaysforfuturemum just want to say that I understand why you made all those choices re your family and deciding to stay at home. The stress of you both working and sharing chores can be enormous with young children in particular, also you do have a right to rear your own children and be with them as opposed to using childcare. This is reason enough.
Not being married has made you vulnerable (the same has happened to me). I really don't think it's unreasonable at all to try to appeal to you partner's better nature and request that he treats you as a married partner after all those years.
Don't let up, keep on at him.
I know what the law states, but he will know that to not treat you as an equal married partner would be screwing you over.
I have requested the same from my partner and want him to give me a proportion of his pension as mine has suffered greatly through working part-time. I'm willing to accept a greater equity of the house we live in as a pension "payment."
Don't let it go just because he doesn't have to "legally" treat you as an equal.
Also, surely eventually the law on this will change with the times at some point. Nothing is stopping you from taking some control back here and writing to your MP or starting a petition for a change in the law for unmarried mothers.
Make sure everyone knows what you're requesting of him and make sure everyone knows if he doesn't give it to you.[/quote]
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous for a number of reasons.

1. What you're proposing amounts to stalking and harassment, and it will make her seem mercenary. Spreading the fact that you're demanding money from your ex that you have no right to is not likely to win you many allies.
2. OP's ex would be an absolute mug to give her more than half the house, imo. He's supported her and his children all by himself for the past decade plus, because she chose not to go back to work once the kids were at school because doing a job and running a house was too much to handle, despite that being something hundreds of thousands of people do every day. Why should he pay for her to continue doing nothing? He wants the kids 50/50, which is very reasonable for teens, and she'll get half the house. That's fair enough. She'll just have to get a job, or claim benefits, like hundreds of thousands of people.
3. The law doesn't need to change. It's a good system that gives you options. If you wish to protect your own assets, savings and pensions in the event of a relationship breakdown, you choose to not get married. If you wish to have additional security and protection in the event of a relationship breakdown, you choose to get married. If you and your partner do not have the same priorities on that issue, if you're not on the same page about it, then you shouldn't be together. Changing the law because some people aren't acting in their own best interests is stupid.

You need to talk and negotiate together, I take it your cv is polished and you have been applying for jobs since January? I'm one of many forced back into the workplace, it's not easy! I am married (separated) and get interim spousal maintenance but was advised I needed to get a full time job prior to the settlement, the courts would then be favourable to ensuring my income was "more in keeping with what I'm used to" aka a high income, but if I didn't bother the court would say i wasn't trying! Obviously there's a pandemic etc but there is work to apply for. You need to try to work

Don't let up, keep on at him.
I know what the law states, but he will know that to not treat you as an equal married partner would be screwing you over.
I have requested the same from my partner and want him to give me a proportion of his pension as mine has suffered greatly through working part-time. I'm willing to accept a greater equity of the house we live in as a pension "payment."
Don't let it go just because he doesn't have to "legally" treat you as an equal.

Imagine if the roles were reversed, would you give the same advice to a man who had stayed at home? To continue to harrass and demand things they weren't entitled to? Or would you see that as threatening behaviour, because lets face it what you describe is exactly that, threatening.

Bold fail! When will MNHQ allow an edit button. 😣😣

I massively dislike this.
Marriage is a legal document - it shouldn't be something you just fall into unless you choose otherwise!

But presently (mostly) women fall into the opposite trap a lot - where they do everything but marry the guy, make choices and sacrifices on the basis of the relationship continuing and then get royally screwed.

And the social mores are still that the man proposes etc - we constantly get threads on here where the woman feels like she cannot drive it. So essentially society is geared up so that men have a power dynamic here.

While however far we've come, women still tend to pick up the lion's share of childcare and housework, and take the hit to their work prospects & pensions. We're overrepresented in the poverty statistics.

It's all very well saying we've got to educate women about their lack of rights in cohabitation, but that's clearly not happening.

It's all very well saying we've got to educate women about their lack of rights in cohabitation, but that's clearly not happening.

I expect a lot of them know their rights, they just don't think it will ever happen to them.

The op knows her rights. She knows she has none.

And she made an active choice not to go to work.

@Farahilda

Actually untrue, I get spousal maintenance, as does my now dp's ex, it comes down to income difference and age - the reason less is awarded is that more women work full time, for long marriages if you don't and you earn a lot lower even once working full time it's still awarded if there's not sufficient assets to compensate

This is a horrible situation OP agree you need to get a job, any job pronto. You can try appealing to his better nature but something tells me that won’t get you very far. If he wanted to give you the protection of marriage he’d have married you years ago. Time for you to look after yourself now.

But presently (mostly) women fall into the opposite trap a lot - where they do everything but marry the guy, make choices and sacrifices on the basis of the relationship continuing and then get royally screwed.

But that doesn't mean people should just end up with the rights of marriage after a certain amount of time unless they choose otherwise.

Legal contracts like marriage should be something both parties go into with their eyes wide open - they shouldn't be something that just happen after five years because you've not chosen otherwise.

Education is what's needed - but a quick google is all it takes to tell you what your marriage rights would be. People just don't see it because they end up blinded by words.

@Frdd

The op knows her rights. She knows she has none.

And she made an active choice not to go to work.

A choice that she believed her partner was supportive of.

Most of us don't live like our nearest and dearest are going to pull the rug out from under us at any time.

@category12

I massively dislike this. Marriage is a legal document - it shouldn't be something you just fall into unless you choose otherwise!

But presently (mostly) women fall into the opposite trap a lot - where they do everything but marry the guy, make choices and sacrifices on the basis of the relationship continuing and then get royally screwed.

And the social mores are still that the man proposes etc - we constantly get threads on here where the woman feels like she cannot drive it. So essentially society is geared up so that men have a power dynamic here.

While however far we've come, women still tend to pick up the lion's share of childcare and housework, and take the hit to their work prospects & pensions. We're overrepresented in the poverty statistics.

It's all very well saying we've got to educate women about their lack of rights in cohabitation, but that's clearly not happening.

But presently (mostly) women fall into the opposite trap a lot - where they do everything but marry the guy, make choices and sacrifices on the basis of the relationship continuing and then get royally screwed.

I don't think it's reasonable to change a good system (ie you deliberately choose the protection marriage offers, or you don't receive it) because some people don't act in their own best interests.

Women have agency, and access to google. We can't go about demanding equal treatment while also wailing that we're not being sufficiently protected from our own ignorance. It is absolutely common knowledge that if you're not married you have no rights. It's the entire backbone of the marriage equality argument. It's been everywhere for the past 30 years. Not thinking properly about your situation and just blindly trusting what a man tells you is a personal decision, and thankfully we have the right to make those choices ourselves.

He says he didn’t agree to it.

If the op wanted protection then she had the option to get married. If her partner I’d t want to marry her then alarm bells should have been ringing.

I do not understand women who think that being a SAHM is the equivalent to a FT job and who talk about doing all the housework and life admin as if it’s not something full time working parents have to do as well.

There's always the dog to walk, housework to do, shopping, cleaning, putting away, making appointments, organising family stuff, teaching kids how to cook, mend stuff, clear up after themselves, get a tradesperson to fix shower, check roof, sort out stuff for charity shop etc..

Don’t you think a working parent has to do those things?

Legal contracts like marriage should be something both parties go into with their eyes wide open - they shouldn't be something that just happen after five years because you've not chosen otherwise.

But why not?

There are precedents, like I think if you allow people to use your land to get from A-B after a certain amount of time, if you don't protect your interests, they can acquire a right of way, can't they? So why shouldn't a moral obligation to your long-term partner become a legal one?

It’s safer to work and both of you pay someone to do the cleaning and ironing

Op I hope you can look forward and sort a job and get another property to call home

My advice is keep hold of the child benefit for all your children if they are living with you

He says in retrospect that he didn't agree to it, she says he did. I dunno why you'd give his word more weight than hers.

I’m not giving either more weight. I am giving both equal.

These kids are teenagers and at high school. It’s not as if they’re babies and need a lot of active looking after during the day.

By all means try appealing to his better nature .Sadly many men when their R/L breaks down will be trying to get as many assets as possible for themselves! A friend is married to a Millionaire ,their RL has hit the buffers and he says he needs money for outings /gifts and so on when the two girls come to him EOW. WTAF! I would see if you can take your savings ,and put them somewhere safe .Maybe try CAB or likewise for some advice /support .I am sorry this has happened to you.

@category12

Legal contracts like marriage should be something both parties go into with their eyes wide open - they shouldn't be something that just happen after five years because you've not chosen otherwise.

But why not?

There are precedents, like I think if you allow people to use your land to get from A-B after a certain amount of time, if you don't protect your interests, they can acquire a right of way, can't they? So why shouldn't a moral obligation to your long-term partner become a legal one?

Because there are lots of reasons why both parties deliberately choose to not get married. Imposing marriage on those people just because their relationship has lasted an arbitrary amount of time would be wrong.

Marriage is cheap and easy to do. If you want the rights, take them. If you don't, don't, but don't then whinge about the fact that you're not protected from your own decision to, er, not be protected.

If i choose not to install a burglar alarm and i get burgled, it would be ridiculous for me to then claim that it's the government's fault for not making burglar alarms mandatory in private homes.

Because there are lots of reasons why both parties deliberately choose to not get married. Imposing marriage on those people just because their relationship has lasted an arbitrary amount of time would be wrong.

Marriage is cheap and easy to do. If you want the rights, take them. If you don't, don't, but don't then whinge about the fact that you're not protected from your own decision to, er, not be protected

But I'm not advocating that people who choose not to marry or have a civil partnership shouldn't be able to opt out - you could have an equally cheap and easy legal waiver system in place - say £25 and a joint signature, job done.

And could extend the waiver to people like my boss who would like to marry her long-term partner for the commitment and status, but wants everything she owns to go to her daughter in inheritance etc.

@Frdd

There's always the dog to walk, housework to do, shopping, cleaning, putting away, making appointments, organising family stuff, teaching kids how to cook, mend stuff, clear up after themselves, get a tradesperson to fix shower, check roof, sort out stuff for charity shop etc..

Don’t you think a working parent has to do those things?

Most of us have to do this as well as working.

You can’t impose rights over another human being without consent.