Not marrying

[Scissorcollector]

Posting for a rant as I know nobody can actually help, so please be gentle.
Been with dp for 3 years and we have a baby on the way. Being late 30s I wanted us to get on with it as I have a history of early menopause in the family and would like 2 children.
Marriage has always been important to me and if it wasn’t for my age I would have insisted on marriage before baby.
We aren’t well off and I know we can’t afford a basic wedding when the time comes. We speak about it often as he wants to save for a pricey ring. I’ve told him the money is irrelevant but he wants to do it ‘properly’. We’ve looked into costs to budget and plan ahead and it seems a very basic registry office will be more than we can afford outright. I had the impression it would be under £100 but to my shock it seems to be much higher. Money will get tighter with a baby in the mix so I can’t justify spending hundreds at the moment.

I know the relationship is more important than a wedding but it’s got to me more than I expected it to. I often daydream about our wedding day - nothing fancy, no reception, flowers or big white dress. Knowing it may never happen or not for many years is a hard pill to swallow. I know we may have made it work before having a baby but as I said a family is much more important to me as I would have been resentful to marry then find we’d left it too late to conceive.
Has anyone been in this position and you have a happy long relationship without being husband and wife? How do you look past the disappointment when your friends are happily married and done things the ‘right way’ around?

Give your baby your name, you can change it (if you really must) when you get married. Of course you could just keep your name and have your baby have your name too. Your husband can change his, if he wants.

I suspect this thread of being goady simply because you ask whether you really feel like a 'real' family if you're not married. How incredibly rude. I can assure you that after nearly 20 years together, pets, a mortgage and now a small child, yes I do feel like I have a real family.

Just to add - you can replicate almost all the marriage benefits by going through a solicitor. The only thing you can't avoid is inheritance tax, but it sounds like you're probably a way off the threshold for that. It's pricey to get wills, insurance etc done but protects you. I would hope you already have wills in place if you live together.

Don't give up your job, it makes you incredibly vulnerable whether you're married or not.

You can't replicate spousal maintenance in the event of splitting up nor asset-sharing inc pensions (no matter how much career progression/earnings/pensions contributions you choose to pause if you take a career break)

I’m curious, for those saying about more rights, does that only really apply if the mother is the lower earner and therefore vulnerable? I saw a poster saying about getting their name on a house before having a baby, but surely that is really just if you are marrying into Money/ someone with existing assets per say rather than two people saving for a house together? Not being goady I genuinely am not fully aware of the protections it gives outside of if you vulnerable. Would it be the case if you are the better earner it protects the partner that isn’t even if they are not the mother?

@Yummymummy2020 , the mother is often the more vulnerable because of the way society treats motherhood. It's per se, btw.

I would say get married now for the legal protection - personally I'd never have a child with someone I wasn't married to. Then have the amazing wedding when you can afford it.

Get married with a Haribo ring, get the "pricy ring" later on.

In my local registry office, a statutory marriage costs £46, plus £70 / couple for the notice to marry. It varies by place and I'm sure that posh London boroughs charge a lot more than that.

Do you think he really can't be arsed to marry you?

Spousal maintenance is very rare nowadays unless you're married to someone super rich. My partner is a named beneficiary on my pension and I am on his.

It’s not unfair. That’s really daft. It costs what it costs, you could have looked into that at any point. And babies don’t need much stuff. It’s fine if you’ve prioritised that over a cheap wedding ceremony but it’s a choice as are many things.

If you’re that short of cash he’s being ridiculous even thinking about expensive jewellery you don’t need or want. You can both choose a cheap wedding over other things, that’s what you’ll do if it’s what you both want.

Making out that marriage is something you’re being deprived of as a couple is very odd. We all make decisions and have to own them.

Or the baby could just keep her name?

if they get married and a family name is important he can change his to his wife and child’s.

half the paperwork 🤷‍♀️

It might be fine op. I was with dh for 13 years before we finally got married. It was lovely for our children to be involved in our special day. They were 7 and 10 and loved being a part of it. We got married on holiday and it was just the 4 of us. I don’t think there’s a ‘right way round’ anymore

Yes.

when I got Married I had my own house, savings, good career, civil service pension etc.

dh was post divorce and had lost everything, his house, and all assets.

I was persuaded to get married “for protection” when I had my first child.

turns out what this actually means is if dh and I split up, he can walk away with half my house and assets, and possibly my pension too.

basically I potentially lose half of everything.

@Cantthinkofaname2203 ah this makes perfect sense, and exactly what I was asking so thank you for such an articulate answer. I hear this a lot about protection and marriage for women having children, but I suspected it might not always protect the woman as much as it is implied to do!

@KirstenBlest thank you for the correction Kirsten, I am aware I simply typed too fast for my own good. I actually wasn’t asking if women are often more vulnerable, simply really if marriage only really offers protection to the lower earner whoever that might happen to be , however another poster down the thread gave a very insightful answer so not to worry I have my answer now!

Not sure where that registry office is!?!! I got married 6 years ago and less than £100. Shop around I’m sure you will find it a hell of a lot cheaper than where you’ve been looking

Over a 100 mmm we went for small registry and cost less than a £100 had 5 close family with us. Then booked a village hall,dj and party for the night time with a buffet and cake and sweet tripley for just all family and friends under 300....anyway was perfect for us as we ain't huge wedding fans and now I'm happily married Mrs with 3 under 2s now haha

Spousal maintenance has only ever been a thing for the well off and increasingly rare. I know my MIL was awarded this back in the 1980’s.

@Yummymummy2020 really it protects the lower earner which historically has tended to be the woman and still tends to be. I have two women friends who are both high earners and earn far more than their partners. One is married and one isn’t. The one that is married was almost 50 when she married so no kids. If they ever break up he will do far better. Other friend does have children but youngest is a teenager and is close to adulthood. She has a great pension, her partner doesn’t as self employed, she will never marry as she knows in a split she would have be worse off. So yes marrying does help the lower or non earning partner.

I am a perfect example of why you should possibly marry, both on very similar salaries and then I went PT to look after children so my pension took a hit.

In most councils, last Monday of each month is the cheapest day to get married/civil partnership. Two witnesses, 10 minutes in and out!

Hopefully you will find somewhere cheaper Op, as there are much cheaper options out there.

Is this just about the money, or are you concerned that your bf is using the money as a reason to put off getting married? Not meaning to be goady, it's a genuine question. I've seen it on here a number of times, where a man 'wants to wait til we can have an expensive ring / venue / dress / honeymoon' all of which are not necessary for getting married, and they're actually just using that excuse to put off getting married.

I echo pp as well....please make sure you do the practical / traditional thing and give the baby YOUR surname.

The OP has already stated she would like to take her husband's name. As is her choice.

OP, could you tell us which area you're in?

OP,

Do this and you can always do something else a bit later.

I would not be giving the baby his name under ANY circumstances before being married.

This doesn't have to be a big deal if it means that much to you and he is sincere.

I've known at least 6 couples where they have not been married for various reasons (usually using money, rings, the right time to propose etc etc ) and they've given the child the fathers name. Not one of those have ever resulted in marriage and all have since separated.

If he wants to wait for a pricey ring fine, but your child gets your surname until you are married.

@Yummymummy2020 , fair enough, my typing is not great. I've probably read too many threads where the mother is left to do most of the childrearing and being vulnerable financially because she is waiting for the father to pop the question.

Probably

Different people are in different circumstances and have different attitudes to material wealth and risk.

There is no one right decision, but it's important not to sleepwalk into a situation which leaves you vulnerable. And starting a family is the time when decisions need to be made, and if someone decides to reduce earnings (and probably pension) then it's better made after full consideration of the legal differences and a bit of scenario planning (death, separation, redundancy, long term illness/disability, DC who needs additional care etc)