'Don't have kids unless you are ready to marry' says judge

neverdespairgirl

I'm not married. I'm 35, am pregnant with my second child, and live with my partner and our 8 year old son. We've been together for 15 years, so this isn't exactly a short-term fling.

If marriage was important to me, or to him, I'm sure we would be married. Neither of us is against it, we just don't quite see the point and our commitment to each other is basic and fundamental to both of us. I love him dearly, he's the light of my life, and I have no doubt he feels the same.

Marriage to me doesn't mean more than what I have with him now. A public commitment isn't necessary to me, to feel loved, cared for, cherished and valued. Our finances are joint, our flat is jointly owned, we have wills leaving everything to each other, and we are each other's next of kin. Marriage in and of itself doesn't cause commitment.

Of course, couples who aren't married are more likely to split up. That's because couples living together run the whole range from those who see their relationship as permanent and committed, via those who think they are in it for the long-term, and those who aren't sure, to those who just think they are with Mr / Miss "Good Enough For Now". Those who are married aren't necessarily never going to split up, but they have made a committment.

But my dearly beloved and I are also committed, to each other and our 1.5 children. We aren't waiting and seeing, and so forth.

If it mattered to my OH, of course we would marry. If it mattered to me, he'd be only too happy. But at the moment, with life / work / us / children, it doesn't matter to either of us at all.

picklekin

I waited till I was married, I waited 6 years for him to be ready, waitied a year to plan the wedding and for it to feel "right", waited 6 months after to stop taking the pill, waited until I'd got my operation out the way and was fit and healthy to have children... waited waited waited.

Now I've been trying to 1.5 years and think one of the major reasons we are struggling to conceive is that we are just to old now, I wish we'd not waited so long

My point is, if you want something, grab it, don't wait for everything to be perfect and the moon to be in Aquarius.

balletshoes

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

At last, someone has the courage to say it:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10504840/Dont-have-children-unless-you-are-ready-to-marry-says-judge.html

I agree.

and I disagree.

supersaver2

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I'm not married. I'm 35, am pregnant with my second child, and live with my partner and our 8 year old son. We've been together for 15 years, so this isn't exactly a short-term fling.

If marriage was important to me, or to him, I'm sure we would be married. Neither of us is against it, we just don't quite see the point and our commitment to each other is basic and fundamental to both of us. I love him dearly, he's the light of my life, and I have no doubt he feels the same.

Marriage to me doesn't mean more than what I have with him now. A public commitment isn't necessary to me, to feel loved, cared for, cherished and valued. Our finances are joint, our flat is jointly owned, we have wills leaving everything to each other, and we are each other's next of kin. Marriage in and of itself doesn't cause commitment.

Of course, couples who aren't married are more likely to split up. That's because couples living together run the whole range from those who see their relationship as permanent and committed, via those who think they are in it for the long-term, and those who aren't sure, to those who just think they are with Mr / Miss "Good Enough For Now". Those who are married aren't necessarily never going to split up, but they have made a committment.

But my dearly beloved and I are also committed, to each other and our 1.5 children. We aren't waiting and seeing, and so forth.

If it mattered to my OH, of course we would marry. If it mattered to me, he'd be only too happy. But at the moment, with life / work / us / children, it doesn't matter to either of us at all.

Its great that you have ensured you are both safe for the future and if the worst happens, lots of unmarried folks aren't. After you have sorted all the wills, property etc to ensure your partner will receive it on your death (god forbid), it would be cheaper to have a very simply wedding though and this will bring about all you have sorted automatically!

Dunroamin

picklekin wrote: »

I waited till I was married, I waited 6 years for him to be ready, waitied a year to plan the wedding and for it to feel "right", waited 6 months after to stop taking the pill, waited until I'd got my operation out the way and was fit and healthy to have children... waited waited waited.

Now I've been trying to 1.5 years and think one of the major reasons we are struggling to conceive is that we are just to old now, I wish we'd not waited so long

My point is, if you want something, grab it, don't wait for everything to be perfect and the moon to be in Aquarius.

Unfortunately, I feel that grabbing things is responsible for many of society's problems. If you'd not waited for your husband to be ready you might have been left as a lone parent and if you hadn't waited to be a healthy parent, he might have been.

onlyroz

He is simply saying two things:

- You should be in a stable relationship before considering children
- Statistically, married couples have the most stable relationships

It's really not that hard to understand.

System

For what its worth I think the Judge meant well.:(

sooty&sweep

Neverdespairgirl the article refers to relationships that merit marriage ie two people who are genuinely committed to each other through thick and thin which from what you say you clearly are !
For me its refering to couples that have only been together for a relatively short period of time, they are all loved up and wouldn't it be nice......
I'd also say that I think there will always be exceptions but on the whole I agree with the sentiment of the article.
Jen

Person_one

onlyroz wrote: »

He is simply saying two things:

- You should be in a stable relationship before considering children
- Statistically, married couples have the most stable relationships

It's really not that hard to understand.

I think that's already generally how it works though. Yes, people all have different ideas of what a stable relationship is, but I don't believe that there are loads of people making babies fully expecting and happy to be single parents within a year or two.

Of course, lots of children aren't planned, and then people have to improvise and do the best they can, unless the judge is suggesting people only have sex if they are in a stable relationship and want children!

lazer

Person_one wrote: »

I think that's already generally how it works though. Yes, people all have different ideas of what a stable relationship is, but I don't believe that there are loads of people making babies fully expecting and happy to be single parents within a year or two.

Of course, lots of children aren't planned, and then people have to improvise and do the best they can, unless the judge is suggesting people only have sex if they are in a stable relationship and want children!

or maybe only have unprotected sex if in a stable relationship and want children.

If you don't want children take precautions to ensure you don't have them - use 2 methods of contraception.

I think its sad that so many relationships are now seen as throwaway and disposable.

Even on MSE if a couple are having difficulties many people seem to respond that you should leave the relationship, better of without them etc, rather than try and work it out first.

I sometimes think people expect too much from a relationship - its not going to be hearts and flowers all the time!

I agree with the judge 100%