Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Does he not want to marry Me anymore?

150 replies

Girlsjustwannahavetea · 15/10/2024 19:57

I'll try and keep it short.

Me and my partner have a baby together and have previously talked about marriage.

I am feeling insecure about my financial security since we are not married but share a child. He is currently the highest earner. I have only just started out In my career. I'm probably feeling this way as we now have a baby of 4 months.

Anyway, I've been talking to him about it and he had reasurred me about several aspects of our finances. Which is fair enough. My concern is also that he has an ex wife, so she maybe entitled to some of his finances, I'm not sure.

What is getting to me is, it could have all been solved if he just said 'well we're going to be getting married so it'll be ok'. But he never brought this up, despite discussion about his ex wife etc. So maybe he has changed his mind? I know I could have brought up marriage myself, in a sense, I was steering the conversation that way. But hey ho I didn't.

I hate having conversations like this as I always think it'll come across as me appearing after his money. Which is not the case. But I do worry. Plus I don't want to be one of those marriage pusher women. I've known a few of those.

Anyway I'm not well versed in finances with regards to marriage and divorce.

Anyone got any opinions?

OP posts:
BobbyBiscuits · 16/10/2024 15:54

You can't force him to marry you. But you could propose? If he said no would you want to split up?
He has to financially support your child regardless but it's really about whether you feel marriage is a deal breaker, or if you can continue in the way you have been.
You need to discuss it with him.

CowTown · 16/10/2024 16:31

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 15:12

You are not wrong in your statement, however it does not apply to all woman IMO.

I will use my last relationship as an example:

My ex earnt £20k a year and had zero ambition to earn any more. Lived with her parents, had no pension and no savings.

For 2 years she pressurised me into marriage and kids, knowing full well ( I assume ) that if things did not work out she would come out the other side an awful lot better off whilst I would be an awful lot poorer. Yes, she would have to put a temporary hold on a career that she never had, and she might have lost £30-40k in earnings, but she would still be much better off financially in the long term regardless if we split or stayed together after we married.

I am not saying i am against marriage, but like everyone else, I want to protect my financial assets that I have worked incredibly hard for.

Clearly you and your ex were never going to work out. Finances are one of the top, if not the top stressor in a marriage. Couples ideally need to be aligned on financial values, rather than income. Do we save or spend? Do we carry credit card debt when we want something now? Do we rent or buy? Do we buy a house we can afford to pay off, or get the biggest property we can afford on an interest-only loan? Do we pay off our mortgage early? Do we push hard at work for promotions, or coast along? How much do we prioritise holidays? Do we prioritise expensive cars? Do we prefer ‘experiences’ or ‘stuff’? Do we overpay into our pensions, or put in the bare minimum?

It’s pretty clear from your post that you and your ex weren’t aligned on finances. If you met, say, an academic who worked hard for promotions and was career-driven, and also aligned on your financial outlook (yet only earned £45k), it might be worth seeing where it goes.

NettleTea · 16/10/2024 16:41

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 15:12

You are not wrong in your statement, however it does not apply to all woman IMO.

I will use my last relationship as an example:

My ex earnt £20k a year and had zero ambition to earn any more. Lived with her parents, had no pension and no savings.

For 2 years she pressurised me into marriage and kids, knowing full well ( I assume ) that if things did not work out she would come out the other side an awful lot better off whilst I would be an awful lot poorer. Yes, she would have to put a temporary hold on a career that she never had, and she might have lost £30-40k in earnings, but she would still be much better off financially in the long term regardless if we split or stayed together after we married.

I am not saying i am against marriage, but like everyone else, I want to protect my financial assets that I have worked incredibly hard for.

See in regards what you have built up PRIOR to a marriage, I agree with you to a certain extent. Ideally you would both be bringing a certain amount of security and assets to the table.

Many women are performing really well compared to men in their careers before children - its having children where it falls off a cliff and creates the sex wage gap.

(Ive seen too many videos of alpha dudes going on about women earning more, and no such gap - but they do tend to only look at the pre-children women)

Its AFTER children that the problems come - as in OPs case here. And a consideration as to whether a woman's value in regards bringing up a family that they both wanted has value that is beyond bringing in a salary.

Maternity leave often sets a pattern that seems very difficult to get out of - woman at home with the baby starts picking up more and more of the traditional role. Man gets into the habit of doing less and less, because 'logically' she is at home all day so she SHOULD be doing it (Ive heard this argument, and its hard to argue against.

Woman needs to go back to work. Typically there seems to be a lack of discussion with man about who will do pick ups/drop offs and so so many times men 'Just Cant' because their important job doesnt allow flexibility (or he hasnt asked, but thats a good excuse) so this causes a big imbalance work wise, or a mum run ragged.

For the man it seemed better for her to stay home, or just work part time, especially if there are more children, because then he doesnt have to pick up the slack at home/have demands about childcare, and the wages of these reduced hours or work thats flexible around children doesnt go far when balanced with nursery fees. And its not really until secondary school that supervised childcare ceases to be as important (well Id argue not but.....)

This leaves a position where a man can progress in his career unhindered, knowing all is being handled by someone else at home. Meanwhile she may have taken potentially 10+ years off the career ladder and will never be able to get back to a level she may have been at previously, never mind going further. Mothers are seen as a problem in many workplaces - potentially taking time off, needing flexibility, whereas ironically men with children are seen as more responsible, and often it does their careers good.

Now if you are married, these choices and decisions mean that the unpaid labour that women are doing - physically having the children, taking time out, taking the financial hit to their careers and carrying most of the emotional burden of running a household whilst supporting her partner to succeed - these are balanced by the financial security that they are building something together - that her contribution is recognised as being as significant to the family whole as the man's higher wages.

If you are not, you are taking a mighty leap of faith, surrendering all that free labour and future career on the hope that he wont bugger off and change his mind, and you will literally be left holding the baby with 100% responsibility. Or even worse, bugger off as the last one leaves home for Uni, and your 'useful free labour' is finished and you have spent years being an unpaid housekeeper/nanny/etc and now find yourself homeless and with no career whatsoever, or chance of building a pension.

Im not hearts and roses about marriage for its own self. But if you are planning a family, I think its the decent thing to do. Its a big ask for a woman. Its a commitment to be a team to build it. Her role is not insignificant.

CowTown · 16/10/2024 16:54

Perfectly said @NettleTea

CutthroatDruTheViolent · 16/10/2024 16:58

Girlsjustwannahavetea · 15/10/2024 20:28

Gently, dear reader, people do sometimes not address things head on... I don't think that equates to being mature or not. If you re read, we have spoken about marriage. Many times. Just from this brief conversation, I'm surprised he didn't mention it. Not to say I won't be discussing this with him at all.

You might not that think that, but I certainly do.

You've allowed this man to impregnate you, you presumably see him as a life partner - yet you're pussy-footing around him. And yes, it is incredibly immature as someone else said to expect someone to read your mind and do what you want them to do. Especially if it's not something that's important to him - and arguably, how important is it to you if your "previously discussed" mentions of marriage weren't explicitly "I want to be married, I want to be married to you".

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:03

NettleTea · 16/10/2024 16:41

See in regards what you have built up PRIOR to a marriage, I agree with you to a certain extent. Ideally you would both be bringing a certain amount of security and assets to the table.

Many women are performing really well compared to men in their careers before children - its having children where it falls off a cliff and creates the sex wage gap.

(Ive seen too many videos of alpha dudes going on about women earning more, and no such gap - but they do tend to only look at the pre-children women)

Its AFTER children that the problems come - as in OPs case here. And a consideration as to whether a woman's value in regards bringing up a family that they both wanted has value that is beyond bringing in a salary.

Maternity leave often sets a pattern that seems very difficult to get out of - woman at home with the baby starts picking up more and more of the traditional role. Man gets into the habit of doing less and less, because 'logically' she is at home all day so she SHOULD be doing it (Ive heard this argument, and its hard to argue against.

Woman needs to go back to work. Typically there seems to be a lack of discussion with man about who will do pick ups/drop offs and so so many times men 'Just Cant' because their important job doesnt allow flexibility (or he hasnt asked, but thats a good excuse) so this causes a big imbalance work wise, or a mum run ragged.

For the man it seemed better for her to stay home, or just work part time, especially if there are more children, because then he doesnt have to pick up the slack at home/have demands about childcare, and the wages of these reduced hours or work thats flexible around children doesnt go far when balanced with nursery fees. And its not really until secondary school that supervised childcare ceases to be as important (well Id argue not but.....)

This leaves a position where a man can progress in his career unhindered, knowing all is being handled by someone else at home. Meanwhile she may have taken potentially 10+ years off the career ladder and will never be able to get back to a level she may have been at previously, never mind going further. Mothers are seen as a problem in many workplaces - potentially taking time off, needing flexibility, whereas ironically men with children are seen as more responsible, and often it does their careers good.

Now if you are married, these choices and decisions mean that the unpaid labour that women are doing - physically having the children, taking time out, taking the financial hit to their careers and carrying most of the emotional burden of running a household whilst supporting her partner to succeed - these are balanced by the financial security that they are building something together - that her contribution is recognised as being as significant to the family whole as the man's higher wages.

If you are not, you are taking a mighty leap of faith, surrendering all that free labour and future career on the hope that he wont bugger off and change his mind, and you will literally be left holding the baby with 100% responsibility. Or even worse, bugger off as the last one leaves home for Uni, and your 'useful free labour' is finished and you have spent years being an unpaid housekeeper/nanny/etc and now find yourself homeless and with no career whatsoever, or chance of building a pension.

Im not hearts and roses about marriage for its own self. But if you are planning a family, I think its the decent thing to do. Its a big ask for a woman. Its a commitment to be a team to build it. Her role is not insignificant.

Well put and I agree with this. But:

As @CowTown said, if a partner brings to the table similar financial assets/ and we are financially aligned then suddenly marriage isn't so scary. Its likely any career break will be short lived if they are ambitious and they will want to get back into work fairly quickly.

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 16/10/2024 17:09

Why WOULD he want to get married again when it places him at financial risk and you're already doing the wife duties, and he has no obligation to you? Youre hardly likely to take off and marry someone else now you have a child with him are you? He would likely only get married if you insisted it's not in his best interest to do it

category12 · 16/10/2024 17:13

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:03

Well put and I agree with this. But:

As @CowTown said, if a partner brings to the table similar financial assets/ and we are financially aligned then suddenly marriage isn't so scary. Its likely any career break will be short lived if they are ambitious and they will want to get back into work fairly quickly.

As long as the spouse is happy to do an equal share in regard to childcare.

Most of the time, even in this day & age, the mother is the default parent, who is expected to take time off for the children's sickness or holidays or work flexibly, and is the one the childcare setting calls first etc.

Otherwise it's not fair that that the man benefits from her labour while her career opportunites suffer and therefore she should be compensated.

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:20

category12 · 16/10/2024 17:13

As long as the spouse is happy to do an equal share in regard to childcare.

Most of the time, even in this day & age, the mother is the default parent, who is expected to take time off for the children's sickness or holidays or work flexibly, and is the one the childcare setting calls first etc.

Otherwise it's not fair that that the man benefits from her labour while her career opportunites suffer and therefore she should be compensated.

Don't forget the man will normally pay for the rent/mortgage, food, holidays etc. Although the mother will do an awful lot, the man will be paying/subsidising her wage whilst she is not working...

Anyway, we are getting off track here, this is about marriage, not who pays for what when children are involved.

Mrsttcno1 · 16/10/2024 17:20

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:03

Well put and I agree with this. But:

As @CowTown said, if a partner brings to the table similar financial assets/ and we are financially aligned then suddenly marriage isn't so scary. Its likely any career break will be short lived if they are ambitious and they will want to get back into work fairly quickly.

The only thing I would say about this is motherhood can (doesn’t always, but it’s possible) change a woman’s sense of ambition for a career.

Using myself as an example, I have always been career driven and money motivated I suppose would be quite accurate. Fresh out of law school I was all about climbing the ladder, the next promotion, achieving X bonus, and my husband I’d describe as the same. My husband and I earned equally, then I earned more, then he earned more, we’ve gone back and forth like that a few times, we bought our home together, we got married, and my husband has always asked me if I would want to “slow down” when we had children and I said absolutely not! I loved my career, I felt so much accomplishment in promotions and money and new connections, just like he did.

Well now we have a little girl and I can honestly say although I still love my job, no job, no promotion, no amount of money would be enough for me to take any extra time away from my baby. And my husband feels exactly the same. We are both going to slow down or stagnate career-wise now, both condensing or dropping hours, because the only thing that holds real value for us now is time, time is a thief and your baby changes so much so quickly, as long as our bills are paid the only thing we are motivated to find more of right now is time to spend as a family with our girl. Suddenly that £20k promotion I thought I wanted for years after maternity leave feels absolutely worthless if it means spending a single minute extra away from my baby, the bonus my husband wanted which required a longer hours and working away, worthless, because he doesn’t want to miss any more of our daughters childhood than he has to.

No promotion or job or bonus ever made me feel as accomplished as watching my baby learn to do something for the first time, or fall asleep on my chest, or show me that big smile or belly laugh.

I’m not saying this is the case for everyone, but it absolutely can be for some people.

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:23

Mrsttcno1 · 16/10/2024 17:20

The only thing I would say about this is motherhood can (doesn’t always, but it’s possible) change a woman’s sense of ambition for a career.

Using myself as an example, I have always been career driven and money motivated I suppose would be quite accurate. Fresh out of law school I was all about climbing the ladder, the next promotion, achieving X bonus, and my husband I’d describe as the same. My husband and I earned equally, then I earned more, then he earned more, we’ve gone back and forth like that a few times, we bought our home together, we got married, and my husband has always asked me if I would want to “slow down” when we had children and I said absolutely not! I loved my career, I felt so much accomplishment in promotions and money and new connections, just like he did.

Well now we have a little girl and I can honestly say although I still love my job, no job, no promotion, no amount of money would be enough for me to take any extra time away from my baby. And my husband feels exactly the same. We are both going to slow down or stagnate career-wise now, both condensing or dropping hours, because the only thing that holds real value for us now is time, time is a thief and your baby changes so much so quickly, as long as our bills are paid the only thing we are motivated to find more of right now is time to spend as a family with our girl. Suddenly that £20k promotion I thought I wanted for years after maternity leave feels absolutely worthless if it means spending a single minute extra away from my baby, the bonus my husband wanted which required a longer hours and working away, worthless, because he doesn’t want to miss any more of our daughters childhood than he has to.

No promotion or job or bonus ever made me feel as accomplished as watching my baby learn to do something for the first time, or fall asleep on my chest, or show me that big smile or belly laugh.

I’m not saying this is the case for everyone, but it absolutely can be for some people.

This makes me very happy!

SoNiceToComeHomeTo · 16/10/2024 17:33

WearyAuldWumman · 15/10/2024 20:35

This was England and the partner was paying alimony to his ex. One of the reasons that the couple remained unmarried for so long was that the relative had a very good wage and that would have been taken into consideration for alimony.

Sorry, alimony in England? We haven’t had it for ages have we?

category12 · 16/10/2024 17:33

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:20

Don't forget the man will normally pay for the rent/mortgage, food, holidays etc. Although the mother will do an awful lot, the man will be paying/subsidising her wage whilst she is not working...

Anyway, we are getting off track here, this is about marriage, not who pays for what when children are involved.

No, I was talking about while she is working. If the man wants her back to work asap after maternity leave, he needs to be stepping up to do half of the childcare and housework.

InfoSecInTheCity · 16/10/2024 17:50

@Girlsjustwannahavetea

I think he hasn't mentioned it because he doesn't see it as necessary or as a priority. At this point there are a few options for you to consider the main ones being.

  1. Marriage, you would obviously need to raise this head on but it's the most straightforward method of putting in place the contractual safeguards.

  2. put alternative legal mechanisms in place to offer you and your child financial security, seek proper legal advice for this

  • house deeds
  • wills
  • insurance beneficiaries
  • next of kin status in case of incapacity
  1. Decide you are incompatible and can't come to agreement and end the relationship

  2. accept the risk that he could leave you high and dry and hope he doesn't, continue as you are.

  3. complete financial separation while remaining together. Split all bills proportionate to your income, 50/50 on all household work and child rearing duties so you can devote as much time and energy to your career as he does. Ensure that in the event of a relationship breakdown you are financially stable alone,

WearyAuldWumman · 16/10/2024 20:42

SoNiceToComeHomeTo · 16/10/2024 17:33

Sorry, alimony in England? We haven’t had it for ages have we?

The death happened 15 years ago.

Piggled · 16/10/2024 20:44

WearyAuldWumman · 16/10/2024 20:42

The death happened 15 years ago.

We still have spousal maintenance in the UK just depends on circumstances.

WearyAuldWumman · 16/10/2024 20:47

WearyAuldWumman · 16/10/2024 20:42

The death happened 15 years ago.

I don't know how the law stands nowadays, but I thought that maintenance was still paid if the ex had been a SAHM and had lost out financially as a result?

Having said that, another relative through marriage (in England) has recently married their partner of 25 yrs because they have seen the difficulties that others have had when a partner has become ill.

You really do need to have a POA in place too, but what they told me was that they'd seen a sibling's partner being viewed with suspicion when she tried to organise both medical and financial matters after her life partner suffered a catastrophic brain injury.

WearyAuldWumman · 16/10/2024 20:55

Piggled · 16/10/2024 20:44

We still have spousal maintenance in the UK just depends on circumstances.

Thank you.

In this case, the ex had never had a career.

SoNiceToComeHomeTo · 16/10/2024 21:16

Piggled · 16/10/2024 20:44

We still have spousal maintenance in the UK just depends on circumstances.

Interesting! I just googled and apparently it is rare, but can still happen.

OhDearMuriel · 16/10/2024 21:29

Come on @Girlsjustwannahavetea Why do YOU think he's never mentioned marrying you?

Surely it's obvious?

He doesn't want to.

He's got you right where he wants you. He has no financial ties to you whatsoever, apart from child maintenance, should he wish to one day trade you in for a younger model or whatever.

Why on earth you would have a baby with someone, without discussing martial plans, if it's so important to you, is beyond me.

jsku · 16/10/2024 21:31

SoNiceToComeHomeTo · 16/10/2024 17:33

Sorry, alimony in England? We haven’t had it for ages have we?

I think they mean spousal maintenance. In some countries it is called alimony.

I got spousal in my divorce - until kids finish secondary education. If exH dies before - his estate has to pay out whatever remains due.

If someone divorced some time ago when longer (indefinite) spousal was awarded - they’ll have some sort of provision upon death as well.

nwsw · 17/10/2024 04:23

Girlsjustwannahavetea · 15/10/2024 20:22

Well he clearly isn't a marriage pusher man as he can't bring up the conversation. But of course it's always on the women to instigate these conversations - according to MN. Why should I butter up his ego by doing that?

Because you are the one who wants to know.

Completelyjo · 17/10/2024 06:10

Londonguy84 · 16/10/2024 17:20

Don't forget the man will normally pay for the rent/mortgage, food, holidays etc. Although the mother will do an awful lot, the man will be paying/subsidising her wage whilst she is not working...

Anyway, we are getting off track here, this is about marriage, not who pays for what when children are involved.

Subsidising his wife while she takes maternity leave to care for his child.

The way you phrase things is so telling in itself.

Londonguy84 · 17/10/2024 08:52

Completelyjo · 17/10/2024 06:10

Subsidising his wife while she takes maternity leave to care for his child.

The way you phrase things is so telling in itself.

No Need to be bit*hy - What else would you call it?

And its HER child as well as his....

Many years ago when my dads then partner was pregnant and for the first four years of THEIR child's life, she didn't work, so had little to no income. My dad 'subsidised' her throughout this period by paying all the bills, all of the food shopping AND giving her a 'wage' so she could still be independent.

Not really to sure why you want to start an argument with me on this one!

SirChenjins · 17/10/2024 08:57

A partner doesn’t subsidise his pregnant wife or partner though - a child is a joint responsibility and while a woman is on mat leave and therefore not able to work then her partner’s income is the joint income.

Swipe left for the next trending thread