Early Marriage

[pinball]

Just now, Frances said:

I still don’t see what they were adding to the thread or why it matters that they were removed. I only saw one because the other was already removed. But it seemed more like mocking another poster than adding to the conversation.

So you don’t get it?

[Frances]

Just now, pinball said:

So you don’t get it?

I guess not. I only was able to view the second one, though. And I didn’t recognize what it is from which is not unusual for me.

[TexasProud]

2 hours ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

Really? Did you not know any teens when you were one? Teens are famous for their impulsive, risky behavior and magical thinking.  I mean, I understand that you weren't one of those kids, I knew quite a few of those, but I have a hard time believing you never witnessed such thinking and behavior around your peers during adolescence and/or that you failed to process it as such when you were around it. And I don't believe that even now it's not possible for you to grasp it. There's no statistical chance whatsoever you never encountered such thinking and behavior around teens at what I assume was a Jr. High/middle school, high school and college outside of your own house.

 Do you literally mean you don't get it at all and are unable to intellectually process the fact that teens and young adults are prone to risk behavior, or are you doing that disingenuous Southern thing where you make a false statement like "I don't get it" as code to mean you aren't one of the people who did/does that sort of thing? You do know that admitting to getting it/it computing does not equate to condoning it or admitting to participating in it, right? Is that your concern? It's just not an idea that's challenging for a neurotypical person to process.

Strange, I thought I already responded this. Of course I knew teens like this. They never made sense to me. I did not understand their thinking at all.  How could they risk their health and safety. Just did not make logical sense.

 

I know I was probably a strange teen.  My senior year the boyfriend I talked about wanted to take me to a choir party. He asked my parents, I guess. I was shocked my mom was going to let me go since there were no parents there and there would be drinking. I went and fixed myself a coke. ( Didn’t trust anyone else to fix me something.) As I was doing that, one of the younger kids looked at me. “You can do that? You don’t have to drink?”  I looked at her, “If you don’t want to drink. Don’t drink. No one is making you.” “Oh,” she said, “I didn’t know you could do that.”   ????  Yeah, didn’t understand that either. Makes no sense. We left at 9 or 10 when people were getting tipsy.  Mom asked me about the party when I got home and I was honest.  I went to a few more.  But yeah, I don’t understand the whole getting drunk part. Being out of control…NO WAY.  That isn’t fun. That is terrifying. I will be in control the whole time thank you.  Making a fool of myself as a drunk just doesn’t seem smart or fun. Are there thousands of people who disagree. Yes. Can I comprehend their thinking? No. It makes no logical sense.  (I am not against drinking, even though I choose not to. I have adult friends who drink and my mom does, but none of them do to excess. That is fine. I just don’t trust myself. )

[Laura Corin]

On 8/16/2021 at 10:34 PM, TexasProud said:

No she makes perfect sense. I didn't want to be married...until I did.  To say...well, are you ready for marriage....  I would have said no. So i am not supposed to date?

I wasn't ready to marry until I had lived with my now-husband for four years. I was 29 when I married.

[TexasProud]

4 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

I wasn't ready to marry until I had lived with my now-husband for four years. I was 29 when I married.

Yeah, for me, living with someone has tge same intimacy as being married. To me, I just dont get the appeal of living together. 

[Laura Corin]

12 minutes ago, TexasProud said:

Yeah, for me, living with someone has tge same intimacy as being married. To me, I just dont get the appeal of living together. 

In my own case, my childhood situation had made me anti-marriage, and there was no social pressure towards it. Then the right partner came along and at a certain point it suddenly just seemed right.

Edited August 20, 2021 by Laura Corin

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, TexasProud said:

Yeah, for me, living with someone has tge same intimacy as being married. To me, I just dont get the appeal of living together. 

Do you get the appeal of marriage? For many people, the only difference to living together are the legal advantages. (Which, especially for young people, may not yet feel very relevant)

Edited August 20, 2021 by regentrude

[Laura Corin]

28 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Do you get the appeal of marriage? For many people, the only difference to living together are the legal advantages. (Which, especially for young people, may not yet feel very relevant)

Yes. Although we were already engaged, the final push to our marriage was my sudden need for a US Green Card.

[Wheres Toto]

23 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

Yes. Although we were already engaged, the final push to our marriage was my sudden need for a US Green Card.

For us it was when dh was laid off so I could add him to my health insurance. 

[regentrude]

51 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

Yes. Although we were already engaged, the final push to our marriage was my sudden need for a US Green Card.

For us, it was the possible need for a spousal visa in case only one of us would get a postdoc position in the US.

[regentrude]

27 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

For us it was when dh was laid off so I could add him to my health insurance. 

Which is a factor that is absent in countries with universal health insurance. Back home, you don't have to marry for that.

[Cordelia]

In my homeschool circles, I knew two girls who married at 18. One of them is divorced now. I knew a handful of girls who married at 19. Many girls married between 20-24. 

DH and I were 21 and 20, respectively, when we got married. We are happy and have no regrets, but I know marrying young isn't for everyone. We had both completed our bachelor's degrees already. 

[TexasProud]

5 hours ago, regentrude said:

Do you get the appeal of marriage? For many people, the only difference to living together are the legal advantages. (Which, especially for young people, may not yet feel very relevant)

This is me, the way I feel. I understand others feel differently,  but I am describing my own thoughts/feelings.

I do not understand why  I would live together and not married.  The ultimacy of having sex where a baby could result, needs marriage.  Sex is intimate anyway. Living together, you can just leave. Marriage is a sacred covenant, being one flesh in that covenant: spiritually, emotionally, physically.  Living with someone takes a type of vulnerability for me that is not possible without marriage.  

Also, financially you would be intertwined. I want the covenant/legal contract. To think that you can make no legal agreements is leaving yourself open like this:

https://www.bryanfagan.com/family-law-blog/2017/january/non-marital-conjugal-cohabitation-agreements-for/

So if you are going to have to make some kind of legal financial agreements: common-in-law agreement, then you might as well get married. 

Again, to me, and yes, maybe I'm weird, but logically, living together makes no sense, nor does it seem safe to me.  But really, what trumps all of that is the fact that it is pleasing to God for me to marry and not live together.  It would have been equally pleasing to God for me to remain single. Married people are not better than single people, though the church tends to act like that is true.

[regentrude]

16 minutes ago, TexasProud said:

The ultimacy of having sex where a baby could result, needs marriage.  Sex is intimate anyway. Living together, you can just leave. Marriage is a sacred covenant, being one flesh in that covenant: spiritually, emotionally, physically.  

I understand that you have a differing opinion and am not trying to convince you to think otherwise. I just want to explain that, to many people, living together does not mean the can "just leave". They may have a strong ethical commitment to the relationship that does not require an external acknowledgment by church or state. Like the unmarried friends of my parents who lived together for fifty or so years, and one nursed the partner through sickness until their death at age ninety. 

As for the practical side of finances: if two persons have roughly equal incomes, there is no need to intertwine their finances. Couples can have separate accounts and share the bills.

I understand that there are certain legal protections in marriage, but, as I mentioned before, many of these are irrelevant for couples who don't have children and where partners have their own income and insurance.

And at a 50% divorce rate, the safety that marriage appears to provide isn't all that it's cracked up to be. If I could not trust my partner's intrinsic commitment to the relationship without a piece of paper, I would not dream of entering a marriage.

Again, YMMV and that is fine. Just trying to explain my pov.

Edited August 20, 2021 by regentrude

[TexasProud]

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I understand that you have a differing opinion and am not trying to convince you to think otherwise. I just want to explain that, to many people, living together does not mean the can "just leave". They may have a strong ethical commitment to the relationship that does not require an external acknowledgment by church or state. Like the unmarried friends of my parents who lived together for fifty or so years, and one nursed the partner through sickness until their death at age ninety. 

As for the practical side of finances: if two persons have roughly equal incomes, there is no need to intertwine their finances. Couples can have separate accounts and share the bills.

I understand that there are certain legal protections in marriage, but, as I mentioned before, many of these are irrelevant for couples who don't have children and where partners have their own income and insurance.

And at a 50% divorce rate, the safety that marriage appears to provide isn't all that it's cracked up to be. If I could not trust my partner's intrinsic commitment to the relationship, I would not dream of entering a marriage.

Then why not get married?  I just don't understand.  But that is fine. I don't need to.  I have made my choice and am not changing my mind that it is best.

[regentrude]

3 minutes ago, TexasProud said:

Then why not get married?  I just don't understand.  But that is fine. I don't need to.  I have made my choice and am not changing my mind that it is best.

You don't need to change your mind.

But to answer your question: why take any kind of action if you feel you are fine without having done said action and don't feel the benefits outweigh the effort? 

Edited August 20, 2021 by regentrude

[Faith-manor]

5 minutes ago, regentrude said:

You don't need to change your mind.

But to answer your question: why take any kind of action if you feel you are fine without having done said action and don't feel the benefits outweigh the effort? 

Right. Get married, don't get married, not a big deal. Without a religious or civil mandate that it must happen, then other considerations are at play, and not everyone will arrive at the same conclusions. For middle boy, he is likely to live long term with his s.o. and it is actually better for them tax, benefits, etc. to not be legally married. For dh and I, it was the right move back in the day. But if something happened to dh, even if I ever found someone else to share my life with, marriage would be off the table. Too complicated at this stage of life. Too many wills/trusts, paperwork, retirements, inheritances, etc. that would have to be changed. The marriage license, for me, does not represent my commitment to the relationship. However, for some it does, and so everyone has to do what they think is best.

[shawthorne44]

On 8/17/2021 at 10:11 AM, Carrie12345 said:

But, yes, healthy examples go a long way!

For me, that was why I waited.   I saw an example of an excellent marriage and an example of a miserable marriage.   In the excellent marriage, I remember seeing them holding hands while sitting on lawn chairs when they were pretty old (to my young eyes).    With the miserable marriage, I saw that it wasn't good.  Later I learned that he beat her.   At least until my grandfather threw him (they were BIL's) down the stairs and said he'd kill him if he did it again.  We aren't a Jerry Springer family, but maybe more wife beaters need to be tossed down the stairs.  

Anyway, I'd seen both extremes of marriage and I knew I wanted the good kind, so I waited until I met the right person.  We have the good kind.  I hope my daughter has the good kind.   I wouldn't mind if she found it earlier than I did.   We got married at 39 and had DD at 40.   If DD waits that long, I'll be 80 when I have my first grandchild.   

[ktgrok]

On 8/17/2021 at 9:09 PM, Clarita said:

I can process the fact that teens and young adults are prone to risky and impulsive behavior. I am not an old soul ever. I do know I wasn't the riskiest teen but I have a closet full of shoes and purses from my impulsive-ness. I understood as a teen that a baby would absolutely ruin my magical thinking of getting a first well paying job that I could travel lavishly around the world. That's why I've always had a hard time understanding why teens supposedly have a hard time with this.

The majority of people I know did hold off on sex until their twenties.  

When it happens, usually people are not thinking at all. Once those hormones get going the blood is all going to the primitive part of the brain, not the part that makes rational decisions. Many a person has thought they were just going to kiss for a bit and ended up going much farther, just on the basis of hormones/lust. (raises hand!)

[Kassia]

I got married at 19.  I don't even know why we got married so young instead of just living together - just seemed like the right thing to do at the time. We've been married for 34 years and are blissfully happy.  I am grateful every single day for my amazing DH - I am truly blessed.  

Ds1 and his girlfriend have been together for almost 9 years and living together for 6.  We keep wondering when they will announce an engagement but nothing yet.  They are clearly very committed to each other and make all their major life decisions together.  I don't see them any differently than I would a married couple at this point.  Maybe they won't marry until they are ready for children.  

 

 

[CAtoVA]

I thought it was just happening around here with the teens I know. They are religious but not fundamentalist. I think it mostly has to do with wanting to have sex but not wanting to have sex outside of marriage. AND their parents are all thrilled and extremely supportive which I think is significant. I would NOT be thrilled and extremely supportive if my teen (17-19) came to me wanting to marry the person he/she had been dating for less than a year. 

I will not be surprised if most of these marriages I am seeing lately end up at least unhappy if not in divorce.

[frogger]

I remember camping with a bunch of women when one lady started trashing marrying young and how awful it was. There were only two people there who married in their twenties, a couple singles, and four of us who had married between the ages of 16-19. My mom was one who married at 16 and was very happy until her husband died in a car wreck. All the rest of us were happily married many decades later. 

The truth is it has more to do with why a person gets married. If it is just so they can have sex and feel they must to do so or if they feel they must because someone is already pregnant or they can't handle living life on their own then I can't see those marriages going well. If they are minding their business, going to college or working and making their way in life and find someone who would make a good life partner/team mate that they want to walk through life with that is an entirely different thing. I actually think those who marry young and are not set in their ways, have an easier time growing together. Not that you should hurry the process. You should just marry when you find the right person and it fits into the rest of your life/ career etc. For some that might be 20 or like a friend of mine, it could be a first marriage at 50. 

That being said, I would never give permission to my daughter to marry at 16 but I have to say it worked for my mom. I also would not want my recently graduated child marrying someone who has been on their own for awhile since the knowledge and experience difference might create a strange adult to child type relationship or dependency. I want all my children able to take care of themselves and exert some independence. I married at 18 but I was close to 19 and had moved out and was living on my own at 17. In fact, at first they didn't what state I moved to and I received no money. It would have been nice to have more education on the financial side and legal stuff but I (and then we) figured it out. I sometimes wonder if I help my kids too much as they seem to be taking longer to get as independent as I was. 

 

Edited to add: my mom's family wasn't really religious. I have no idea why she married so young. 

Edited September 11, 2021 by frogger

[frogger]

On 8/20/2021 at 9:56 AM, regentrude said:

.

And at a 50% divorce rate, the safety that marriage appears to provide isn't all that it's cracked up to be. If I could not trust my partner's intrinsic commitment to the relationship without a piece of paper, I would not dream of entering a marriage.

 

This is a very fair statement and I agree with it but when I moved in with DH we never explicitly stated we were together for life. That is what marriage was for me. The commitment to him and in reality his whole family (which is much harder) was made explicit in our vows.  You could make a vow or oath without gov't documentation of course, but that was when we told each other we were in this for good and that opened up the idea of possibly raising children with him in the future. I believe in trying your best, I realize life can be tricky and throw curve balls at you, but really trying your best to have a whole intact partnership for raising kids for their sake. 

[lewelma]

Here in NZ, marriage often happens as a celebration of 20+ years of being partners. It happens in general *after* the children have left the home. The public health care, social/separation policies, and the secular nature of society means that there is no incentive and no benefits to marriage. It is just not a cultural norm here any more. 

Even the prime minister of NZ who has just had a baby is not married to her long term partner. 

Edited September 11, 2021 by lewelma

[DawnM]

Kids are getting married early in our former homeschool group.   At least I think it is early.   They are getting married at 19-23 in large percentages.

We have not encouraged or discouraged our sons, but we have told them it is best to finish training and have a career first.   But none of them seem to want to marry young, so I am glad.

My husband and I were 28 and 29 when we married.   He was 28.  He did go to grad school after we married and I supported us for a couple of years, but I was working full time and we wanted him to get it before kids came along.

[ktgrok]

7 hours ago, frogger said:

This is a very fair statement and I agree with it but when I moved in with DH we never explicitly stated we were together for life. That is what marriage was for me. The commitment to him and in reality his whole family (which is much harder) was made explicit in our vows.  You could make a vow or oath without gov't documentation of course, but that was when we told each other we were in this for good and that opened up the idea of possibly raising children with him in the future. I believe in trying your best, I realize life can be tricky and throw curve balls at you, but really trying your best to have a whole intact partnership for raising kids for their sake. 

In my mind, a publicly made oath or promise is marriage - and that used to be all that marriage was. Even te church says the priest/minister doesn't marry people, just witness the marriage. So sure, if people mean it the same way, I'd consider it the same. 

But I do think there is value in making that public - it is why the church always required some kind of witness. Otherwise, one person could be telling the other it was forever, while telling their other girlfriend the same thing, etc. 

So I'd say there is significance and benefit to a publicly known commitment, be that legal or not. (then there are other legal benefits in the USA - from medical decision on down)

[ktgrok]

6 hours ago, lewelma said:

Here in NZ, marriage often happens as a celebration of 20+ years of being partners. It happens in general *after* the children have left the home. The public health care, social/separation policies, and the secular nature of society means that there is no incentive and no benefits to marriage. It is just not a cultural norm here any more. 

Even the prime minister of NZ who has just had a baby is not married to her long term partner. 

I'm curious, is there any kind of expectation that these relationships are permanent (as permanent as marriage, anyway)? Like, do people treat it like marriage?

And how do you distinguish, if you do, between girlfriend that may or may not workout long term to "partner"? Like, who do you include in the family Christmas photo? Probably not the girl that your son just started dating, don't want that on the wall forever if they break up next week, but you of course do include spouses, grandchildren, etc. So....is there some other indicator than marriage? Maybe buying property together or something?

(truly interested, not being snarky or judgemental. I think marriage as a comittment between two people for better or worse is important, but I don't think a legal agreement is the only way to do that. It certainly wasn't done that way for a very long part of history. I find other options interesting from that point of view.)

[regentrude]

28 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

And how do you distinguish, if you do, between girlfriend that may or may not workout long term to "partner"? Like, who do you include in the family Christmas photo? Probably not the girl that your son just started dating, don't want that on the wall forever if they break up next week, but you of course do include spouses, grandchildren, etc. So....is there some other indicator than marriage? Maybe buying property together or something?

I am not the person you asked,  but back home, long term unmarried partnerships are common. At some point, you just know and treat it as permanent. My sister was with her partner for 12 years before they got married. At some point, he became part of the family. There's no clearcut external sign, you just know.

My mom's voice teacher was never married to the man she lived with for many decades until her death in her 80s. He was treated like a husband would.

My kids have both been with their partners for 5 years. We consider them part of the family. I can't pinpoint an event that changed our perception, it's more a feeling. 

[Kassia]

9 minutes ago, regentrude said:

 

My kids have both been with their partners for 5 years. We consider them part of the family. I can't pinpoint an event that changed our perception, it's more a feeling. 

Same with us.  Two of my sons are in long-term relationships.  With ds1 and his gf, I forget that they are not married and I consider her my DIL even though I don't call her that.  They've been together for 9 years, living together for over 6.  

 

[Laura Corin]

6 hours ago, lewelma said:

 

Even the prime minister of NZ who has just had a baby is not married to her long term partner. 

Whilst our PM will not state how many children he has by how many women. The lower limit is six by three women,  to two of whom he has been married. He and his latest wife - his third - are expecting their second child.

I don't value marriage per se but I do value honesty and fidelity. 

[frogger]

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

I am not the person you asked,  but back home, long term unmarried partnerships are common. At some point, you just know and treat it as permanent. My sister was with her partner for 12 years before they got married. At some point, he became part of the family. There's no clearcut external sign, you just know.

My mom's voice teacher was never married to the man she lived with for many decades until her death in her 80s. He was treated like a husband would.

My kids have both been with their partners for 5 years. We consider them part of the family. I can't pinpoint an event that changed our perception, it's more a feeling. 

A perception is kind of fuzzy. It sounds like courts are tired of this fuzziness too.

https://www.npr.org/2016/09/04/487825901/no-you-re-not-in-a-common-law-marriage-after-7-years-of-dating

Life just seems simpler when people are clear. I 'm not sure about advising my children to accept vague feelings and perceptions for a super important commitment.

Not that I'm trying to change your mind or anything, but it isn't something I'd advise to my children.