Single, Married, Civil Union or Living Together? What works for you and why??

Hello Everyone,

I am curious as to how many of you are willing to share your views on teachers who are in relationships and the commitment level that you have.

Our jobs can be scrutinized, and very difficult for relationships. It's a demanding career, and things can get more challenging when love enters the mix.

Moral and ethical expectations are also touchy topics. Nepotism and relationships at work are frowned upon, but who really understands what we deal with besides a fellow co-worker??

Most of us want to be loved, share a home, start a family and live happily ever after. I see some of us don't care for the drama that weddings and marriages can create. Some of us find single life much easier for our careers. And for others, a non-traditional lifestyle may be more easier, whether or not it is acceptable to our families and even the public eye.

My concerns include financial planning as well. Although marriage is an institution that provides for the welfare of loved ones, cohabitants are left stranded and face challenges when a loved one is sick or dies.

I've been with my man for almost 5 years. I asked him to moved in with me. Very few people on our job know we are in a relationship together. If we married, one of us would have to transfer to another site, (which is company policy). We don't want to do this. This is my second job.

In my teaching job, I realize there would be more benefits if we were married. I don't want to pressure him, because we are a good place in our relationship. Both of us had some bad marriages in the past. Other issues have caused us to think cautiously about marrying again. I also think any mention of moving forward in the relationship should come from him...I'm old school, and want to have a special memory of that moment, and some celebration of our union.

However, as we get older and I think about retirement, I seriously am considering domestic partnership or civil union status. I hate to think that if one of us becomes ill, the hospital won't allow us to make decisions for each other. Also, we don't want family meddling in our affairs, as we see how that track record worked in past relationships, and how dysfunctional our family members can be.

Domestic partnership status will give us health benefits and some financial responsibility for each other, but won't touch our federal taxes or social security. I know for a fact that I could lose lots of money if I married my guy, and that is awful but a reality.

Anybody else looking deeper into the future of their relationships?? If my guy proposed, would the thought of me asking for a domestic partnership be considered unloving, even untrustworthy?

What if 5 years go by, and he doesn't propose??? If I married at age 60, and my ex died, I could still get his widows benefits. Strange but true...

 

I think domestic partnerships are the way to go. It’s much less risky and you won’t run the risk of having to pay alimony or losing half of your assets in the divorce, which is ridiculous to begin with.

More and more millennials are forgoing marriage and childrearing. (Yay!) They see the costs affiliated with raising children, worry about being able to provide for themselves on top of having to pay for student loans, not being able to find work, etc.

Marriage has tax advantages, but the divorce rate in this country is 52%, meaning there is a 52% probability that your first spouse will leave you. And that rate goes up from there. For second marriages, it’s 75%, if I am remembering correctly.

I choose not to get married because it would interfere with my life goals and spending habits, which I’m NOT going to compromise on. I want to live a lavish lifestyle and no one will impede my ability to do so.

 

My main life goal is to be happy, and that means to have the love of my life, my husband of 35 years, with me through it all.
We are beyond thrilled that our elder daughter is getting married next week-end. We expect that our younger daughter will be married in the next year or two.
Raising our daughters was the most fun and rewarding accomplishment of our lives!

I have no expectations as to how others choose to manage their partnership/no partner status. Live and let live. That being said, I do feel those who place a higher value on money than on people, are missing out.

 

I may be alone in this, but I firmly believe that if it works for you, it is your choice. The second part of this belief is that it is a personal choice that should remain, well, personal. Your choice works for you because __________, and I don't need or particularly want to know your reasons. I accept that adults have reasons for their decisions. I prefer the term significant other if one needs to "label or be possessive of" a partner, and even though married a fairly decent time, I prefer to sometimes refer to DH as my SO, since it doesn't imply that I own him - just a quirk of mine.

You don't need to share the personal details of your partnership, IMHO. I live by that for a myriad of reasons. Society likes to assign "significance" or labels that can be offensive. If your relationship(s) remain personal, they are harder to label, and in truth, for some, labels hurt. I guess you would put me in the "don't ask, don't tell" mindset. As I stated above, you are consenting adults, and whatever works for you, for whatever reason, is a very personal choice. Why should any of us have to defend that?

 

,

 

Why don’t more people get prenups? That eliminates basically all the financial pitfalls of getting married. I fully intend to keep working when/if I get married and have kids, and retire with a pension, so I think a prenup is the best way to go. I’ve heard one too many horror stories of someone losing half their pension close to retirement age to someone already financially draining them. No thanks.

 

I'm fairly traditional. I am married.

However, if I had my way, marriage would stop being this huge legal thing with all the fine print and whatnot. Legal protections and financial options could be available for domestic partners who wish to seek them out, but marriage would be but a religious and/or cultural ceremony.

My view is partially because I lean a tad libertarian and also because of my religion, which has a very specific ceremony that can only happen if you're already legally married/want to get legally married at the same time (because of laws). Which is all well and good, but my faith tends to see our ceremony as The Marriage and the legal document as the thing we sign because we do.

It's not that I'm against marriage, but I do think it's odd and probably unnecessary these days that it's still a government thing.

Now, as far as families and kids go, I do think committed long-term relationships are the way to go, but again, does it really need to be marriage?

 

This is absolutely the easiest legal thing to do when you are both healthy and mentally stable. One form that is notarized should take care of this completely. You just need to carry a copy of it with you in case it is needed. So, until you decide what to do, I suggest you get these forms filled out and notarized so your significant other can have legal power of medical attorney and living will over you in case something would happen to you in the mean time.

Some states may require a lawyer to oversee, but I haven't had that the case in the instances I've used it.

Power of Attorney can also be set up in case of disability of the partner.

 

I also feel they are more likely to get divorced.

 

Do you mean living in your parents' home? Living off of the lifestyle you so much reject?

 

I don't know if this is so strict a millenial thing. My husband is a millenial and has been pretty much self-sufficient since he was 16.

 

.

 

I thought the current prediction was now down to 1/3rd among college graduates.

 

I'm engaged but have been dating my man for quite a long time. We live together and are in no rush to go down the aisle, but would surely love to marry. I have quite a lot of student loan debt and I don't want that on him when we marry. I worry most about having enough money to live on in our older yrs. Neither of us has exactly been at our jobs for any considerable length of time.

We live in an apt, but would like own a home for sure. I'd get my mom's house if anything happened to her, but I'd have to refinance it.

If anything happened with our health, I'd like to make the decision on what happens w/ him because he wants nothing to do w/ his dysfunctional family anymore. My mother's still living, so she's still the benefactor of my assets and I am for hers.

 

I got a bit confused because you said you were back home. Typically that indicates living with some kind of family. Sorry for the mistake.

 

.

 

I’m talking collectively, so not just college graduates.

 

Just so you know, if you default on your loans and you have any considerable assets, your loan providers can sue you for the balance in full, which would require you to sell your Mom’s home...

 

To each their own. Those who choose not to - all the power to them. My sister was like that, until recently - ha. While I sometimes rolled my eyes (well, she is my sister... ), I fully respected it.

For me, I'm not worried about the money, about the benefits, about anything. My wife and I love each other and marriage was right for us - it had nothing to do with protecting/ not protecting money, or gaining benefits.

 

Thanks, yes good to know & that sounds right!

 

For one thing, many probably just don't think about it. But also, many likely think (as I do) that it's more meaningful to them to start off their marriage with that full belief - without hesitation - that you'll be together forever. Sort of like some people's belief in God...are they always 100% sure? Or is there that leap of faith?

 

I am married, but I think everyone should do what feels right and correct for them. I too think long term. Just yesterday I asked my husband what he would like to do with his body if he dies while we are living in the US (he is Mexican and we currently reside in Mexico but are looking to return to the states). We are only 37 & 38, but I want to be prepared so that I honor and respect what he wants done (and that starts with me knowing what his wishes are).

In regard to your question, if your man proposes and you prefer a civil union, I think you could explain your reasons to him just as you've laid them out here for us. You have a compelling argument that he may very well understand.

 

Honestly? I wish that the U.S. would make the religious union between two people more ceremonial and make the civil union the law of the land.

 

People aren't legally married if they don't get a state sanctioned marriage license, except for the states that have common law marriage for those who have lived together for a certain number of years. While a religious person can officiate the ceremony rather than a civil servant, marriage is a legal contract within a state. That is why people can be married by a justice of the peace or some other civil servant designated by the state.

 

I see pre-nups valuable when someone comes into a relationship with a lot of money to start with. I can see there are times when that money might want to be off-limits in the case of divorce to avoid marriages to take the money away from a family. Otherwise, marriages are partnerships. Why shouldn't the proceeds of what was grown financially during the marriage be shared if a split happens? This means if the woman earns more and has a larger retirement, shouldn't that be split equally with the husband?

 

Yep. That's how we were married (justice of the peace), much to the dismay of my husband's very Catholic family! I'm actually surprised that they (his family) recognize our marriage (though we've been married for 17 years, so maybe they've just accepted it over time). My husband's parents didn't allow their daughter (my sister-in-law) to live with her husband until they were married in the church (even though they had a civil ceremony first and were legally married).

 

I agree with this to an extent until you have someone who gambles, sucks the other person dry financially, or contributes nothing to the financial resources (of course if there’s a stay and home parent that’s another situation entirely). A lot of divorces happens for financial reasons, and I would hate to have to give up half my retirement (and then potentially live in poverty) for someone who took advantage of me. God forbid this ever happens, and maybe I’m just cynical, but those of us with pensions or growing retirements (and those who were took the necessary steps throughout their life to be very responsible with their money) have a lot to lose.

 

Let’s say two people are married for all of one month, then they decide to get a divorce for whatever reason. And let’s say that the female spouse is very wealthy, whereas the male spouse has a middle class job and meager assets. Should he be entitled to half of everything the female spouse owns just because? What did he do to earn anything? What was his considerable contribution to the family finances in that one month?

 

I'm a bit surprised, with you being a math teacher, to see this -- the rate may be 52%, but that's with every single marriage/divorce considered. While the randomly-selected probability would be 52%, the conditional probability could be much, much less, depending on how you enter the marriage (i.e. there are many factors that would easily reduce that). To put it more simply, there isn't a 52% chance my wife will leave me.

 

Once again, this is the “collective” divorce rate in this country. I even said in a previous post that I am referrring to the collective, which would be the total population. I could care less about the conditional probability because that is less useful. And how would I know your personal situation, which is anecdotal?

I’m surprised, with you being an educator, that you would not have better reading comprehension.

 

Everyone goes into a marriage thinking their spouse won’t leave them. people/situations change all the time throughout life.

 

I understand you're referring to a collective. I never denied that.
However, the collective rate of cancer (using a quick, random google search, since the number itself isn't as meaningful here) is 38.5%. Do I have a 38.5% chance of getting cancer? Or is that number higher or lower because of my family history?

If there's a 1 in 645 chance of getting in a car crash, but I'm someone who drives erratically (I don't - ha ), is my chance 1 in 645?

 

Are statistics primarily used to talk about individual data items or random members of the population of interest? We make inferences about the population from our sample, provided our sample size is sufficiently large, NOT the other way around.

What are you doing?

 

That is patently false. I've known many people who go into marriages expecting they could very easily be the 52% and thinking it most likely won't last.

 

Most courts would never give 1/2 to someone because they were married for a month. That would be the exception to the rule.

 

I agree w/ a2z's post #34. What seems like eons ago now, I know I posted at one point about how a wife should have a separate bank account to sock away money if her marriage ends so she won't be so down and out. I'm not some pessimistic person either, but nothing wrong w/ being prepared. We prepare for everything else: Fire drills, earthquake drills, now shooting-on-campus drills are starting. We hope those things never happen either, but they do.

 

Oh you. You zeroed in on the fact that this person said “everyone,” and then provided a counterexample.

Referencing your second point, this is why marriage is on the decline, because it is too risky. When you have slightly more than a one-in-two chance of being divorced, what’s the point? When you look at all marriages in the United States, more than half fail. Those odds are too high for my liking, so I’ll pass.

 

Why not? What's wrong with looking at the conditions that applicable to me? If I am conditions that statistically make divorce less likely, why should I assume the 52% applies to me?

 

Except every study out there shows that divorce is on the decline.

 

I don’t know who you know, but most people I know (I’d say everyone) goes in thinking it’s for life. Why get married if you have any other mentality? Or at least if you don’t think it won’t last forever, then why not get a prenup?