What’s the deal with not being married?

[Cloud1220]

Myself and DP of 10 years are not married. We have two DC. Mortgage/house in joint names 50/50.

Every thread I see on here (when things get rocky) where someone isn’t married has comments like ‘why didn’t you think about marrying him before you had children?’, ‘this is why you should have been married’ etc.

So, wise people in my phone, what do I need to know?!

A will can be changed at any time. Not so easy to disinherit your spouse.

Not to mention if he were to ever have an accident/be injured/die/unable to speak for himself, you will have zero say in what happens because you’re not his next of kin.

Is that true though? I am my partners next of kin on his medical records - he has had lengthy stays in hospital and I was the person who was contacted.

On divorce, marriage allows the marital assets (the family home and money earned during the marriage, amongst other things) to be fairly divided amongst the parties. So a SAHM who has taken a career break to raise children or a lower earner might get a larger share of the assets to "compensate" for lost earnings going forward. Also, the court's primary concern will be the welfare of the children. So they will award sufficient assets to the primary career to ensure the children have a suitable home.

When a relationship breaks down and the parties are not married, there are none of these protections - each party can simply walk away with the assets which they legally own. The only payment the non-resident parent has to make to the resident parent is child maintenance, which is hardly generous. In the case of 50/50 care, neither parent has to pay the other party anything.

Out of interest OP - you've weaved your lives together quite sensibly with the joint mortgage, wills, life insurance policies etc. Why not just get married? At the end of the day it's just a contract and adds a bit of extra protection which is never a bad thing.

@Cam2020 I have a friend who's never been fussed about being married. Her partner doesn't care for it either. They've been happily together for years and recently had their first child.

It was only while sorting out wills and guardianship that they realised just what rights and protections they both got by being married.

They are getting civil partnered soon.

Like it or not, that legal contract does give legal rights to each party. If people don't want those rights and are fully aware of the implications of not having them ... crack on.

What is shocking is how many people DON'T KNOW what those implications are. They think common law spouse is a thing or that being together x number of years gives them rights.

Back in the 1980s I worked with a gay couple. They were in their 50s and had been together for over 20 years. They owned a house together and were known as a couple.

One of them died unexpectedly. His parents and siblings swooped in and took everything. His partner was excluded from the funeral and he had to sell his home to pay off the parents with their share

I was only a teen but I was horrified by what happened, and how people could be so evil. The survivor had thought he had a good relationship with his out-laws prior to the death.

They had no children, and obviously this was long before Civil Partnership and gay marriage. It completely changed my ideas on marriage. It makes me so angry when people say it's just a piece of paper. That couple would have given anything to have been legally Wed.

Why not just get married?

The OP's partner doesn't want to!

@Alexandernevermind

If you aren't married you won't be his next of kin, so any important decisions will be made by your PIL or DP's siblings until your children are old enough. It means you won't inherit his share of your home or any of his money and won't be provided for in his pension. The same goes both ways of course.

There is no such legal status as 'Next of Kin in the UK. And anyway, people need to have a PoA in place, which gives the power to whoever you name - e.g your DP.

You will inherit the home if you have bought as Joint Tenants, and if you are Tenants In Common you can leave the house in your will.

You can name your DP as a beneficiary of SIPP pensions and workplace pensions (I don't know how others work) .

[quote CayrolBaaaskin]@Lavenderfieldsofprovence - Even the mental health act definition you puts the nearest relative as an unmarried partner you’ve lived with for 6 months or more if you have such a person. Please stop scare mongering. Being married does not in itself allow you to make medical decisions for another person.[/quote]
I never mentioned mental health.

There's far more sneering in terms of the much voiced MN opinion that every woman who has kids with man without marrying him is somehow an idiot

All you have to do is peruse the relationships forum and see the outcomes of seeing what ‘just a piece of paper’ can lead to. If it doesn’t happen to you, well, just count yourself lucky

It seems that some women feel the need to justify being married by spouting all the spurious legal reasons (for which there is a legal procedure for each that does not involve being married), possibly because they feel like they've let the side down (or betrayed their own feminist principles) by being a 'kept woman'. No-one cares! Do what's best for you and your family and make sure you have legal matters tied up if case of whatever might happen, whether you're married or not!

The problem is that too many don’t and are unaware that they have no rights if things go wrong. Marriage is a one-stop shop to be protected, you can replicate it with all sorts of contracts but few end up doing this.

If your non-married partner dies, his accounts are frozen until the estate is settled. If you are relying on him for income/bills, you will have no access to the money to cover those.

You'll pay inheritance tax on any money/property your partner leaves you in a will, whereas you don't if you're married.

And I think you probably aren't entitled to his pension if you aren't married.

Inheritance tax. Inheritance. Tax implications. Also I love my new surname.

Marriage is a one-stop shop to be protected, you can replicate it with all sorts of contracts

Not really. Those contracts can be unilaterally terminated if the relationship ends, which is when you'd need them the most.

“It's unfair of your DP to judge you on what his friends ex wife did (and you should tell him this). It's just an excuse.”

This. It’s bullshit. And it sounds like a very one-sided story, anyway. It’s very convenient, isn’t it, to say he won’t marry you because someone he admired had a bad time on divorce. But he’ll accept all the benefits that come with marriage - a joint home, children, a partner who takes a hit on career and earning power. He’s happy to take the upside without any of the commitment. It won’t do, OP.

Or you could choose not to take a financial and career hit. It’s not compulsory for women not to work for years because they have a child.

It's not as straightforward as that. Most mothers I know do work in some shape or form, but their careers took a hit after having a kid in a way that their partners' mostly did not. It's not just about whether you give up work, it's all the little things, like pickups and dropoffs and managing school holidays and not taking on big projects or seeking promotion because so much of the domestic stuff devolves on you. Even if you are determined not to take any kind of career hit, you are much more likely to be passed over for raises or promotions once you have a child. It very often affects the way your boss sees you.

The most difficult situations happen when a child is born and has a medical problem or disability. The child is going to need lots of care. Daycare often isn't appropriate or workable. Someone is going to have to give up their career, even if they did not plan to. It usually ends up being the mother. Putting one's foot down and insisting that the guy does 50% sometimes doesn't work, especially if it rapidly becomes obvious that this very needy and hard-to-care-for child will get less good and less patient care when they are left with Dad.

Don't even get me started on the burden of caring for elderly parents, which also ends up falling disproportionately on women. Again, you can try to demand and insist that your partner or brother does his full share. Very often, they simply don't step up (enough) and so the daughter or daughter in law ends up doing more, because she cares and can't bear to watch a parent or parent-in-law being neglected.

I know of two cases where one of the non married couples ( no children involved in either case ) died in their 30s/very early 40's. In both cases they lived with their partner.
The "parents in law" got involved re the deceased's estate and expensive solicitors brought in.
I was aghast !

I think a lot of married woman stupidly think they are protected and will be financially better or should they split from partner if they are married... sadly, just ask divorced SAHM, that's not the case.

If you aren't married you won't be his next of kin, so any important decisions will be made by your PIL or DP's siblings until your children are old enough

Absolute rubbish.

During Dps cancer treatment I was the next of kin. If anything happened to him I am his next of kin.

Having seen a few friends go through divorce the only difference between being married or living together I have seen is the size of the solicitors Bill.

If you have your name on the house, on the pension and in the will then I can’t see much difference between being married or living together

Not seen anyone get a portion of a pension yet.
Friend who is the latest to divorce is looking at a £60,000 divorce bill and has taken 5 years of her life. It would have been cheaper for one court case to force the sale of everything and split everything 50/50 rather than the multitude of court hearings that are used by him to financially abuse my friend. And the court don’t care. Even when he has gone completely against orders the penalty isn’t given out.

If he wanted out, you'd be completely stuffed and he'd be laughing.

This poster has it in a nutshell, I’m afraid....

ScarletZebra
A will would have sorted everything

Marriage is great for the non-breadwinner in terms of protection. Not so great for the breadwinner if you get a divorce. My advice if you are the higher earner stay unwed if you are financially reliant get a ring on it

@Oliversmumsarmy you won't get half the pension of unmarried. You wouldn't be named on a pension - it's individually specific

Also @Oliversmumsarmy next of kin is a legal status. When my friend got committed for attempting suicide he particularly requested for his mother to be next of kin. He was told (as were we) that legally his wife had to be next of kin and had the power to make the decisions regardless of his wishes. I think you are living in a place of comfort when actually should the worse happen you won't be quite as well off as you hope.