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

littlerat

I'm not religious and would say for myself, that I'm not all that bothered about marriage. But, before I purposefully got pregnant, I would worry that if a bloke wasn't willing to nip to a registry office with me, is he really prepared to raise kids with me. A surprisingly old fashioned view for me, as much as I think in one sense it's just a piece of paper, in another I think it shows willingness to commit to you in a way that's longer to get out of than just moving out. There's also some legal things automatically afforded by marriage.


I agree with the general idea of the Judge's views - be sure you're committed, that's the important bit. Don't say you *have* to be married, but maybe consider why you can't be.


To be honest, there's a few girls I know who don't seem to have properly bothered with the relationship part at all. Either the pill etc is actually only about 50% effective, or a lot aren't even bothering to use one form of protection, never mind two.

I also know of more than 1 instance of women in committed but unmarried relationships having happy accident(ly on purpose) children as the bloke doesn't want them yet. Which is scary as hell, if a bloke poked holes in a condom everyone would scream hell from the rooftops, yet this seems to be somewhat accepted. :eek:

unicorn1984

littlerat wrote: »

I'm not religious and would say for myself, that I'm not all that bothered about marriage. But, before I purposefully got pregnant, I would worry that if a bloke wasn't willing to nip to a registry office with me, is he really prepared to raise kids with me. A surprisingly old fashioned view for me, as much as I think in one sense it's just a piece of paper, in another I think it shows willingness to commit to you in a way that's longer to get out of than just moving out. There's also some legal things automatically afforded by marriage.


I agree with the general idea of the Judge's views - be sure you're committed, that's the important bit. Don't say you *have* to be married, but maybe consider why you can't be.


To be honest, there's a few girls I know who don't seem to have properly bothered with the relationship part at all. Either the pill etc is actually only about 50% effective, or a lot aren't even bothering to use one form of protection, never mind two.

I also know of more than 1 instance of women in committed but unmarried relationships having happy accident(ly on purpose) children as the bloke doesn't want them yet. Which is scary as hell, if a bloke poked holes in a condom everyone would scream hell from the rooftops, yet this seems to be somewhat accepted. :eek:

Think this is terrible. Trapping a man into having children is a very scary thought! I know a girl who went out every weekend (and she used to be very open about this!!) sleeping with random men, claiming to be using contraception, because she wanted a baby so badly she was willing to sleep with strangers to fall pregnant!!!!

Tygermoth

So my friend who married three times for only short periods and had a child in each relationship would be considered more 'stable' to be having children than myself unmarried but with my Partner for 12 years and very very happy?

Dunroamin

Tygermoth wrote: »

So my friend who married three times for only short periods and had a child in each relationship would be considered more 'stable' to be having children than myself unmarried but with my Partner for 12 years and very very happy?

It's not difficult to stay in a relationship when you're "very very happy".

pollypenny

claire16c wrote: »

Just because someone has a lavish wedding doesn't mean commitment isn't there though.
ip.

I didn't say anything of the sort. However, I do know people, usually the woman, where the 'grande spectacle' of the day is the be all and end all, then the marriage didn't last.

For anyone to say that they can't afford to marry is plain daft.

catkins

unicorn1984 wrote: »

Marriage USED to be for life, people of our Grandparents ages never divorced, now its so common, people barely bat an eyelid. So I really don't see how being married makes you better equipped to have children....

You are right - couples rarely used to get divorced even when they literally hated each other which of course was not good at all. Now though we have probably gone too far in the other direction in that some couples give up at the slightest hiccup.

Marriage is not all plain sailing. I think I have a happy marriage and I love OH to bits (most of the time!) but I don't live in a rosy world where every day is perfect. There have been times when it would have been easy to walk away but we didn't.

We went into our marriage believing it should be for life. I don't think it even crossed our minds at the time that it might not be. Now I hear people about to get married saying "Oh if it doesn't work I'll just get divorced" which I don't think is the right attitude to enter marriage with

POPPYOSCAR

duchy wrote: »

This one if your relationship isn't stable enough to make a commitment equal to marriage emotionally and financially then it sure isn't stable enough to have children within.

Totally disagree.

We do not need to be 'married' to be emotionally and financially committed to each other. We have been together for over 25 years and have two children together.

Just recently two sets of friends who were married have got divorced. Where is the emotional and financial commitment in that?

pollypenny

Most relationships will have some ups and downs ( no innuendo intended).

It's possibly easier to walk away if you are not married.

And I fully agree that you can be in a stable relationship without marriage.

I bet neverdespairgirl and her OH have got the legal side tied up, though.

Kayalana99

pollypenny wrote: »

For anyone to say that they can't afford to marry is plain daft.

Why?

I don't want/need a church wedding with all the bells and whistles but I do want a proper celebration with our family and friends. Isn't that one of the reasons to get married to celebrate your love? To make a lasting commitment to someone?

Maybe I could afford to go down to the registery office and sign abit of paper to say I'm married with just a couple people but what would be the point other then the legal side?

mumps

catkins wrote: »

You are right - couples rarely used to get divorced even when they literally hated each other which of course was not good at all. Now though we have probably gone too far in the other direction in that some couples give up at the slightest hiccup.

Marriage is not all plain sailing. I think I have a happy marriage and I love OH to bits (most of the time!) but I don't live in a rosy world where every day is perfect. There have been times when it would have been easy to walk away but we didn't.

We went into our marriage believing it should be for life. I don't think it even crossed our minds at the time that it might not be. Now I hear people about to get married saying "Oh if it doesn't work I'll just get divorced" which I don't think is the right attitude to enter marriage with

Divorce used to be very expensive and only for the rich. One set of my grandparents might as well have been divorced, they lived apart for many years. Same with great grandparents, and I am turned 60 so you can guess that was some years ago. The only regret my mother and her siblings had was that my grandparents didn't separate sooner. Children can be damaged by parents staying together just as easily as by divorce.