Marriage is outdated

[Lifepuzzle]

For discussion/viewpoints really. I think marriage is increasingly becoming an outdated concept. I think the value system that underpins it is, theoretically lovely - commitment to one partner for the rest of your life. But the reality of human nature is that people often outgrow each other, sometimes quickly and sometimes after 30 + years together.

I don’t think there is any shame in parting ways with someone who you’ve had a good run with, you’ve been good friends, you might have had children, but seasons move on and the whole idea of “for life” actually becomes too much pressure for people who have tried their best, had good times, but just………moved on. Yes there is something nice about knowing one person forever, but in reality I’m beginning to wonder if the unrealistic expectation of the forever part just forces people into long term unhappiness eventually.

I think marriage often does work - but for a certain lifespan. It’s a contract, in many ways, but contracts that don’t have a review and renewal date after a certain period of time are dangerous things. People should be given the option of continuing to choose their partner. In a utopian world we like to imagine we all stay together until death do us part, but in reality many people are living under conditions that they wouldn’t choose if the contract came up for renewal.Then, when divorces do happen they are often acrimonious, leaving one or both partners feeling like a failure for calling time.

Marriage isn’t just about romance anyway, it is about nailing down financial security and loyalty for the sake of children and asset-building. Yes romance comes into it at the beginning and no-one enters a marriage thinking it will fail. But it’s an outdated concept that allows no flexibility for re-assessment or understanding of the fluid nature of people as they move from one life stage to another.

I take your point, however I don’t think an ‘average couple’ would not have a pension or own a house at some point in their life. But even if that’s the case I still think there are benefits to being married over not being married- legal next of kin, parental rights and responsibilities, benefits to children and security to name a few. Doesn’t a married widow(er) even get rights to their partners state pension (or has that been scrapped?)

My son ( early thirties) and his friends clearly don't think marriage is outdated. Over the last few years he and DIL have been to dozens of weddings of friends and family, and their closest friends( 4 couples) are all married or will be by the end of the year. Some have children and all those couples were married before they had children. These are all high earning professional men and women.

I'm of an age where people are starting to have their ruby wedding anniversaries. It's wonderful to see couples together with their families whose love for each other has grown and matured over the decades. My own parents were married for 60 years before my father died, their close friends were the same.

There are still plenty of people around who value marriage.

It is if the woman thinks there is such a thing as "common law wife", or that she has any rights at all if she or her partner leaves.
Everyone should think very carefully about all aspects of marriage before committing to a relationship or having children. Make sure they understand the law. Then decide. It is absolutely fine to decide either way, just don't do it in ignorance or wishful thinking.

But in a lot of cases it doesn't seem to make much of a difference. If the guy leaves and you are married there is nothing in place that makes him pay child support. Houses can be held in joint tenants even if not married. It's easy for men to do what they like and the woman isn't protected more than if she isn't married if it went to court - if the guy wanted to sell the house the judge still says the kids should stay in the home if both parents pay the mortgage. You can't make a man who won't disclose his earnings pay proper child support if he doesn't want to even if they were married.

Why isn’t it lovely to see couples in committed relationships celebrating 40 years together with their families around them? Why only married couples?

Almost 50% of marriages in the UK end in divorce so what's the point? I've always made sure my finances are good so I don't need to rely on anyone because you can't rely on anyone.

Divorce was invented for people who want to end their marriage. Nobody is tied for life. Until the law is changed marriage protects children and partners in case of unexpected death or separation re property. Common law doesn't count for anything in the UK.

I'm sure it would be, if I knew any, but I don't. I don't know anyone who is in a relationship for that long who isn't married.

Maybe that's because marriages tend to last longer than unmarried partnerships? Who knows.

A joint mortgage may serve the same function in a childless or short marriage.

But once one of the partners (usually the woman) has given up several years of salary and career progression and pension to care for children, a joint mortgage doesn't really cut it.

Imagine a situation where a couple have children, the woman either gives up work completely or drops to part-time for several years to care for the children. Once the children are teens, the woman looks to return to work/FT but the couple jointly decide to manage on the husband's salary so the wife can continue to be home during the teen years. A few years later, the couple split up. Maybe the husband has an affair and leaves the wife for another woman.

If the woman is unmarried, she is entitled to nothing except her share of the joint mortgage. She has sacrificed her own career and limited her earning potential. She has lost out on years of pension contributions. Since the children are now over 18, she is not even entitled to child maintenance or a right to be housed. She takes her share of the house, with which she can afford to buy a small flat if she is lucky. She has been out of the workforce for at least a decade so struggles to get a well paid job and mansge thr household bills. She has only a tiny pension. She will struggle financially until the day she dies. Meanwhile her partner has built a career and a pension. He will easily support himself on the salary which previously supported the whole family. Perhaps he has also built up some savings in his own name over the last two decades. He has a comfortable life and retirement, having benefited from the free childcare and housekeeping provided by his unmarried partner for 20 years.

If the same couple are married, the woman is protected because the law recognises her contribution for the last 20 years. She is entitled to a share of her husband's pension and savings, regardless of whether they are in her husband's sole name. She may be entitled to a larger share of the house or other assets, in recognition of the fact that her reduced earning power is a result of raising the children, and also in recognition of the fact that her husband's career progression was aided by his wife providing all of the childcare. The woman may have a reduced standard of living after divorce, but she will be able to support herself and have a secure retirement.

As a PP said, it is incredibly naive to dismiss the benefits of a marriage contract.

Good for you - you sound so sensible.

I wish you and your husband all happiness.

I think it entirely depends on what sort of person you are, what you believe you are getting into and why.

I am nearly sixty, married many decades and my kids are around 30, also married.

For us, marriage is a wholehearted, ‘we’re all in’, lifelong commitment. The joining of of two people - legally, financially, morally - to create one: the basis of this new family.

If one person sadly turns out to not be what they were believed to be - violent/ a liar/ a cheat etc - then that would likely mean divorce so there is merit in doing lots/many years of due diligence before entering into marriage.

But marriage still has its place for us in the modern world. It provides a legal and financial framework for security for women when they become somewhat more vulnerable due to bearing children. It also affords legal (eg the hospital/ next-of-kin scenario) and financial (eg widow’s pension) status. Plus the feeling of security and commitment.

As a young woman I was hopeful that I would follow my parents' example. They have been married 52 years. But it wasn't to be. He was not a good person to me. I chose badly. I don't think I'll marry again, because if I look at the hard financial truth of it... it's not to my advantage.

The difference between my generation (X) and my parents Boomer generation is that society and the law has changed so much. My mum couldn't get a mortgage in her own right or get a credit card when she got engaged to my dad. Having kids outside marriage was not socially acceptable. We take these things for granted now.

So I'm divorced, and my DB has been with his partner for around 25 years, no sign of a wedding at all.

I think if you are certain you have met the right person in a romantic level, and you are clear on your future aspirations and that you support each other implicitly without terms and conditions, marriage is a good thing. It just didn't work out for me, that's all.

I actually agree completely OP.

Even in those circumstances there could be an advantage in having your relationship recognised in law. If one partner dies or becomes seriously ill an unmarried partner may face more admin difficulties than a married partner would have done, especially in some countries abroad.

Inheritance tax doesn't affect many couples as it stands at the moment, but that might change under Labour. There is absolutely no way to replicate the enormous advantage a married couple have when it comes to leaving their assets to their children without paying any tax.

I have yet to see a single coherent explanation of what people mean when they say 'marriage is outdated'. It usually seems to come back to some false assumption that it's religious, or that marriage is disadvantageous to women in a way that it isn't to men, or that you have to spend a small fortune on a wedding, none of which is true.

You seem to be talking about social attitudes to a relationship involving having children, not about the legal pros and cons of being married or in a civil partnership as opposed to just cohabiting.

Exactly. It’s a statement of intent

I don't think marriage is outdated, but I don't understand why women think it offers them any particular protection. If you want to leave an unhappy marriage, you will still need financial independence. And marriage doesn't offer any particular protection to children in case if a divorce - talk to the divorced mothers around you or pop over to the relationship board to see that many divorced mothers are in a pretty difficult situation. So, by all means get married if you want to, but don't ever give up your financial independence.

I love the security of marriage, working through difficulties together in the relationship as the years go by. Been together twenty one years, married for over 18 years....raised our four children together through many ups and downs.

I have no interest in casually being with someone. I wanted a quick registry office wedding. Wasn't interested in expensive stuff. The marriage was what I was after years ago.

I just think people give up too easily with marriage when the going gets tough. Some obviously have high expectations and need to lower them and realise that it takes a lot of effort to keep the marriage going. Don't expect miracles!

I am glad not to be a blended family like the family next door where the woman has had three to a previous partner and one to her current partner. She has joint custody of the children so every two days they're back and forth. Looks a very complicated life.

If anything happens to DH I will stay a widow. Have no interest in meeting anyone else.

I don’t believe marriage is “outdated”. But I think part of the complexity, and the reason many (particularly younger) people are agnostic on marriage, is that modern marriage has morphed sociologically into a fairly complex beast which straddles a strange line between being about both a legal contract and about romance, which aren’t easy bedfellows. I’m married. I’m also childfree, financially independent from DH (we don’t share any finances), had a pre-nup, didn’t say ‘until death do us part” or “forsaking all others” within my vows, we had a very expensive wedding which was absolutely a party, and we are non-monogamous. Far from being outdated, marriage accommodates all of this “modernity” and works for our relationship; but even as we on this thread discuss the many legal and financial benefits of marriage, there will still be people on this thread whose response to the above would be “why even bother getting married if you aren’t going to have shared finances / are making arrangements and agreements which plan for divorce / are going to have sex with other people?” Because it’s difficult to separate the hard logic of marriage being about protection in the event that something goes wrong, and the socialisation of marriage being the ultimate declaration of love and what love means.

People are increasingly having children later in life, increasingly not buying property until later in life, and there aren’t all that many fancy-free young people contemplating their deaths or pensions. I can absolutely see why an increasing number of young people who are not living the lives their parents did and not bound by the same social mores their parents were (with women not having economic equality, of cohabiting being frowned upon, of sex outside of marriage being scandalous, of the stigma of being an “unwed mother” etc) who are not necessarily considering harsh legal facts, often have negative experiences of their parents’ marriages, and who therefore take the view that marriage is outdated because you don’t need marriage to prove that you’re committed or in love.

Outdated in the sense that everything is seemingly disposable now, including people and relationships. I like being married and believe I made a commitment for life. Nobody is forced to do that if they don’t want to though.

Many marriages are totally crap or people settle in life.

People change, things change etc. I know very few people where both parties are really happy.

Lots of guys I speak to will say it's the worst thing they ever did....

Some of us have more money than our male partner and we’re financially secure and continued to work when our dc turned 1. The women who are ‘foolish and naive’ are the ones who give up their career when they have children, married or not.