Young Carers of The Mix, we need you! Tell us about your experiences of our services and give yourself a chance to win £50 of Amazon vouchers.

Having children un-married

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
Just to stop another thread going too off track...
What do people think of having a child without being married?
Xx
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A bit of paper means nothing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's what I think too.
    OH and... if someone is against people having children if they aren't married... would said person also be against someone having a sperm doner etc if they are single? Or adopting when single?
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't think it's marriage that I would be concerned about as commitment generally. Marriage is, ultimately, a contract.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aye. I don't think marriage is necessarily an important component, but a healthy, stable, committed lifelong relationship is.

    Yes, people break up and pregnancies are unplanned and shit happens, but for planned families, I think this is the ideal.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i think its ideal, but then again how often is the ideal way of doing things the only way that works? as long as people find a way that works for them and are committed to the child above all else then thats all that matters. i guess people just have to accept that if it goes wrong, then they'll be automatically be critised for being outside of the 'ideal' despite any other factors.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you think the child would be worse off in life if it's parents wern't married?
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    no i don't think that, how on earth can you say whether a child be happy in life or not just because the parents are married or not married. its much more complicated than that! each parent has to care and the child will turn out however it turns out there is no way of predicting these things.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, that's kinda what I think :)
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think a child is more likely to be happy in life if their parents are in a long term stable committed cohabiting loving relationship.

    A woman who is married is more likely to be in a long term stable committed cohabiting loving relationship than one who is not.

    So a child of a married woman is more likely to be happy. But it's not the fact the woman is married that does it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I like the idea of it because of the symbolism of both parents and kids all having the same surname - it underlines being part of one family, and possibly (although maybe less so nowadays) means that professionals (doctors, teachers etc.) see you as more stable and in a more positive light.

    But practically? I don't think it makes any difference to the child's welfare and happiness - it's all about being part of a stable and loving family, regardless of whether the parents are married or not, or together or separated/divorced. It's underlying social and financial problems that are the big baddies here, not whether the parents hold a particular bit of paper or not.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Changing name isn't required for when you get married. And you can change name without getting married. While I know the two often go together, which of the two do you think is more important?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree with the general concensus. Marriage itself isn't essential.

    To me what matters is that the parents-to-be are planning to be in this for the long haul and committed to sorting out problems that may arise.

    I live in a country where it's the norm to have kids before getting married. The trend is rather to tie the knot after having children together. It's more of thing to do to please those around you (big party! woo!) and perhaps just make it official that you are indeed committed. I work with woman who just got engaged after recently giving birth to her third kid. ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i dont think marriage is a requirement, or even a sign of a healthy relationship necessarily
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »
    Changing name isn't required for when you get married. And you can change name without getting married. While I know the two often go together, which of the two do you think is more important?

    Hmm, interesting point.....I think though I'd be a bit pissed off if someone suggested just changing names in that situation - I would wonder why he was so desperate to avoid saying any sort of wedding vows :P

    Personally, if I got married I would change my name, but not if I didn't...despite what I implied about 'respectability' it embues I think that I'd rather go with the different names than 'pretend' I was married if I wasn't (which is basically what I'd be doing) - it just kinda would leave a bitter taste in the mouth somehow.

    For me the symbolism of being one family that marriage brings with it is more significant than the actual name thing itself - as I said, it's probably becoming less and less of an issue.

    I also felt a touch uncomfortable when my bf said - after saying how ambiguous he feels about marriage - that he thinks it's more important when kids are (or about to be) in the picture. I'm not sure I'd like being married 'just' because of a baby. Again, cohabiting but committed and with separate surnames is preferable to either 'pretending' I was married (a touch hypocritical?) or being married 'just for the sake of the child'. And most of us agree the actual piece of paper makes no difference anyway...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Meryn wrote: »
    Hmm, interesting point.....I think though I'd be a bit pissed off if someone suggested just changing names in that situation - I would wonder why he was so desperate to avoid saying any sort of wedding vows :P

    .

    weve considered it. Mainly to save the cost of getting married
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    weve considered it. Mainly to save the cost of getting married

    Yes, I suppose so. I think the bare fact that you can get married on a shoestring doesn't mean that it's easy to without putting a lot of noses out of joint. Feeding and watering people is pricey :yes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    well i got married on a shoestring before and it was fine, but the marriage didnt last, so really, whats the point of getting married anyway. It doesnt keep people together
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    well i got married on a shoestring before and it was fine, but the marriage didnt last, so really, whats the point of getting married anyway. It doesnt keep people together

    Not to be a valiant defendant of marriage, but it makes a lot of things legally easier. For example - the classic among the unexpected - your spouse has a fatal accident: You will inherit nothing if he hasn't set up a will.

    Of course it doesn't keep people together, and if people stay together just because of the marriage it's just as worse, but it's a nice traditional gesture to show your partner that you want to have a tighter bond with him, even if it's just on paper.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    well yeah, its a gesture. Its cute.
    Its not necessary though and it doesnt necessarily mean that the couple are more commited to each other than a couple who are cohabiting
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I guess I'm pretty traditional in my beliefs (blame it on the hereditary Catholicism) so I personally wouldn't consider having a child without being married. Not that I'm being judgemental, just that I personally think that's the right way to do things.

    I did read some statistical evidence that children of married couples are less likely to turn out to be ne'er-do-wells or something of that ilk but each to their own. I just think that wedlock is the best situation in which to raise a child.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think it's best to raise a child within an extended family that consits of a few generations, just to go against the grain.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I...don't know. I'm not going to have children before we've been married for a couple of years but that's more to do with timing than anything else. The idea is to get married within the next 3-4 years and then have kids 3-4 years after that. I want my children to grow up knowing that mummy and daddy were happy together and that sort of thing. I...didn't really. My mum and dad split up when I was eightish and all I've known since then is the stupid competitiveness of being a child with two families (largely from my dad's pov, I have to say, because really, saying 'is your mother coming?' when I asked him to come to my graduation royally pissed me off). I don't want my kids to experience that, ever.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree that marriage isnt necessary for a happy family but I am planning on waiting until I am married and settled before I have any kids. Like other have said, better stability financially and in terms of equal rights to possessions that sorta thing.

    Now i'm not saying divorced families ruin things and im not stereotyping but from what i've seen, the kids whose parents are divorced are the ones that are pregnant at 14, drinking, drugging etc etc

    Also, kids are a life long commitment, and if your not prepared to make that kind of commitment to another person, how much commitment do you think youll be able to put in to raising a child?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Also, kids are a life long commitment, and if your not prepared to make that kind of commitment to another person, how much commitment do you think youll be able to put in to raising a child?

    but that seems to suggest that divorced/seperated parents dont make good parents. being in a committed relationship isnt indicative to how committed as a parent you would be. they are completely different. i do understand what you're trying to say but there really is no comparison in my mind.

    edit: wanted to add
    Now i'm not saying divorced families ruin things and im not stereotyping but from what i've seen, the kids whose parents are divorced are the ones that are pregnant at 14, drinking, drugging etc etc
    your personal experiences in life may show you that but there are so many other factors to take into account. e.g single parent families most likely to be on a lower income so having to settle for a house in a socially deprived area. i wouldnt point any sort of finger at blame at single parent families because equally this exists in the 2.4 family made up of ma and pa. families struggle in various ways whether it be financially (e.g the single parent) or emotionally (e.g mum and dad together but always argueing). any sort of struggle that occurs is gonna affect the kids. rambly rambly
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lexi99 wrote: »
    I agree that marriage isnt necessary for a happy family but I am planning on waiting until I am married and settled before I have any kids. Like other have said, better stability financially and in terms of equal rights to possessions that sorta thing.

    Now i'm not saying divorced families ruin things and im not stereotyping but from what i've seen, the kids whose parents are divorced are the ones that are pregnant at 14, drinking, drugging etc etc

    Also, kids are a life long commitment, and if your not prepared to make that kind of commitment to another person, how much commitment do you think youll be able to put in to raising a child?

    It's a different thing though, unmarried people having kids and married people having kids and then divorcing. You can't guard against that, surely? As much as everyone who gets married may want to believe it's forever, sometimes marriages don't work. Are you saying that if the parents stay together if the marriage isn't working rather than divorcing, the kids are more likely not to end up drinking, taking drugs and getting pregnant at 14? Or am I totally getting the wrong end of the stick here?

    My personal perspective is that my parents separated when I was 13 and my brothers were 10 and 7. They divorced 5 years later (my dad wouldn't agree to the divorce and I believe the law at the time meant that in that situation they couldn't divorce as one wasn't consenting to it). I wouldn't say any of us have turned out badly. We all struggled with their divorce in our own way, but it was actually the best thing they could have done and I sometimes wish they had done it even earlier as they were clearly unhappy for a long time but I know my mum found it hard to leave because of us and not wanting to cause us upset and pain. It's different in every case I think - of course I never wanted my parents to split up but with hindsight it turned out to be the best thing for all of us.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh no i'm not generalising at all, I know that there are hundreds of other factors to take into account, and its a very simple and easy assumption to make; just blame it on the seperation.

    What is best for the kids imo, is committed parents, together or not, who do things in the interests of the children, and not because they want to get one up on their ex or to spite him/her.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    I think it's best to raise a child within an extended family that consits of a few generations, just to go against the grain.

    :yes: Support from the extended family is a big plus too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lexi99 wrote: »

    Also, kids are a life long commitment, and if your not prepared to make that kind of commitment to another person, how much commitment do you think youll be able to put in to raising a child?

    but very commited people often dont get married too, and people in crap relationships often tie the knot.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,328 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    I think it's best to raise a child within an extended family that consits of a few generations, just to go against the grain.

    I'd also agree with this. I was raised in a big, extended family and am happy that my kids will have the same. Lots of 'uncles' and 'aunts' who are really their great aunts and great great uncles and cousins once removed and all that good stuff.

    Excellent for babysitting, too :thumb:
Sign In or Register to comment.