Jump to content

Menu

Not wanting to risk it


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

The only time I've seen lawyers involved in a break up without divorce is when kids are involved, it was in fact a common law marriage, and or they bought stuff with both their names on it.

*Purposely* having kids with someone you wouldn't want to be tied to legally is just... well not smart to me.  Kids legally bind you in one way or another to another person for no less than 18 years. And not even divorce changes that most of the time. So the thought process in that decision is just ... confusing to me to say the least.

Completely agree. I will never understand the whole “baby daddy” thing. I just can’t comprehend people who say they are not yet ready to marry someone because that is too big of a commitment, but they are ready to go ahead and have a baby with them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 229
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I never thought I would be in a place where I could say I understand that reasoning, but now I do. The past 5 years of my marriage have been horrible as I have suffered the consequences emotionally, l

Why not? Maybe the woman has no interest in marriage, either.   Do you think the man is immoral for being in a serious relationship with a woman he doesn’t plan to marry?  I’m trying

You're kind of hitting on the reason, but not really viewing it as logical I think. Because really, it isn't. But it's still the reason. Someone who is burned very badly in a marriage will often say n

43 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I don’t know since it was a comment or two by a stranger but we have talked about all variations of it on this thread.  Either way it comes down to ‘well this person is great, but there is only so much I am willing to do to blend our lives together because the risk is too great.’

 

 

 

Thanks! I thought I might have missed something.  🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never thought I would be in a place where I could say I understand that reasoning, but now I do. The past 5 years of my marriage have been horrible as I have suffered the consequences emotionally, legally, and financially of my husband's gradual decline from early onset alzheimer's. Some of what has happened he truly cannot be blamed for, some is debatable. I am facing years of care-taking and all the legal and financial responsibilities, and we will end up very poor. As a caretaker, I will be very lucky to survive it without serious health consequences myself. I am being asked daily to pull forth all the forgiveness and loving that person can possibly provide unconditionally in some very difficult (sometimes downright hostile) circumstances and with no appreciation or recognition from my husband.  Yes, I would think twice about a second marriage. A person only has so much of that to give.

ETA: I would imagine that is how some of the previously mentioned people also feel.

Edited by shanvan
  • Sad 16
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Catwoman said:

 

Thanks! I thought I might have missed something.  🙂

No, I just thought we were talking about doing anything for love, but not being willing to do THAT.

 

/meatloaf

  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 12:03 PM, Murphy101 said:

I don't understand why people think of what parents have as belonging to their kids.  It doesn't. I highly encourage people to give what they want to go to certain people before they die.  That's really the only way to be sure it actually happens.

Money is not the only issue--to some people, not even the main issue.

Not long after my grandmother died, my grandfather (who was in the beginning stages of Alzheimer's, not yet diagnosed) remarried, to a woman he hadn't known very long. He died a couple of years later. A trunk full of my grandmother's photos and other mementos, which my parent and other family members very reasonably expected to inherit, was gone. (The box was in the house, empty.) The monetary value to anybody else was surely nothing. My parent would have gladly come and picked up the items to remove them from the house if asked. All were unhappy.

12 hours ago, Frances said:

Completely agree. I will never understand the whole “baby daddy” thing. I just can’t comprehend people who say they are not yet ready to marry someone because that is too big of a commitment, but they are ready to go ahead and have a baby with them.

Um, that's not always on purpose. Sometimes people act afterward as if it was planned all along (and sure, sometimes it really was).

 

My parents are both happily in long-term, cohabiting relationships with very nice people (and one of them does have a child with that partner). After two divorces each (one from each other and one each from subsequent spouses), they are certainly experienced enough to make up their own minds. If nothing else, the legal divorce process certainly prolonged hostile interactions with one person in particular. (There will definitely be nothing to inherit from one parent anyway, and I have no idea about the other.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, whitehawk said:

Money is not the only issue--to some people, not even the main issue.

Not long after my grandmother died, my grandfather (who was in the beginning stages of Alzheimer's, not yet diagnosed) remarried, to a woman he hadn't known very long. He died a couple of years later. A trunk full of my grandmother's photos and other mementos, which my parent and other family members very reasonably expected to inherit, was gone. (The box was in the house, empty.) The monetary value to anybody else was surely nothing. My parent would have gladly come and picked up the items to remove them from the house if asked. All were unhappy.

I didn't say it was all about money. I never said anything about money.

You're example proves my point.  If you want to be sure someone gets what you have - give it to them now because that is the only way you can be sure it will happen. Doesn't matter what it is.  Money. Pictures. Mom's China or great granddad's rifle.  If you don't already own it, you should have no expectation of having it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

If you want to be sure someone gets what you have - give it to them now because that is the only way you can be sure it will happen. Doesn't matter what it is.  Money. Pictures. Mom's China or great granddad's rifle.  If you don't already own it, you should have no expectation of having it.

 

None of my grandfather's four children should have expected to get the family pictures, or to be told if his wife was dumping them while he was alive but no longer able to object? I can't agree with that. It would've been nice if someone had picked up on his cognitive decline before he got married, but grief and dementia can look a lot alike.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, whitehawk said:

 

None of my grandfather's four children should have expected to get the family pictures, or to be told if his wife was dumping them while he was alive but no longer able to object? I can't agree with that. It would've been nice if someone had picked up on his cognitive decline before he got married, but grief and dementia can look a lot alike.

 

It doesn’t matter what we agree with, the facts are that they had no legal right to it just because they were his children. Fact is, if he had shared that with them before death it wouldn’t have been an issue afterwards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

 

It doesn’t matter what we agree with, the facts are that they had no legal right to it just because they were his children. Fact is, if he had shared that with them before death it wouldn’t have been an issue afterwards. 

 

They may not have had a legal right to the family photos, but I certainly wouldn’t fault them for having expected to receive them. 

And realistically, the photos may have been very important to him and he wanted to keep them until he died... and then, due to his illness, he wasn’t in a mental state to think about giving them to the family.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Catwoman said:

 

They may not have had a legal right to the family photos, but I certainly wouldn’t fault them for having expected to receive them. 

And realistically, the photos may have been very important to him and he wanted to keep them until he died... and then, due to his illness, he wasn’t in a mental state to think about giving them to the family.

 

I don’t fault them either. But the law does. Sucks but thems the rules. 

Hence my ardent and firm encouragement for people to give while they are alive. 

Especially in the case of photos. It’s no big deal to copy the ones they want to keep in view. But loved ones need to make those requests NOW and should presume absolutely nothing about what might or should happen after death.

And honestly, it’s just easier to deal with before death. Less crap to manage in the midst of grief.  Less argument about what the deceased wanted. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Families and passing stuff on is its own crazy gig.  My grandmother arranged to donate a chair that had been in the family to a museum when she died - but her sisters came in and stole liberated it before it was taken over because they thought she had no right to do it.  People just don't think ahead enough, and assume others will be sane and thoughtful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

Families and passing stuff on is its own crazy gig.  My grandmother arranged to donate a chair that had been in the family to a museum when she died - but her sisters came in and stole liberated it before it was taken over because they thought she had no right to do it.  People just don't think ahead enough, and assume others will be sane and thoughtful.

Agreed. It's nuts.

My grandmother wanted to give a way a lot of her important things before she was in ill health because she wanted to avoid drama. She approached her five children on three different occasions asking them what they would like so she could label things, or settle issues if some of them wanted the same item. They wouldn't talk about it. Wouldn't take anything. I think that it was because for them it meant emotionally acknowledging that grandma was getting old and die, and they didn't want to think about it having already lost grandpa. But she didn't take it that way. She thought it meant that they didn't want any of her things, that there was nothing of value, not even photos, to them. So she approached 11 grandchildren about it. We all called each other, had great conversations about it, and decided who wanted what. I got my grandmother's ruby thumbprint glassware, another cousin took a handpainted light fixture that was over the couch, something my grandmother had adored and was very unique. Another cousin took her guitar which she played for her kids when they were young, spending hours singing to them, a tradition she continued when we grands were all little. And so on....some of the boys divied up grandpa's tools, and his guns. Bit by bit things moved on to their new homes until my aunt finally got upset on one of her visits. My grandmother stood her ground and said the grandchildren got these items because we cared enough to have a discussion about it with her. Oh my gosh. The tantrums, three aunts, my father figure (other uncle had recently died so he was not involved, it was legendary. The oldest, an aunt I had been very close to, was just so upset about the glassware that I thought she'd have a stroke. I drove all the way home to box it up and bring it back to her. As soon as I walked through the door with the first box, my uncle (her husband) had a fit because auntie had inherited nine sets of expensive, antique china worth thousands of dollars from his mother and he wanted to know exactly where she thought she'd keep it. They had a fight, and when it was over, she refused to take the glassware. Sigh....

The tea cup and saucer collection had gone untouched so that was offered to auntie, but my father figure birthed a cow because he wanted it all since he had been the one to buy them for her. (He had a tradition through his teen and young adult years of buying her a new cup and saucer for every birthday and mother's day.) My mom didn't want them. It wasn't like he was ever going to do anything with them.

Melt down after melt down. When it was all said and done, nothing changed. Grandma was so appalled by the attitudes of her own children that she demanded we grands keep the items we'd asked for, and we grand kids were so disgusted by our parents behavior that we all kind of hinted that we wished we could have them all committed right there on the spot.

It was an ugly family meeting.

My mother never got anything from her side of the family. Grandma had remarried and the man was abusive. He took all of her photos, china, etc from her first marriage and burned them in the yard. 

Do not ever assume that the splitting up of the belongings of the dearly departed or soon to be departed will go well. Better just steal yourself for the drama, and then if it goes well, you'll be pleasantly surprised.

And when there is remarriage, it is a serious problem because everything becomes marital property. The kids may view it as theirs, but yet, none of it, not the house, the money, the left over toys and books from their childhoods, the photos, nothing. It's a real problem for a lot of families.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When my father died, my step-mother wasn't ready to let go of any of his items although she wanted me and my sister to eventually have them.

A few years later she passed away.  I didn't attend the funeral (out of state) because I had a fragile 2-week-old baby.

A few years after that I realized that I *really* wanted my dad's Vietnam medals.

I contacted my step-brother and he said that the items had already been given to one of his nephews.  I was disappointed, but I knew that I had no legal claim to the items.

A few weeks later my step-brother called me and told me that his nephew agreed that I should have the medals.  We arranged for my mom to pick up the items.  (A little awkward, but she was willing.)  When my mom gave me the medals she also gave me a photo album of my father's family that my step-brother had found in my father's things.

I was so grateful to have them!  

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 8:54 AM, whitehawk said:

Money is not the only issue--to some people, not even the main issue.

Not long after my grandmother died, my grandfather (who was in the beginning stages of Alzheimer's, not yet diagnosed) remarried, to a woman he hadn't known very long. He died a couple of years later. A trunk full of my grandmother's photos and other mementos, which my parent and other family members very reasonably expected to inherit, was gone. (The box was in the house, empty.) The monetary value to anybody else was surely nothing. My parent would have gladly come and picked up the items to remove them from the house if asked. All were unhappy.

Um, that's not always on purpose. Sometimes people act afterward as if it was planned all along (and sure, sometimes it really was).

 

My parents are both happily in long-term, cohabiting relationships with very nice people (and one of them does have a child with that partner). After two divorces each (one from each other and one each from subsequent spouses), they are certainly experienced enough to make up their own minds. If nothing else, the legal divorce process certainly prolonged hostile interactions with one person in particular. (There will definitely be nothing to inherit from one parent anyway, and I have no idea about the other.)

 

I know a couple who just got married on New Year's. They have been together for 27 years and have 2 kids, both now grown. They just hadn't wanted to make it legal until recently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 5:22 PM, Catwoman said:

 

But if you weren’t married, why would things need to be divided at all? In a dating relationship, you have your house and your stuff and the other person has their own house and their stuff, and finances are kept separate. 

People live together. Live together for a few decades, and who's copy of The Stand is this, not to mention everything else in the shared house (did you buy this silverware or did I?), even if you continue to rent, gets harder and harder, even if you keep separate bank accounts and don't co-own any major assets like a house.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ravin said:

People live together. Live together for a few decades, and who's copy of The Stand is this, not to mention everything else in the shared house (did you buy this silverware or did I?), even if you continue to rent, gets harder and harder, even if you keep separate bank accounts and don't co-own any major assets like a house.

 

Yes, I agree, but living together is not a requirement when people are dating, even when they are a couple for many years. It is a decision they make, and the consequences may very well be that things will get messy if they break up, but they can avoid a lot of that if they live in separate homes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

Yes, I agree, but living together is not a requirement when people are dating, even when they are a couple for many years. It is a decision they make, and the consequences may very well be that things will get messy if they break up, but they can avoid a lot of that if they live in separate homes.

 

I do think this is true, but I don't think it's actually a very common scenario where people date long term, and don't live together.  Even when they say that they don't want to marry again because of bad experiences of some kind.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I do think this is true, but I don't think it's actually a very common scenario where people date long term, and don't live together.  Even when they say that they don't want to marry again because of bad experiences of some kind.

 

 

Actually, we have quite a few friends and clients who are doing exactly that, so I’m not sure it’s as rare as you think it is. 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Catwoman said:

 

Actually, we have quite a few friends and clients who are doing exactly that, so I’m not sure it’s as rare as you think it is. 🙂

I know several couples like that. Especially the over 50ish couples. No desire to move in together even though they’ve been a “couple” for 15+ years. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I know several couples like that. Especially the over 50ish couples. No desire to move in together even though they’ve been a “couple” for 15+ years. 

I've always thought that that would be the perfect sort of relationship: separate houses, separate everything, but living next door to each other for something of a long-term, committed, friends-with-benefits relationship. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WendyAndMilo said:

I've always thought that that would be the perfect sort of relationship: separate houses, separate everything, but living next door to each other for something of a long-term, committed, friends-with-benefits relationship. 

I know at least two do not have sex. I suspect some of the others aren’t but it’s not something I’m going to ask. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WendyAndMilo said:

I've always thought that that would be the perfect sort of relationship: separate houses, separate everything, but living next door to each other for something of a long-term, committed, friends-with-benefits relationship. 

I feel similarly.  I've read through this entire thread and I'm one of those people who has very strict parameters on what I'd consider for marriage again. I'm also 50+, so anyone I date has their own "baggage" along with my own "baggage," not that I've dated since the divorce. Marriage would happen after a long list of criteria, like being friends first to marriage last - if ever. 

Separate living spaces would be okay with me for a long while. I share a house with my mother  and son, I don't want to try and cram another person in this household, even if I love them dearly. Elder care, pets, material possessions, children, etc. Part of it is my own issues, like not giving up the independence I've worked so hard to gain in the last few years. My marriage was controlling, not only would I have to have an intense trust in the person, I'd have to guard myself not to fall into old habits. So that let's share a relationship to let's share every aspect of our physical lives will be a long tip-toed journey. 

I also no longer believe that marriage is some magic ticket that somehow cements a relationship. So I can definitely see someone being "the one" and yet be hesitant to get married. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I do think this is true, but I don't think it's actually a very common scenario where people date long term, and don't live together.  Even when they say that they don't want to marry again because of bad experiences of some kind.

 

I can think of an example right off the top of my head - they met much later in life and both wanted to preserve their own space so they had room for their hobbies and didn’t drive one another nuts. They dated and were essentially as good as married for nearly three decades, until he passed away unexpectedly last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Catwoman said:

 

Actually, we have quite a few friends and clients who are doing exactly that, so I’m not sure it’s as rare as you think it is. 🙂

 

I would say that is the group I see it in most often, but in terms of all the people I know, it's a small number.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

I can think of an example right off the top of my head - they met much later in life and both wanted to preserve their own space so they had room for their hobbies and didn’t drive one another nuts. They dated and were essentially as good as married for nearly three decades, until he passed away unexpectedly last year.

 

Sure, so can I.  But that doesn't make it that common.  I can think of as many who live together but don't want to commit to marriage (and I don't include in that people who live together but just don't really think it's important to do the legal thing bt have basically the same personal commitment anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 4:19 AM, DawnM said:

DH and I have talked about what we would do if one of us died.  He claims he would never marry again.  I told him I might marry again! 😘  I get lonely by myself.  I didn't marry until I was 29 and I remember the loneliness and wanting someone, BUT, not being willing to just settle either.  I was accused of being too picky, too judgmental about guys, etc......and several of those who "accused" me are now divorced.  I get where they were coming from back then, but some of them settled, and I knew it.  

I am seeing several of. you mention finances.....I get that.....but can't you do a pre-nup?  Or is that still legally problematic?  I really don't know much about it.  I would want to make sure my $$ went to my kids as well.  And I would want to make sure my Aspie was well cared for in particular.

 

 

Medicaid does not recognize prenuptial agreements when qualify for long term care. It is a HUGE deal when senior citizens remarry.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Seasider too said:

 

Medicaid does not recognize prenuptial agreements when qualify for long term care. It is a HUGE deal when senior citizens remarry.  

MANY state or federal programs if any kind do not recognize any legal paperwork at all. Even if you aren’t married. For example, food stamps requires everyone who lives at the address to submit birth cents, SSN and income. Kids 18+. Grandma’s pension. All of which is money the mom applying might not be able to access to feed her family but it counts against her for food stamps. For that matter, she could be married to an ass who refuses to give financial information and not be able to get food stamps then either. 

And in Oklahoma, all medical debts are automatically communal marriage debt. Prenups won’t change that here. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

MANY state or federal programs if any kind do not recognize any legal paperwork at all. Even if you aren’t married. For example, food stamps requires everyone who lives at the address to submit birth cents, SSN and income. Kids 18+. Grandma’s pension. All of which is money the mom applying might not be able to access to feed her family but it counts against her for food stamps. For that matter, she could be married to an ass who refuses to give financial information and not be able to get food stamps then either. 

And in Oklahoma, all medical debts are automatically communal marriage debt. Prenups won’t change that here. 

That's not quite accurate. For SNAP, you have to disclose who all lives there, but if they do not eat together with you, you don't have to give their income and such.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ravin said:

That's not quite accurate. For SNAP, you have to disclose who all lives there, but if they do not eat together with you, you don't have to give their income and such.

In practice it's nearly completely accurate bc they presume if someone lives with you, they are eating with you.  You can say otherwise all you want but they are going to count it anyways.  I've never heard of anyone ever convincing their worker that someone that lives with them isn't eating their food.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...