What age range do you consider ideal for DC's marriage?

[Zinnia]

I said 26-30, but eh...  I got married when I was 26 and dh was 30.  We had only known each other 1.5 years, but if we had met each other earlier, we would have done fine getting married earlier.  We had growing to do, but I've liked the growing we've done together, and I wish that I had met him earlier.

 

For us, I really prefer short-ish courtships and engagements.  I think no premarital tEa is best, and a long engagement makes that difficult.  I mean, not getting married just for tEa, but also not putting off marriage just because of some arbitrary number.

[ktgrok]

Also, there's less chance they will finish.  At least if my own experience is any indication.  Babies happen.   :p

 

same here

SaveSave

[Guest]

If you're going to pay for college, what difference does it make if their married or not? Assuming if they're mature enough to afford marriage (meaning being able to afford housing) I don't know why that would cause a parent to withdraw paying tuition and books. I don't make that if/then statement.

 

We WILL pay for our kids school assuming we are in our current financial situation or better, whether they're married or not. One is already paid. If she chose to get married I wouldn't take that support away.

 

I fall on the side of better early than late (assuming appropriate partner). It comes with less baggage, fewer fertility issues and more opportunity imo. But I do feel the most important part is showing them what makes a good spouse. Not just letting them depend on "fate". I feel like too many parents and adults worry about things like if the 20 something have enough money, security and jobs and not enough on coaching what actually goes into making a suitable marriage partner. There are a lot of poor choices out there making six figures in their 20's at stable companies. Doesn't mean they're a good choice, iykwim.

Well, for me - and some people are really not going to like the way this sounds, but - to me, that is like "playing house." Like, we'll just play house and pick out furniture together, but our FOO still have a large say in what happens because they are still providing financial support. I think to be married and have babies means you are manning your own ship now.

 

This is probably an odd example, but my SIL gave birth to the first grandchild on both sides of her family. She was young, and they were still dependant financially on both sets of parents. They had a dispute about the *name* the first grandchild was going to have, because family members wanted the name to continue to a fourth generation. SIL did not want to do this. She had a name picked out that still honored the generational name but was her own choice. But it got kinda ugly, it sounds like. The child got the generational name, but has been called by an unrelated name his whole life. So, just imagine if the child was named James Worthington Simmons, IV, but was called "Tyler."

 

Anyway. Sorry for the tangent. My point is that I envision married children as independant totally. If my independant child wants to get a doctorate and I have the means to help finance that, I guess I wouldn't say Absolutely Not, but I can't imagine that will be probable after a decade of paying for private high school and then undergrads for three children, so it's a little hard to envision at the moment.

 

But I can say I have zero intention of paying for anything like phones, cars, clothes, electronics, etc. after they are married, except as a Christmas or birthday present

[Ailaena]

I just want a grandchild before I'm dead, please 🙄

 

Most of dd's friends are planning on finishing up grad school before before getting married. One pair has been together since they were 16, and engaged for the last 2.5 years. I'm like, just marry already, why wait??

[regentrude]

Well, for me - and some people are really not going to like the way this sounds, but - to me, that is like "playing house." Like, we'll just play house and pick out furniture together, but our FOO still have a large say in what happens because they are still providing financial support. I

 

So would you feel different if they were still in college, living together, but not married?

Or is it "as long as you want our financial support you may not live with your S/O"?

[Farrar]

I genuinely don't care. Well, I don't want any marriages happening before they're in their 20's, but I got married at 21 so I feel like a hypocrite being against that. I was finished with college, and so was dh, but I don't necessarily think people have to go right to college. My brother is doing a college/apprenticeship program now and he's married with a kid and another on the way. I think financial stability is good... but I also think you shouldn't have to have money to be married. I think there are many orders to life.

 

I think it's more about the maturity, the match, the relationship being healthy. And while I would love to have grandchildren one day many years from now so I can't lie - I would be a little sad not to have either kid have sprogs of their own - I'm really okay with it if they decide to never marry or to have untraditional relationships or whatever. It's really about them, not me.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Farrar

[Guest]

Hubby and I started dating in Jan of the year we got married. I didn't even like him - at all(!) - on that first date. :lol: By May we knew we were right for each other and in August we got married. My dad was positive a kid would be arriving shortly, but no, sorry dad. No kids until 4 years later when we wanted them. We had loads of fun together and will be celebrating our 29th wedding anniversary this coming Aug. Definitely no regrets and tons of hopes my kids can find someone just as right for them - preferably early in their lives.

 

I guess a few of us just march to different drummers. I read what many folks want for their kids - and shudder when I think of it applied to my life. It's reminded me to stay out of my kids' choices once they find "the one."

I like how you left no doubts. 😄

[Zinnia]

 

But I can say I have zero intention of paying for anything like phones, cars, clothes, electronics, etc. after they are married, except as a Christmas or birthday present

 

Some of this hasn't even crossed my mind, honestly.  

 

My parents weren't in a position to pay for stuff like this, well ever (I bought my own car at 17 after a year of them giving me a ride to work).  And dh's parents didn't think it appropriate to pay for extras like this.

 

We'll probably work out a different system for our kids, but we are years away from that, so it's hard to say.

[Guest]

So would you feel different if they were still in college, living together, but not married?

Or is it "as long as you want our financial support you may not live with your S/O"?

I don't actually know. I don't care if my kids cohabitate before marriage, so...I'm just not sure how that would shake out.

 

It seems to me that my "line" has more to do with how independant they are, but I view married as "totally independant." So, maybe if they moved to another country and were living as though married and had their whole lives they were doing independantly, it would seem to me that I should not be paying for any part of their lives...unless I just simply can afford to and choose to. If my youngest and still dependant child were still in the midst of an undergrad, say, I wouldn't be paying for my DD to live in France and get her doctorate, I don't think, unless we were just so flush it did not matter. But if I have to choose, the younger, still-dependant child gets the financial bennies.

[marbel]

Well, for me - and some people are really not going to like the way this sounds, but - to me, that is like "playing house." Like, we'll just play house and pick out furniture together, but our FOO still have a large say in what happens because they are still providing financial support. I think to be married and have babies means you are manning your own ship now.

 

<snip>

 

I get you. "Playing house" is a good way to phrase it.  If my kids want to live like independent adults, then they should live like independent adults.   It would be the same if my kid was living with someone without being married (though my personal preference would be that they not do that).   Though I could see helping out with higher education if that became desirable and I had the means to do so.   

 

But I think my parents stopped paying for anything for me once I moved out of the house at age 21, except that at some point in my late 20s my dad bought me a car for some reason I can't recall.  I had already owned 2 cars on my own, so I'm not sure how that came about.  So that is my expectation for my own kids.  Same with my husband.  I think his parents considered him to be financially independent the day they dropped him off at college.  :-)   

[EmseB]

The bolded is interesting. If you would like to share, why do you think this?

 

 

 

Tons of reasons. A caveat is that I'm going on the assumption from the OP that someone has a good partner that they want to marry.  I'm not talking about people who don't meet until later in life or are unable to have kids.  Just going from my own life and the assumption from the OP.

 

A lot of it is based on my life experience. I enlisted in the military at 18.  I didn't finish my degree until I'd already had three kids.  My husband didn't get his degree until after we got married.  So I don't associate getting married in any way with getting through college. Now, joining the military was not an easy thing or rainbows and butterflies, certainly. And I realize it probably scares the beejeebers out of a lot of parents to think their kids might enlist.  But it really shifted my perspective about college and young adult life.

 

Secondly, I lived by myself in an apartment. I paid my own bills. I spent money on whatever I wanted. I traveled whenever I wanted (within the confines of working, of course). I slept in. I ate fast food when I didn't want to cook. I went out drinking on a lot of weekends because I could. I grew particular in my ways. I lived alone with no one making any demands on my time. I basically cared for no one except myself. And sometimes when I'm waist deep in kids needing me I think, oh to be young and carefree again.  But it didn't prepare me at all for living with a spouse or kids. I didn't spend the time developing a habit of selflessness or thinking of others. The life I lived (and was taught is what is "necessary" to do before getting married) is antithetical to all of my values about what is important, true, and good now. Basically, I did nothing very little of value to better myself during that time. I'm sure a more disciplined person could make more of life as a single, but I was not that person. In other words, I've spent more than a decade trying to undo the habits and lifestyle I ingrained in myself during those formative years. And it made the first years of marriage considerably harder, and even still makes marriage a bit harder to this day.

 

So, kind of linked in with that, I also think it depends a lot on how one views hardships and struggles (financial and otherwise). I honestly wish those struggles with my husband were my formative experiences rather than single life. I'm trying very hard not to romanticize that because I know it would have been a very difficult time for us if we'd married when I was 20.

 

Thirdly, when we finally decided to have kids, we couldn't. It took four years after deciding it was a "good" time to have babies. In hindsight, had I known about how very little control I have over when I'm going to have babies (which is really the opposite of what we teach people, especially women, these days) I would have started sooner. All things being equal, I would have liked to have had babies young(er) and be done with childrearing younger. I don't think growing up having to sacrifice oneself for another (a baby) is a bad thing, even if it happens young.  Again, I'm not trying to romanticize how hard it is. But, I would have rather my character been shaped by that than how I did "grow up" during my 19-22 years.

 

There's probably more, but gotta get to swimming lessons.  For the kids. I know how to swim already.

Edited July 18, 2017 by EmseB

[Guest]

Well, for me - and some people are really not going to like the way this sounds, but - to me, that is like "playing house." Like, we'll just play house and pick out furniture together, but our FOO still have a large say in what happens because they are still providing financial support. I think to be married and have babies means you are manning your own ship now.

 

This is probably an odd example, but my SIL gave birth to the first grandchild on both sides of her family. She was young, and they were still dependant financially on both sets of parents. They had a dispute about the *name* the first grandchild was going to have, because family members wanted the name to continue to a fourth generation. SIL did not want to do this. She had a name picked out that still honored the generational name but was her own choice. But it got kinda ugly, it sounds like. The child got the generational name, but has been called by an unrelated name his whole life. So, just imagine if the child was named James Worthington Simmons, IV, but was called "Tyler."

 

Anyway. Sorry for the tangent. My point is that I envision married children as independant totally. If my independant child wants to get a doctorate and I have the means to help finance that, I guess I wouldn't say Absolutely Not, but I can't imagine that will be probable after a decade of paying for private high school and then undergrads for three children, so it's a little hard to envision at the moment.

 

But I can say I have zero intention of paying for anything like phones, cars, clothes, electronics, etc. after they are married, except as a Christmas or birthday present

My experience is that families who register overbearing opinions, register them regardless of if they are paying for things or not. I think it's often used as an excuse ("they're paying, we're powerless") to not address power struggles. It has less to do with money that personalities and dynamics.

 

But at the end of the day, I agree with Kelly. It's cultural. It's economic. Wealthy parents expect to see wealthy kids through tough times. Kids from wealthy families expect a fall back parachute. Yes, there are strings but ALL families have strings. What it comes down to is what you believe best equips your children to function successfully and independently in the future. It reminds me of how we talk about "scaffolding" here. Wealthy people as a whole tend to provide more "scaffolding" for their kids and that involves paying for college whether those kids are married or not. It's just a different viewpoint. I'm not saying it's wrong at all to not do so- but am pointing out that when we have these conversations on wealth etc. In other threads, some of these differences explain outcomes. Not burdening young people with student loans and start up costs gives those kids a massive r advantage out of the gate.

[AmandaVT]

DH and I got together when I was 24. We moved in together about a year and a half later but didn't get married until I was 30. I lived on my own in an apartment from 21-25 and it was really good for me to live on my own like that.

 

I have friends who married during college and had babies young. 

 

I think ideal age really varies on the couple and the circumstances. I did vote 26-30 because I do think it's good to finish up education and get started on a career before getting married.

[Carrie12345]

One can be in a committed long term relationship without that piece of paper.

And that's a whole other aspect. I don't actually care much about the paper, so my answer applies to any deep, committed, joining of romantic partners anticipating a lifetime together.

[desertstrawberry5]

Really? There's no difference in your mind if they are 18-19 and still in college/doing career training vs. they are 28 and one or both parties owns a home?

 

Fascinating.

for me, no. 

 

It really is so individual. 

 

I don't believe in soul mates, or "the one" or any of that. I just want them to be in love with someone they trust, and preferably that we approve of. But it's their choice of course. 

 

 

I have been with D since I was 22. I wish I had married MUCH earlier, and let that shift my career path and life track. I didn't because that was an unpopular choice. 

 

For my children, I only want them to be above the age of consent -16 here- and some job/career training would be nice. I'm planning for all of my kids to have a vocational certificate of some kind at 16, so that works. 

 

Where we are, it's easy to live on almost nothing. Being married young is not really a hindrance. 

 

OTOH there's no hurry either. At Ben's age, I was active husband shopping  :leaving:  he has made it very clear that he has no interest in that nonsense. :lol:  He's got plans that don't include a partner. and I'm cool with that. Different from me, but still totally ok. 

 

I'm fine with cohabitating, serial monogamy, and life-long bachelorhood if that's what each child wants. I hope that my children are spared nasty break ups, especially if there are children involved. I'm not much for weddings, and don't care if they never have one. I never want my children to ever have a bad, cruel, or abusive partner. 

 

I guess I'm just super flexible on this issue. 

[Guest]

Tons of reasons. A caveat is that I'm going on the assumption from the OP that someone has a good partner that they want to marry. I'm not talking about people who don't meet until later in life or are unable to have kids. Just going from my own life and the assumption from the OP.

 

A lot of it is based on my life experience. I enlisted in the military at 18. I didn't finish my degree until I'd already had three kids. My husband didn't get his degree until after we got married. So I don't associate getting married in any way with getting through college. Now, joining the military was not an easy thing or rainbows and butterflies, certainly. And I realize it probably scares the beejeebers out of a lot of parents to think their kids might enlist. But it really shifted my perspective about college and young adult life.

 

Secondly, I lived by myself in an apartment. I paid my own bills. I spent money on whatever I wanted. I traveled whenever I wanted (within the confines of working, of course). I slept in. I ate fast food when I didn't want to cook. I went out drinking on a lot of weekends because I could. I grew particular in my ways. I lived alone with no one making any demands on my time. I basically cared for no one except myself. And sometimes when I'm waist deep in kids needing me I think, oh to be young and carefree again. But it didn't prepare me at all for living with a spouse or kids. I didn't spend the time developing a habit of selflessness or thinking of others. The life I lived (and was taught is what is "necessary" to do before getting married) is antithetical to all of my values about what is important, true, and good now. Basically, I did nothing very little of value to better myself during that time. I'm sure a more disciplined person could make more of life as a single, but I was not that person. In other words, I've spent more than a decade trying to undo the habits and lifestyle I ingrained in myself during those formative years. And it made the first years of marriage considerably harder, and even still makes marriage a bit harder to this day.

 

So, kind of linked in with that, I also think it depends a lot on how one views hardships and struggles (financial and otherwise). I honestly wish those struggles with my husband were my formative experiences rather than single life. I'm trying very hard not to romanticize that because I know it would have been a very difficult time for us if we'd married when I was 20.

 

Thirdly, when we finally decided to have kids, we couldn't. It took four years after deciding it was a "good" time to have babies. In hindsight, had I known about how very little control I have over when I'm going to have babies (which is really the opposite of what we teach people, especially women, these days) I would have started sooner. All things being equal, I would have liked to have had babies young(er) and be done with childrearing younger. I don't think growing up having to sacrifice oneself for another (a baby) is a bad thing, even if it happens young. Again, I'm not trying to romanticize how hard it is. But, I would have rather my character been shaped by that than how I did "grow up" during my 19-22 years.

 

There's probably more, but gotta get to swimming lessons. For the kids. I know how to swim already.

Well, that's interesting. Sometimes, people who didn't get to do those "live my own life" things regret that they never had that and wish they had done that before marriage. But I hear you saying you wish you never would have had that "live my own life" part because then you had to sort of unlearn it.

 

About having babies, though: one never knows how it will play out, no matter what age child bearing begins. I had a miscarriage and a full-term stillbirth in my early 30s. I also had "underwhelming fertility," if that's a thing. So, though we started having babies at a likely age (I was 26), it still never went as I envisioned. Twice I went a year without getting pregnant despite trying. Then a stillbirth that wrecked my head. Then a miscarriage that wrecked my head. Then a high risk pregnancy.

 

I do agree with you that we (society) makes it seem as though eventually you can just decide to have a baby and you get to plan to have one next May because that's a pretty month.

[Seasider]

Ideally, after they have finished at least their undergraduate education. Mid twenties.

Or trade school - enough training to be able to live on their own should anything happen to a spouse. It kind of ties in to what Rosie said above, for a woman especially not to feel trapped by a lack of financial options.

 

Basically I want to see them be functional adults ready to handle adult responsibilities for themselves before making a promise to be that for someone else, too. Seems these days I am seeing a push in some circles for young (17-20yo) marriage. I feel the underlying assumption is that the parents of these brides and grooms are supposed to keep supporting them, even providing room in the family home, as they start their young married lives. I always think back and know that my early years of marriage would have been awful with that sort of parental proximity.

 

ETA I voted 23-25 because I would hope my kids are all educated and have found good starter jobs by then.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Seasider

[Seasider]

Well, for me - and some people are really not going to like the way this sounds, but - to me, that is like "playing house." Like, we'll just play house and pick out furniture together, but our FOO still have a large say in what happens because they are still providing financial support. I think to be married and have babies means you are manning your own ship now.

 

This is probably an odd example, but my SIL gave birth to the first grandchild on both sides of her family. She was young, and they were still dependant financially on both sets of parents. They had a dispute about the *name* the first grandchild was going to have, because family members wanted the name to continue to a fourth generation. SIL did not want to do this. She had a name picked out that still honored the generational name but was her own choice. But it got kinda ugly, it sounds like. The child got the generational name, but has been called by an unrelated name his whole life. So, just imagine if the child was named James Worthington Simmons, IV, but was called "Tyler."

 

Anyway. Sorry for the tangent. My point is that I envision married children as independant totally. If my independant child wants to get a doctorate and I have the means to help finance that, I guess I wouldn't say Absolutely Not, but I can't imagine that will be probable after a decade of paying for private high school and then undergrads for three children, so it's a little hard to envision at the moment.

 

But I can say I have zero intention of paying for anything like phones, cars, clothes, electronics, etc. after they are married, except as a Christmas or birthday present

So is this what you're seeing? Because that's what I'm seeing too, in these young marriages - parents still paying for everything. "Playing house" does seem an apt description. I feel it actually robs a young adult of a sense of accomplishment.

[Dmmetler]

I married a week after undergrad graduation. We'd known each other 6 years. Most of that has been a long-distance friendship that grew into something more. We've been married 23 years, so I think the experiment worked out.

[Guest]

All of my friends have gotten married between 17 and 21 (and they are all still married). So I voted under 18 to 25.

[Rachel]

Really? There's no difference in your mind if they are 18-19 and still in college/doing career training vs. they are 28 and one or both parties owns a home?

 

Fascinating.

That's not a consideration for me either. I've known plenty of people who married young and it worked out well, a few who married young and it didn't. I also know quite a few people who waited and floundered and some who waited and it was for the best.

 

I married at 23. If I waited for my husband to mature we may have never gotten married. Being broke and living in a crumby duplex while I was ready to start a family urged him to get his engineering degree and now he is doing well in his career.

 

I think finding someone who is compatible and has similar values is more important than the age.

[Scarlett]

Tons of reasons. A caveat is that I'm going on the assumption from the OP that someone has a good partner that they want to marry. I'm not talking about people who don't meet until later in life or are unable to have kids. Just going from my own life and the assumption from the OP.

 

A lot of it is based on my life experience. I enlisted in the military at 18. I didn't finish my degree until I'd already had three kids. My husband didn't get his degree until after we got married. So I don't associate getting married in any way with getting through college. Now, joining the military was not an easy thing or rainbows and butterflies, certainly. And I realize it probably scares the beejeebers out of a lot of parents to think their kids might enlist. But it really shifted my perspective about college and young adult life.

 

Secondly, I lived by myself in an apartment. I paid my own bills. I spent money on whatever I wanted. I traveled whenever I wanted (within the confines of working, of course). I slept in. I ate fast food when I didn't want to cook. I went out drinking on a lot of weekends because I could. I grew particular in my ways. I lived alone with no one making any demands on my time. I basically cared for no one except myself. And sometimes when I'm waist deep in kids needing me I think, oh to be young and carefree again. But it didn't prepare me at all for living with a spouse or kids. I didn't spend the time developing a habit of selflessness or thinking of others. The life I lived (and was taught is what is "necessary" to do before getting married) is antithetical to all of my values about what is important, true, and good now. Basically, I did nothing very little of value to better myself during that time. I'm sure a more disciplined person could make more of life as a single, but I was not that person. In other words, I've spent more than a decade trying to undo the habits and lifestyle I ingrained in myself during those formative years. And it made the first years of marriage considerably harder, and even still makes marriage a bit harder to this day.

 

So, kind of linked in with that, I also think it depends a lot on how one views hardships and struggles (financial and otherwise). I honestly wish those struggles with my husband were my formative experiences rather than single life. I'm trying very hard not to romanticize that because I know it would have been a very difficult time for us if we'd married when I was 20.

 

Thirdly, when we finally decided to have kids, we couldn't. It took four years after deciding it was a "good" time to have babies. In hindsight, had I known about how very little control I have over when I'm going to have babies (which is really the opposite of what we teach people, especially women, these days) I would have started sooner. All things being equal, I would have liked to have had babies young(er) and be done with childrearing younger. I don't think growing up having to sacrifice oneself for another (a baby) is a bad thing, even if it happens young. Again, I'm not trying to romanticize how hard it is. But, I would have rather my character been shaped by that than how I did "grow up" during my 19-22 years.

 

There's probably more, but gotta get to swimming lessons. For the kids. I know how to swim already.

I love this post and so much.

[Mbelle]

I married in my mid 20's.  I wish we had started a family earlier.  I wouldn't have minded even marrying in my early 20's, but I did not find the right guy!  I do talk to my kids about relationships and family dynamics.  I was taught almost nothing about this and neither was dh.  I almost think that is insane, because family life can be a source of great joy...or the opposite.  It's great if you can have some tools up front to navigate through difficulties and differences. 

If my kids marry young we will still pay for college.  I believe more in interdependence than independence.  I also do not believe in meddling in my kids decisions.  Some families/grandparents have a very hard time keeping their noses out of their childrens every decision and want to be in control and I don't think age of marriage is going to change that one bit, it's about dealing with difficult people.  So what if our kids make a mistake? Most mistakes are not that big of a deal really and are great for learning.  Or,  what if they just do things a little differently.  It's their life. 

I do believe intergenerational living is coming back.  If families have good boundries, respect and everyone contributes their fair share, this would be fabulous.  This obviously won't work for every family, but for us it would be fine.  It actually makes for a good family economy.  I think this type of living arrangement goes beyond deciding to pay for college tuition based upon marriage or living together.  My family is my best community and we want to invest in that both financially and other supportive ways. However, there's really no right or wrong way with a lot of these things and like others have said it's largely based on family culture.  

 

[Twolittleboys]

I voted 26 to 30 which seems pretty reasonable to me. Generally, people don't finish college here until they are in their later twenties (at least they didn't when I was that age, maybe it has changed?). I don't think anyone in my close family has gotten married much earlier than that. I am still not married (that I would classify as too late) but I am not awfully concerned with the age. At least for girls, by 30 would probably be best due to fertility issues and I actually have thought it might not be the worst careerwise to have children while still at school.

 

Still, I have no problem with people living together without being married but do consider marriage a very serious commitment. So I would expect my kids to be pretty sure before they get married (though I know there is no guarantee even if people have known each other for a long time).

[MEmama]

So is this what you're seeing? Because that's what I'm seeing too, in these young marriages - parents still paying for everything. "Playing house" does seem an apt description. I feel it actually robs a young adult of a sense of accomplishment.

Our parents didn't pay for anything once we got married--actually, once we left home. Mine never once considered how broke or desperate I was after I moved across country on my own. Never asked, didn't care.

 

You BET I'll do anything in my power to make sure DS is comfortable. That's not spoiling him or babying him or any other excuse. Of COURSE I want to give him every advantage in life--what parent doesn't? My job doesn't end at 18 or with that college diploma or with a marriage certificate or anything else. If he needs help and I can help...that's my priority. Always.

[Farrar]

The financial support thing is funny. I'm not going to help them if they're living in an unhealthy fashion and frittering away funds or refusing to work - though by work, I mean work for money or in schooling. But I'll financially support them in various ways if we're able to as they get started in life - whether they marry or not. Our parents helped us out in various ways at points - by doing things like "selling" us their cars once they were ready to upgrade or by giving generous "Christmas gifts" that were clearly just checks to help us pay the bills when we were young and struggling. I respect that some people aren't willing to do those things for adult children ever, but it's just a separate kettle of fish from marriage in my mind.

 

I also have zero issue with "co-habitation", which is even just a funny term. If my kids want to co-habitate once they're legal adults, go forth and have at it. For the rest of your life if you like. I appreciate the institution of marriage, but they don't have to if they choose otherwise.

[Carrie12345]

 

Anyway. Sorry for the tangent. My point is that I envision married children as independant totally. If my independant child wants to get a doctorate and I have the means to help finance that, I guess I wouldn't say Absolutely Not, but I can't imagine that will be probable after a decade of paying for private high school and then undergrads for three children, so it's a little hard to envision at the moment.

 

But I can say I have zero intention of paying for anything like phones, cars, clothes, electronics, etc. after they are married, except as a Christmas or birthday present

 

 

If one of my kids is 23 and single and another is 22 and married, I can't imagine giving one favor over the other. They're both my beloved children, and I'm the parent who wants to give X, Y, or Z assistance. How seriously they are or aren't involved with another person doesn't change that.

[ErinE]

The following thoughts are conditional. I assume my child wants to be married, has discussed the future with their partner, the relationship isn't abusive, my children want children, and there's no substance abuse problems. Otherwise, the sentences get too muddled with all my qualifiers.

 

Mid-twenties, after completing undergraduate or technical degrees. I do talk with my kids about the fertility decline in women and general tiredness of both sexes as they age. It should be a consideration if my children want children of their own. Both genders get the same talk.

 

While I don't have moral objections to living together without being married, I think they should be engaged before living with another person and have a plan to marry within the year. I've seen far too many women expecting marriage (it's overwhelmingly women) move in with a man only to discover many years later that the man had no real intention of making the relationship permanent. For women who wanted marriage and children, it's heartbreaking.

[Guest]

My experience is that families who register overbearing opinions, register them regardless of if they are paying for things or not. I think it's often used as an excuse ("they're paying, we're powerless") to not address power struggles. It has less to do with money that personalities and dynamics.

 

But at the end of the day, I agree with Kelly. It's cultural. It's economic. Wealthy parents expect to see wealthy kids through tough times. Kids from wealthy families expect a fall back parachute. Yes, there are strings but ALL families have strings. What it comes down to is what you believe best equips your children to function successfully and independently in the future. It reminds me of how we talk about "scaffolding" here. Wealthy people as a whole tend to provide more "scaffolding" for their kids and that involves paying for college whether those kids are married or not. It's just a different viewpoint. I'm not saying it's wrong at all to not do so- but am pointing out that when we have these conversations on wealth etc. In other threads, some of these differences explain outcomes. Not burdening young people with student loans and start up costs gives those kids a massive r advantage out of the gate.

To the bolded: true, but doesn't that also speak to the immaturity of the young couple, if they aren't grown enough into themselves to recognize that naming their child is their own choice to make?

 

I agree that better-off families provide more scaffolding and we are providing way more scaffolding to our kids than was provided to us (me, especially).

[Guest]

To the bolded: true, but doesn't that also speak to the immaturity of the young couple, if they aren't grown enough into themselves to recognize that naming their child is their own choice to make?

 

I agree that better-off families provide more scaffolding and we are providing way more scaffolding to our kids than was provided to us (me, especially).

 

I'm not sure if it's a maturity issue. I think it's more of a boundary and confidence issue, among other things. But I may be letting my own experience color that some. It seems from what I read here though, many of us have issues drawing lines with our parents on a range of topics. It doesn't seem maturity based in those cases. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by texasmom33

[Guest]

If one of my kids is 23 and single and another is 22 and married, I can't imagine giving one favor over the other. They're both my beloved children, and I'm the parent who wants to give X, Y, or Z assistance. How seriously they are or aren't involved with another person doesn't change that.

Right, but I assume I will pay for my third child's undergrad education, just as I'm paying for my first child's undergrad, but if my firstborn wants to earn a doctorate - which is definitely possible - I beleive my first obligation is to provide as equally as possible for my younger child's undergrad first. So, obviously, I wouldn't want to be paying for my 30-year-old's advanced degree and say, "aww, sorry youngest child. You'll have to get a job at Walmart and hope for managerial promotions because the money is all gone now."

[J-rap]

I don't think there's a magic age, but not under 21.

 

My ds and I were married at 23, a month after I graduated from college.  My dh then proceeded to go to graduate school twice, for a total of 5 years.  We lived poorly in cheap apartments in interesting areas and LOVED it!  I'm so glad we married when we did.  We've both changed a lot since then in some ways, but we've changed together.  I'm glad we didn't wait until dh was done with school, or had money, or whatever.  The timing was perfect for us.

 

Our dd was married mid-way through college.  We continued to pay for her college as planned, but nothing else.  Her dh supported them both through those years.  They lived in a tiny one-room apartment in Central America (where her school was) and were very happy eating black beans and rice every day.  Now they are done with college, have moved to the U.S., both are working and are on their way to being financially stable.  They're very, very happy.

 

But I know that for some people this would not work.  It depends on so many things, including attitude, disposition, expectations, goals, etc. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by J-rap

[marbel]

I'm not sure if it's a maturity issue. I think it's more of a boundary and confidence issue, among other things. But I may be letting my own experience color that some. It seems from what I read here though, many of us have issues drawing lines with our parents on a range of topics. It doesn't seem maturity based in those cases. 

 

Not really arguing but... aren't boundary and confidence issues basically maturity issues?   I guess I just see the ability to draw appropriate boundaries, and the self-confidence to say to parents "thanks but we are doing it this way" as part of maturing into adulthood.  

 

But neither set of parents gave us (husband and me) any particular boundary issues, nor were they meddlesome, so I haven't experienced some of the problems others have. 

[Crimson Wife]

 For us, I really prefer short-ish courtships and engagements.  I think no premarital tEa is best, and a long engagement makes that difficult.  I mean, not getting married just for tEa, but also not putting off marriage just because of some arbitrary number.

 

Yes, this. Though I do hope my children finish college before marrying. Oldest DD is on the community college-and-transfer path and by the end of the month will have 22 credits towards an associate's and the general ed requirements for a bachelor's. She could well be done with her bachelor's by her 20th birthday.

 

Adults are free to make their own life decisions but I would prefer it if my kids followed in DH's and my footsteps of only ever being with each other & not living together prior to marriage. Yes, we did "jump the gun" wrt intimacy but we had already decided to marry (even though we were only "pinned" rather than formally engaged).

 

[Lady Florida.]

I voted that age isn't a primary consideration but also that 26-30 is ideal. While age really isn't my first consideration, that age range allows for them to (probably) be out of college and financially stable, but still young enough for children if they choose to have children.

 

 

 

 

I am not opposed to him living with someone long term either in lieu of marriage or before marriage. My views on marriage are no longer traditional. 

 

I'm not either. In fact, for a while we thought dss and ddil weren't going to get married. They were living together and we treated her like a legal daughter-in-law. I'm not sure what made them eventually decide to marry, but it wasn't pressure from us. When they told us we congratulated them but didn't say anything along the lines of "it's about time".

Edited July 18, 2017 by Lady Florida.

[MEmama]

I'm not sure if it's a maturity issue. I think it's more of a boundary and confidence issue, among other things. But I may be letting my own experience color that some. It seems from what I read here though, many of us have issues drawing lines with our parents on a range of topics. It doesn't seem maturity based in those cases.

I agree.

 

I've been giving this type of thing a lot of play in my head lately as I'm navigating the teen years and thinking on our changing roles as parents. The longer I'm at this gig the more clearly I'm able to see what was lacking in my own upbringing. Why I've never confronted those issues with my parents (and won't ever, at this point) has nothing to do with my maturity level thankyouverymuch; it's far more complex and murky. I suspect that's true for nearly everyone in some relationship or another.

[Guest]

So is this what you're seeing? Because that's what I'm seeing too, in these young marriages - parents still paying for everything. "Playing house" does seem an apt description. I feel it actually robs a young adult of a sense of accomplishment.

I have seen that in some cases. In other cases, I see different things that either I don't think is ideal or I just don't know what the point is. So, for example, I have seen young women get so focused on getting married and having babies it's like they have no personal goal for themselves. They live to follow their guy all over the country while he's the one accomplishing meaninful things. I don't want that for my daughter OR MY SONS. I also know some people engaged who have no active plan to get married. They just want to be engaged for a few years. That - well, I just don't understand what the point is if it's still that nebulous. Unless they think it gives them mental license to have s3x. Like, a rationalization: "Well, no we're not married yet, but we WILL get married, so..."

[KungFuPanda]

I was working by 16, self-supporting by 18, and married by 21. DH is older. We went to college together as married, non-traditional students. Dd is 20, has had a steady bf for a few years, but is nowhere near ready to be self-supporting. In her circle of friends, the marriages at this age are the strange ones. Most of the college kids I know are not considering combining the college years with early marriage.

 

The current economy makes it hard for young people to strike out on their own. The options we had a generation ago are just not on the table in some areas. Personally, I wouldn't mind a multigenerational household or putting an efficiency apartment over a garage. I'd like to be close and helpful when/if she decides to have children. DH and I did it all on our own. That can be hard at times. DDs bf's parents are a 5 minute walk from my house. It could be a decade or more before the kids could afford this neighborhood (and it's not fancy). I'd rather help and actually SEE them than insist they do it "on their own." As long as they have a financial plan and are working towards those goals, I'm comfortable assisting when we can afford it.

 

I'd like to see kids at least finish their undergrad before marriage, but owning a house in the suburbs with a SAH mom seems an unrealistic goal for young women in their prime child-bearing years.

[Guest]

Not really arguing but... aren't boundary and confidence issues basically maturity issues?   I guess I just see the ability to draw appropriate boundaries, and the self-confidence to say to parents "thanks but we are doing it this way" as part of maturing into adulthood.  

 

But neither set of parents gave us (husband and me) any particular boundary issues, nor were they meddlesome, so I haven't experienced some of the problems others have. 

 

I guess it depends on how one defines maturity? But there are a ton of people who have very successful lives, live and operate independently, and still have complicated relationships with their parents, extended family, etc. Some cultures especially see more of this than others. I wouldn't label them as immature. I think being self supporting/independent financially and dealing with family and/or relational issues are two separate things and much more complex than a simple label or mature versus immature. Relationships are more complex than that. Duty, religion, culture pressures......all of it contribute to interpersonal relationships on that sort of thing. I don't think it's black and white. 

 

I mean, is a person who's decision is to cut everyone off and not speak to their family necessarily over some perceived slight,  more mature than a person who tries to work through conflict? Sometimes, yes, but sometimes no. There's more nuance than that. That's all I was really getting at. 

[creekland]

Well, that's interesting. Sometimes, people who didn't get to do those "live my own life" things regret that they never had that and wish they had done that before marriage. But I hear you saying you wish you never would have had that "live my own life" part because then you had to sort of unlearn it.

 

I think I had that stage from age 11 through college.  My parents got divorced when I was 11 and I lived with my dad up to my senior year when I switched and lived with mom - then there was my 10th grade year living with my grandma in FL.  I rode (horses) a lot and had friends, but it still felt quite a bit like a "single" life TBH - doing what "I" wanted to do all the time (including food, cleaning - or lack thereof, where I went to college, etc).  After age 11 there was no "close" sibling in my life nor parents really controlling my life.  Like the pp, I learned to be pretty darn selfish TBH.

 

When hubby came along and we spent enough time together to find out how much we really enjoyed doing things together, that opened up such a different world for me.  We still enjoy doing things together 29 years later.  We're rarely apart (aside from work).  It's a life I love.  I want the same for my kids - a close couple relationship.  (We're still human and occasionally have fights, but eh, we get over them.  It's still a life I love.)

 

You BET I'll do anything in my power to make sure DS is comfortable. That's not spoiling him or babying him or any other excuse. Of COURSE I want to give him every advantage in life--what parent doesn't? My job doesn't end at 18 or with that college diploma or with a marriage certificate or anything else. If he needs help and I can help...that's my priority. Always.

 

Ditto.  As a pp said, part of it is building - and wanting to keep - family wealth I suppose, though I look at it more as filling in as we can knowing they will do the same when/if we have needs.

 

The financial support thing is funny. I'm not going to help them if they're living in an unhealthy fashion and frittering away funds or refusing to work - though by work, I mean work for money or in schooling. But I'll financially support them in various ways if we're able to as they get started in life - whether they marry or not. Our parents helped us out in various ways at points - by doing things like "selling" us their cars once they were ready to upgrade or by giving generous "Christmas gifts" that were clearly just checks to help us pay the bills when we were young and struggling. I respect that some people aren't willing to do those things for adult children ever, but it's just a separate kettle of fish from marriage in my mind.

 

Same here.  My mom helped us when we had need - even in the economic downturn when jobs (for self-employed hubby) were more scarce.  Hubby's folks helped us with our first house downpayment (after we'd been renting a couple of years).  I can't fathom not doing the same for my kids.  I don't see where they are any better off having to "make it" on their own.  We already try to do the Christmas gift bit, etc.  I would love it if one of our boys wanted to keep the family farm (or two since another house could be built here).  They certainly wouldn't be paying market value if they did.

 

I guess in our generational lines, families just help each other - forever.  Siblings help each other (as long as they are working or aren't for legit reasons, etc).  In old age, kids help their parents (if needed - not always financial help).  I want that to continue.

[OneStepAtATime]

1. When they are mature enough to be financially responsible and capable of being a good partner.

2.  When they meet a person they are well matched to and that other person is also financially and capable of being a good partner.

 

 

The age, to me, is not nearly as important as what they are capable of.  In my early 20s I would have made a lousy wife.  My husband did marry young and it was a disaster.  I was a much better wife in my 30s than I would ever have been in my 20s.  And I think I would have resented my partner eventually.  On the flip side of that coin, I know others that did just fine marrying very young.  They were well matched and both were in a good place for sharing their lives with someone else.

[Crimson Wife]

 I married at 23. If I waited for my husband to mature we may have never gotten married. Being broke and living in a crumby duplex while I was ready to start a family urged him to get his engineering degree and now he is doing well in his career.

 

I think finding someone who is compatible and has similar values is more important than the age.

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

 

One of the catalysts for my DH starting to take concrete action to apply to graduate school was a pregnancy scare I had. Even before he finished his bachelor's he had this vague notion that he would like to get a graduate degree after he finished his Army service obligation but the pregnancy scare kicked his backside into gear to make it happen. He really wanted a baby (I've always been the one wanting to wait) and knew that getting his MBA would put us in a financial position where I'd feel comfortable about having one.

[Arcadia]

There's no difference in your mind if they are 18-19 and still in college/doing career training vs. they are 28 and one or both parties owns a home?

I have friends who marry while in college.

One pair is from well to do families, childhood sweethearts, and marriage means they can stay in the college dorm together. They have new cars paid by parents for college use and housing isn't a concern since both sets of parents would happily let them stay.

Another pair was from middle income families. My friend's parents are the controlling to the point of abusive kind so marrying in college gave her husband some legal power to protect her. He was on scholarship for college and his parents are supportive of their marriage, and they stayed with his parents after marriage.

 

I don't know any who marry in college who have a firstborn before 25 years old. All did not have student debt and have parents to stay with while saving for a house. When to have a baby was tied to availability of grandparents to babysit for free. I've always stayed in HCOL cities.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Arcadia

[MinivanMom]

Or trade school - enough training to be able to live on their own should anything happen to a spouse. It kind of ties in to what Rosie said above, for a woman especially not to feel trapped by a lack of financial options.

 

Basically I want to see them be functional adults ready to handle adult responsibilities for themselves before making a promise to be that for someone else, too. Seems these days I am seeing a push in some circles for young (17-20yo) marriage. I feel the underlying assumption is that the parents of these brides and grooms are supposed to keep supporting them, even providing room in the family home, as they start their young married lives. I always think back and know that my early years of marriage would have been awful with that sort of parental proximity.

 

ETA I voted 23-25 because I would hope my kids are all educated and have found good starter jobs by then.

 

This is my view. The age might be variable depending on the individuals and their college goals (or lack thereof), but I want my kids to be functional, independent adults by the time they marry.

[Scarlett]

It's so surprising to me to see how many of my DD's friends are getting engaged or married already. (DD is 20.) Mt daughter has remained in a relationship with the same young man since they were early teens. What annoys me (and her) is that "everybody" seems to think that, since they appear to be a good match, they should be getting engaged any day now. DD is in no hurry to get engaged or married, even though she does assume it will be this guy whenever it does happen. She has plans to finish her degree and do some other things before getting engaged. (Which suits me fine, because I think the same way.)

 

So, assuming your child meets a suitable mate, when would you ideally want them to get married? And yes, I realize what we hope for and what they do could be different things; answer for what you would like, even if that is not what happened/is happening.

 

This poll is anonymous and multiple choice is allowed if it varies with your children. If your child cannot legally *marry*, answer in terms of permanent committment to a partner.

 

Eta: sorry fixed ages

Interesting how you define playing house. Your 20 DD is in a long term relationship and you have mentioned before you assume they sleep together and stay at each other's places while at college. And you are footing her bills completely. So I am not clear why getting married and you ( collective You) only paying for the college would be seen as playing house more than what she is doing now.

[Selkie]

Hubby and I started dating in Jan of the year we got married.  I didn't even like him - at all(!) - on that first date.   :lol:   By May we knew we were right for each other and in August we got married.  My dad was positive a kid would be arriving shortly, but no, sorry dad.  No kids until 4 years later when we wanted them.  We had loads of fun together and will be celebrating our 29th wedding anniversary this coming Aug.  Definitely no regrets and tons of hopes my kids can find someone just as right for them - preferably early in their lives.

 

I guess a few of us just march to different drummers.  I read what many folks want for their kids - and shudder when I think of it applied to my life.  It's reminded me to stay out of my kids' choices once they find "the one."

 

Ha, same thing happened to us. I was 21 and dh was 23 when we got married. Everyone in dh's family starts having babies right after getting married and they expected us to do the same. My MIL was flabbergasted when I said we were going to wait. She said, "You mean you're going to wait until next year to have one?" Nope, not next year...

 

We ended up waiting eight years to have our first, and by then dh's family were all convinced that we must have fertility problems and would never have kids.  :rolleyes:

[Clemsondana]

My husband and I have talked about it a lot - our parents both pushed the idea that you should wait until you were through with school to get married, and it was implied or stated directly that they would help until you were married. We both did our undergrads with significant amounts of scholarship money (my parents paid some costs, he had a free education) and then went to grad school, where we lived on our stipends (ie minimal parental help - my parents paid my car insurance). We met when I was a freshman and were a couple by the end of the year. By my senior year we knew that we would marry eventually. There was a LOT of pressure to wait until we were through with grad school - either babies would wreck our school, or school stress would wreck our marriage (with our religious beliefs, family assumed, correctly, that babies were unlikely pre-marriage).

 

About a year into grad school (we lived 1.5 hours apart at different schools) I declared that this was ridiculous - we would have been dating for 10 years before we married. We would have been making plans around each other for more than 6. Once you reach the point where you're making decisions around compatible life goals, you've got a commitment. If you're religious and the 'marriage' aspect is important, why wait?

 

I have said that I won't put the stipulation that I'll help until marriage on our kids - whatever $ I have for their education is theirs for their education. I would be less interested in funding 'lifestyle', though. I was able to do marching band in college because summer jobs were enough to fund my (minimal) spending needs. I would expect a married student to work to pay for a larger percentage or all of living costs (my parents paid for my inexpensive dorm).

 

So, we married at 24 and 25. We continued to live 1.5 hrs apart and see each other on weekends for the first 3 years of our marriage. We have always been the responsible sort, sacrificing time together for education, eating beans to scrape together savings while living on a stipend. The pastor who did our wedding did balk at first when he learned that we wouldn't be living together, but in our particular situation, it was actually good preparation for the marriage. Once we finished school, my husband's job has often required frequent travel.

 

Knowing both of our personalities, I think that we would have struggled more had we gotten married later. We have both changed, but I'm not sure I'd even say that most of the change happened during the younger dating years. For us, some of the changes were in ways that made us more compatible and better adapted to our particular life choices. Each of us wanting both ourselves and the other to do what they wanted caused us to be both more independent (such as me managing things while he was away) and more open minded/flexible (when I said that I wanted out of research and wanted to teach, and then later when I decided to homeschool, it was a surprise), and while it hasn't always been easy, at least we got in the habit of expecting change and 'finding a way to make it work' while we were young.

[Crimson Wife]

I have seen that in some cases. In other cases, I see different things that either I don't think is ideal or I just don't know what the point is. So, for example, I have seen young women get so focused on getting married and having babies it's like they have no personal goal for themselves. They live to follow their guy all over the country while he's the one accomplishing meaninful things. I don't want that for my daughter OR MY SONS. I also know some people engaged who have no active plan to get married. They just want to be engaged for a few years. That - well, I just don't understand what the point is if it's still that nebulous. Unless they think it gives them mental license to have s3x. Like, a rationalization: "Well, no we're not married yet, but we WILL get married, so..."

 

My parents held this type of attitude and it has harmed our relationship. There is NOTHING wrong with a woman (or man) prioritizing family over fancy job titles and having personal goals that are things like "help those in need" rather than "be named to the '40 under 40' list" :rolleyes:

 

[happypamama]

I voted 18-22 but also that age is not a huge consideration for me. I really don't have a set age in mind and don't care very much when they get married. I care only that they have a way to support themselves on the day to day stuff. Maybe they need a little help from parents with emergencies or bigger stuff, but I hope they if they're getting married, one of the two of them can pay rent, buy groceries, and pay the electric bill. And I'd like them to be able to have the option for a parent to SAH with a baby if desired. I'd also like them not to have to choose between degree and staying at home with a baby. If I were in a position to help with college or down payment on a home, I'd help with those, regardless of marital status, but ideally, I think they'd be best off living on their own while newlyweds.

 

I got (officially) engaged at 20, right before my sixth (and final) semester of college. My fiancé was 22 at the time and about to start his tenth and final semester because he changed majors and took a fifth year. We'd been together for over six years at that point and had been talking about getting married for three or four of them (okay, probably for more than that). We got married a few months later, after college graduation, at 21 and 23, and we will celebrate our nineteenth anniversary this year. We would have gotten married sooner if we'd had a way to support ourselves, but we were both living in the dorm and working part time jobs. After graduation/wedding, I worked full time while he went to more school, and then I worked part time for a while while he worked full time, until I left the workforce a few weeks before our sweet baby girl made her appearance. I wish we'd been able to get married sooner, but such is life. However, not getting married meant that there wasn't any chance of us having kids, and while a degree isn't the end all, be all, I'm glad to have mine. I worked really hard in high school so I could graduate college a year early. I'm also really glad I was able to support us while dh went to more school because that's paid off in his career, although if we'd had a baby, I'd have been able to take the baby to work with me. I'm really glad I was able to stay home with my babies; I'd really, really not have liked to leave them with anyone. I'm sure we'd have made a lot of situations work, because we always do, but I can't say as I'm unhappy about how it all worked out.

 

My parents got married when they were 20 and 23; my mom was still in college and my dad had finished some grad school, and they had their first child (me) less than 18 months later. Dad later went back to school a couple of times when we were kids. They've been married 42 years and have made it all work, and they're young enough to be very involved with grandchildren.

 

So I really don't care if my kids get married/engaged young. Whenever is right for them. I would encourage them not to delay children too long because they may lose options, but I figure they'll decide what's right for them.

Edited July 18, 2017 by happypamama

[gardenmom5]

age isn't in the equation.  it's when they meet the right person, and the time is right.  there can be so many things that go into that that have nothing to do with chronological age.