Couples who refuse to get married

[david51058]

Why is it there are some couple who refuse point blank to get married? I have nothing against unmarried couples, I just don't understand their reasoning. They live together for years but don't make the commitment to each other by getting married. The usual line is that they don't need a piece of paper to be committed to each other. Why not just do it, especially if they have children? It's not difficult. What is the problem?
It strikes me that the real reason is they are not 100% sure and want to leave the door ajar just in case it all goes wrong and if they are not married it will be easier to escape. The fact that they have had children which most people would think is the ultimate commitment seems not to have any bearing on the matter.

[LoftyLottie]

I really agree with you Milly. Children are a far bigger commitment than getting married. Unfortunately, it seems some don't see it that way. I agree with Cazz - it is far more selfish to have children with no real desire to take on the commitment than it is to not have children.

[e.crespo]

I do hope that the ladies and gents on this site who are in committed relationships and have children find out what will happen financially if, only if, something causes that relationship to irretrievably breakdown or maybe, something more harrowing happens. I just think that forewarned is for-armed and perhaps that is what the older generation is uneasy about, worrying about what could happen (to their grown up children's families) and there isn't the same rights at the moment for unmarried couples. I just hate to feel that anyone could get hurt or lose out because they think that they will be treated the same as married couples.
jj

[craft1948]

So if you live with your 'life partner' and the chap kicks his clogs will you get a widow's pension?

[e.crespo]

probably not.
jj

[LoftyLottie]

There is no such thing as a common law husband/wife. A lot of people don't realise that. You can safeguard yourself with legal contracts, but that will cost a lot more than getting married. At present being married is still the best safeguard for anyone who wants to protect their family.

[craft1948]

I'd miss mine.......very good reason for marrying .

[david51058]

All this "Can't afford it" or "Too much hassle" Whats the point"? are all excuses because they are not certain they want to spend the rest of their lives with that person. Why not just admit it? Also, these couples who have lived together for years, then get married then blame that for spliting up soon after. Why should getting married cause a split? Doesn't make sense.There was obviously something wrong before, nothing to do with getting married.

[Jemisa]

Selfishness -
I Should have said IMO but my daughter says it of herself too. She doesn't want to share her time, or share money or freedom on them (her words) she's got nieces thats good enough. Her partner says the same.

jem

[LoftyLottie]

Actually agree with David. Going down to a registry office and spending whatever it is nowadays for a licence will not change a solid relationship.

And I still think so many people think marriage = big expensive wedding with all the trimmings. All marriage is is a commitment to the person you want to spend your life with and, in my opinion, better from a security point of view for any children.

A girl I know has got engaged, is now having her first child and says they will get married when they can afford to do it properly. What she means by doing it properly is spending a fortune on a big one day event - perhaps that is why people break up after they get married - they suddenly find they are broke and get stressed out.

[mccfluff]

its not an excuse, what is the point.... it means nothing to me so why should i?

[LoftyLottie]

Then Jemisa, I wouldn't mention marriage to her again!! It's up to them and no one else! ;o)

[redcrx]

Im getting confused now. Am i supposed to be marrying to show a commitment that having children doesnt? Or to ensure that if me and Mr CRX split that we both have a share of each others money? or to prove that we love each other?

[LoftyLottie]

RedHelen. What has David's age got to do with it?

[Old_Geezer]

Reasons for not getting married aside, I don't see why someone should be effectively forced to endure some daft pointless religious or civil ceremony simply to prove to others (who aren't part of the relationship) whether they wish to stay together as a couple or not. It is just further authority's interference where it ought occur, pressurising by discrimination, ensuring different couples are treated differently. And to suggest those couples have not made a commitment to each other if they chose not to capitulate to the unreasonable demand, is just insulting. Anyway if you are married the 'door' is still 'ajar'. Divorce not being exactly unknown. It all smacks of some folk just trying to control and castigate others. Forcing them to toe someone else's line, or risk getting bullied.

[david51058]

Redhelen - I am fifty years old. My first marraige was the big expensive job with all the frills. Not money well speant but never mind. My second was down the registry office with family and friends, cheap and cheerful. It was a fantastic relaxed day and we are still very happy together.

[ethandron]

redhelen, i really disagree with your opinion that it's a generational thing. that might be true of someone in their 80s but i really believe that many older people really couldn't care, i think it's more to do with a persons attitude than age. i know a number of people whose grandchildren live with their partners and have children but who aren't married and really these grandparents don't give a toss. 'oldies' are far more tolerant than they're given credit for.
conversely, some of my contemporaries are pushing or have pushed their children into the whole white wedding thing, spending fortunes on 'the day', the brides mothers outfit, the 'venue', goodness knows what else. and at least 3 of these have already ended in divorce with money still being owed.