Why doesn't he want to marry me?

seven-day-weekend

paulineb wrote: »

Well perhaps someone could give a source for the stats. Theyve just been mentioned so far.

Here's one (sources at bottom of article)



http://www.civitas.org.uk/hwu/cohabitation.php

Errata

paulineb wrote: »

Well perhaps someone could give a source for the stats. Theyve just been mentioned so far.

There are plenty of studies, you may find this one helpful http://www.jubilee-centre.org/uploaded/files/resource_344.pdf

poet123

This is an interesting article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2157371/Does-living-marriage-make-likely-divorce.html

And these are some US stats, big disparity there.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/marriages-last-longer-than-living-together-/586321/

Also interesting.

http://marriage.about.com/od/cohabitation/qt/cohabfacts.htm

And this reads quite seriously:

http://www.civitas.org.uk/hwu/cohabitation.php


Stability

Cohabiting relationships are fragile. They are always more likely to break up than marriages entered into at the same time, regardless of age or income. On average, cohabitations last less than two years before breaking up or converting to marriage. Less than four per cent of cohabitations last for ten years or more. 2 Cohabiting also influences later marriages. The more often and the longer that men and women cohabit, the more likely they are to divorce later. 3
Cheating

Both men and women in cohabiting relationships are more likely to be unfaithful to their partners than married people. 4

Saturnalia

Errata wrote: »

Statistics show that on average unmarried partnerships have a shorter shelf life than marriages.

But wouldn't you expect the statistics to say that? I don't know what the official stats on it are but I only know 2 women who married their first and only partner. Most people, by the time they settle down for the long haul, married or not, will have had (a) previous relationship(s).

And you would hope a couple getting married are going into it with the view that this is forever, whereas a couple not getting married might not be thinking of their relationship in such a long term way.

Add in that in this day and age you don't need to be married in order to live as a couple/family, I think it's probably likely that a high percentage of marrying people are doing it due to religious beliefs, and the devoutly religious tend not to believe in divorce.

lostinrates

Retrogamer wrote: »

On the other hand if someone leaves someone they love because they won't marry, then it seems being married is more important than being with the person they love.


I see it as a status thing. A lot of women seem to be keen for it because they feel like society judges them unfairly if they're not married.
They feel as if they will no longer fit in with their friends because their friends are all married but they're not.
Or, they mistrust their partner due to insecurities and think marriage will resolve this.

To me, it seems like a status thing that's needed to either brag / show off or some people need it to feel inclusive.

Actually I think there is some truth in this for some people.

But I think for others if you substitute the word security, or comfort, or reassurance it would be more apt.

Personally, neither were relevant to me, ( financial security now would be) but I do take the point that they were to others.

I didn't really expect to feel about being married as I do. But I love it. I loved being his girlfriend too, but marriage, cementing what we felt already, the commitment to each other, the officially of it (which in our case was quiet) was a surprise in the sense of ...pleasure I suppose. Continued pleasure, it has given me. I hope he would say the same!

Tiddlywinks

Back to the OP though...

A belief (or not) in marriage is a fundamental part of someone's character... something to be bottomed out before adding children into the mix.

... and before you say 'accidental' pregnancy... if you absolutely need to not get pregnant then it is perfectly possible not to get pregnant.

If you are with someone and still haven't made the basic life decisions then I'd suggest that situation falls into the 'need to NOT get pregnant' category.

No excuses... if a £5 million lottery win depended on not getting pregnant then I bet most people would manage it!

Tiglath

I wasn't fussed either way about getting married but it was important to DH so I agreed. My conditions were that I would never have to have children, and that I would keep my name. I don't like children (actually I think I announced the no-kid rule on our 3rd or 4th date), and I'm a bit sensitive about names, being adopted. So we both got what we wanted, and we're both happy with the way things have worked out.

runningwoman

claire16c wrote: »

I have always read that the pill is 99.99 effective and less than 1 woman in 1000 in 1 year will get pregnant with proper use.

I've lost track of the amount of people who said they were on the pill then you find out they were sick or on anti biotics etc & didn't follow the 7 day rule. So they weren't actually on it then were they!

I think average effectiveness with general use is 92% which at 8 in 100 is a lot more than 1 in 1000.

I don't know anyone who had got pregnant whilst using it properly myself, I guess there's a few people out there but it will be much more likely they weren't using it properly.

Aye, above is what I was told last time I got my prescription. Although I find it's the best form of contraception for me, I mentioned "1 in a 100" actually sounds incredibly risky if one is reasonably sexually active :eek:, but the nurse said taken properly it's a lot less than that and I didn't need to worry about "accidents".

lostinrates

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Back to the OP though...

A belief (or not) in marriage is a fundamental part of someone's character... something to be bottomed out before adding children into the mix.

... and before you say 'accidental' pregnancy... if you absolutely need to not get pregnant then it is perfectly possible not to get pregnant.

If you are with someone and still haven't made the basic life decisions then I'd suggest that falls into the 'need to NOT get pregnant' category.

No excuses... if a £5 million lottery win depended on not getting pregnant then I bet most people would manage it!

OP however does have children. Nothing can change that now.


She has decided that the marriage issue is not a 'make or break' issue for her. Which is just as well, after this time, because so far they have been making ok without it.

I would agree with others that if decided I would let it go BUT I would have one last honest conversation, and say its the last one and honest, and ask that in letting it go you both agree to, within an agreed term of time,....say two months, make sure other things are in place to ensure each other's security in worst case scenarios. Indication of NOK. Wills. Names on insurance policies where relevant, anything that might automatically go to the children and in short term leave you in financial difficulty providing for them if tragedy were to strike.

Vicky123

Retrogamer wrote: »

On the other hand if someone leaves someone they love because they won't marry, then it seems being married is more important than being with the person they love.


I see it as a status thing. A lot of women seem to be keen for it because they feel like society judges them unfairly if they're not married.
They feel as if they will no longer fit in with their friends because their friends are all married but they're not.
Or, they mistrust their partner due to insecurities and think marriage will resolve this.

To me, it seems like a status thing that's needed to either brag / show off or some people need it to feel inclusive.

I think it's more likely that attending friends weddings drives home the point that he doesn't care enough and he will surely know this.
She's having to pretend she doesn't mind or alternatively tell everyone who says "your turn next" he doesn't want to marry her!