Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: When things get hot they expand. Im not fat. Im hot.
2,525 posts, read 6,338,699 times
Reputation: 5365
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa
You probably shouldn't get married at all, at any age, unless you're amenable to potentially seeing to one another's medical care should the need arise.
The only concern I ever really have about being in a long-term, cohabiting relationship vs. a marriage is that if my SO were to become seriously ill, hospitalized, if there were end-of-life type decisions to be made, etc. my involvement in his welfare would be seriously truncated/abridged due to not being his legal spouse, and that would be very troubling to me, given the length and seriousness of our relationship. Also that the reverse would be true for him, were I to become ill, etc. Domestic partners should have more rights, IMO.
Didnt mean to sound like Im against marriage. Im from a different era been married 40+ myself so I dont feel like I can speak for younger peeps. Personally Im for it. And domestic partners should have more rights.
I agree with your points. Im just saying older people should think twice. Im 62. If something happens I wont be getting hitched again. Financially its just not wise. There is always power of attorney.
You probably shouldn't get married at all, at any age, unless you're amenable to potentially seeing to one another's medical care should the need arise.
The only concern I ever really have about being in a long-term, cohabiting relationship vs. a marriage is that if my SO were to become seriously ill, hospitalized, if there were end-of-life type decisions to be made, etc. my involvement in his welfare would be seriously truncated/abridged due to not being his legal spouse, and that would be very troubling to me, given the length and seriousness of our relationship. Also that the reverse would be true for him, were I to become ill, etc. Domestic partners should have more rights, IMO.
These situations can get ugly. I work in a doc's office and had coworkers who worked at the local hospital tell us how the live in gf comes into the ICU to see the boyfriend, except his family (who never liked her from the beginning) didn't put her name on the 'immediate family list.' So she's sh*t out of luck & can't even see the guy she's been living with for 10 years. What if he dies while in there, no goodbye even? Oh well for her I guess. Sometimes these families come from out of town and just start throwing their weight around in the medical environment, casting the bf/gf aside. I seen parents in other states get called to ask what to do before the live in boyfriend or gf....Also the live in gf or bf would come into the office and ask me for S.O. medical documents and I can't even give them a printout with S.O. current medications on it, let alone actual medical paperwork. I tell them, he/she has to come in, sign and pick up their own docs. They get pissed at me and I'm like 'uhhhh, ok.' Even with a will, where the gf/bf states in plain English that the live in S.O. is to be the one divvying up this and that; parents, sibs and their lawyers can put up a BIG fight to say otherwise. I'm not saying any of these things are even right, but hey, this is the way it is. There's tons of risk in either scenario, one is no better then the other, when you start to break it down IMO. But if given the choice: I'm going for the scenario where I at least have legal documents to back me up. The immediate family cannot direct the wife/husband to do anything concerning the S.O.'s health -- the live in gf/bf, not so much.
** I would recommend anyone in these long term live in situations get familiar with whether or not you're in a state that recognizes common law marriage there are at least 10 that do. I think each of those states has different guidelines to qualify for common law. Common law marriage will make you the next of kin in those states and it will hold water as compared to winging it and hoping for the best.
You probably shouldn't get married at all, at any age, unless you're amenable to potentially seeing to one another's medical care should the need arise.
The only concern I ever really have about being in a long-term, cohabiting relationship vs. a marriage is that if my SO were to become seriously ill, hospitalized, if there were end-of-life type decisions to be made, etc. my involvement in his welfare would be seriously truncated/abridged due to not being his legal spouse, and that would be very troubling to me, given the length and seriousness of our relationship. Also that the reverse would be true for him, were I to become ill, etc. Domestic partners should have more rights, IMO.
That's what powers of attorney are for. There are several kinds: springing, durable, and healthcare. We each have executed durable POAs and healthcare POAs. A notarized copy is with our doctors and the hospitals in the area. We each carry a small copy in our wallets of both POAs. Additionally, we have put each other as POA with our bank accounts and named each other as beneficiary of all accounts and insurance. Our wills clearly state that we are life-partners and the other is to be regarded and treated as if we were legally married. That phrasing doesn't hold much legal water but it does help when dealing with lay persons. Additionally, very few people know that we are not married and even family seems to believe we are. We have no reason to disavow them of that notion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecilia_Rose
Didnt mean to sound like Im against marriage. Im from a different era been married 40+ myself so I dont feel like I can speak for younger peeps. Personally Im for it. And domestic partners should have more rights.
I agree with your points. Im just saying older people should think twice. Im 62. If something happens I wont be getting hitched again. Financially its just not wise. There is always power of attorney.
Exactly. I also am 62 but we decided 10 years ago to not get married for purely financial reasons. Our income would have dropped by at least $15K (the amount I would get from my ex-hub's SS).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doll Eyes
These situations can get ugly. I work in a doc's office and had coworkers who worked at the local hospital tell us how the live in gf comes into the ICU to see the boyfriend, except his family (who never liked her from the beginning) didn't put her name on the 'immediate family list.' So she's sh*t out of luck & can't even see the guy she's been living with for 10 years. What if he dies while in there, no goodbye even? Oh well for her I guess. Sometimes these families come from out of town and just start throwing their weight around in the medical environment, casting the bf/gf aside. I seen parents in other states get called to ask what to do before the live in boyfriend or gf....Also the live in gf or bf would come into the office and ask me for S.O. medical documents and I can't even give them a printout with S.O. current medications on it, let alone actual medical paperwork. I tell them, he/she has to come in, sign and pick up their own docs. They get pissed at me and I'm like 'uhhhh, ok.' Even with a will, where the gf/bf states in plain English that the live in S.O. is to be the one divvying up this and that; parents, sibs and their lawyers can put up a BIG fight to say otherwise. I'm not saying any of these things are even right, but hey, this is the way it is. There's tons of risk in either scenario, one is no better then the other, when you start to break it down IMO. But if given the choice: I'm going for the scenario where I at least have legal documents to back me up. The immediate family cannot direct the wife/husband to do anything concerning the S.O.'s health -- the live in gf/bf, not so much.
** I would recommend anyone in these long term live in situations get familiar with whether or not you're in a state that recognizes common law marriage there are at least 10 that do. I think each of those states has different guidelines to qualify for common law. Common law marriage will make you the next of kin in those states and it will hold water as compared to winging it and hoping for the best.
A POA will cover HIPAA. As for common law marriage, one of the requirements in most of those states is that the couple jointly file income taxes - so that negates the financial savings of NOT getting married.
Powers of Attorney will get those medical records. Powers of Attorney will get you in the hospital if it includes directives.
There seems to be an assumption from the OP that unless one is considering marriage a relationship is basically never serious enough for cohabitation. It implies that marriage is somehow the ultimate lifegoal of most couples.
What about people like myself who really could not care less about a marriage certificate but love someone they want to spend the rest of their lives with ?
I "shacked up" with my now husband after a couple of months togther. We knew we were deeply committed and serious about each other and marriage was not something which ever meant anything to me ( it still doesn't ). We married only 21 years after meeting each other. To us we were married by the time we decided we were meant for each other to the exclusion of all others.
It would have been ridiculous for us to live separate lives when we wanted to live with one another simply because we did not have a piece of paper to prove that we loved each other... A commitment is made without a wedding band, in the heart and in the mind of two people , regardless of their marital status.
A document means nothing except that you have fallen for the party line and given in to societal pressures. Love is what counts.
I would certainly resent anyone that I should have lived a separate life from the man I loved because marriage was not on the cards.
I still could not care less if we were still "living in sin" as it has been termed by some people I know. I hope human beings have evolved beyond being just social puppets who must abide by the narrow minded rules of an archaic system. This is 2012.
Cohabitation to me is about the only thing which makes sense before you take any kind of official plunge. Only by living with someone and seeing them at their worst as well as their best, at their most mundane and sharing the tedious routine of couples can you truly make an informed decision about the rest of your lives.
How can anyone even pretend to truly know someone else if they have not lived with them? People always behave differently outside of their own environment and you rarely see the real big picture in my experience. Home is where people are at their most natural and true selves.
Cohabitation is the smart thing IMO. Thanks goodness legislation has not ( yet- shudder) interfered with the lives of people to the extent that only marriage is deemed the only worthy relationship... Going back to the good old days simply does not appeal to me in the slightest.
Huh. Interesting thread. There are more opinions against cohabitation than I originally thought there would be.
I believe in living together before marriage. I think a couple with serious intentions learns a lot about the other person by living together, learning their compatibility and such.
After dating a guy for 2 years (living seperately), we started talking about getting engaged. Since we had serious intentions, we decided to move in together. After 7 months of living together (and with a ring bought), it was decided we were not meant to be together for a lifetime. Thanks goodness we learned that before we got married.
My now husband and I lived together for 2.5 years before we got married. We learned a lot about each other before getting married, and now that we are married we are still learning a lot about each other. I just think we had a better idea of what we were getting into since we did live together before getting married.
I respect other's and their wishes. This is just what has worked best for me and my DH.
Watch out for the strings fellas. Strings, I mean, your overnight guest will deliberately leave items of hers as if to mark territory at your place. Some undies, a bra, night shirt, comb or brush, hair spray, tooth brush.
Next thing you know, one of your drawers has been emptied and she has claimed it with her night clothes.
One morning getting ready for work or in the shower you notice extra shampoo and conditioner.
????
O.k. She has flung out her web of strings to attach me to her. You need to get a box and put all her essentials in it and give it to her when she comes over.
"Oh, by the way, you left a few things over here. I put it in a box by the door.
That's what powers of attorney are for. There are several kinds: springing, durable, and healthcare. We each have executed durable POAs and healthcare POAs. A notarized copy is with our doctors and the hospitals in the area. We each carry a small copy in our wallets of both POAs. Additionally, we have put each other as POA with our bank accounts and named each other as beneficiary of all accounts and insurance. Our wills clearly state that we are life-partners and the other is to be regarded and treated as if we were legally married. That phrasing doesn't hold much legal water but it does help when dealing with lay persons. Additionally, very few people know that we are not married and even family seems to believe we are. We have no reason to disavow them of that notion.
Exactly. I also am 62 but we decided 10 years ago to not get married for purely financial reasons. Our income would have dropped by at least $15K (the amount I would get from my ex-hub's SS).
A POA will cover HIPAA. As for common law marriage, one of the requirements in most of those states is that the couple jointly file income taxes - so that negates the financial savings of NOT getting married.
Powers of Attorney will get those medical records. Powers of Attorney will get you in the hospital if it includes directives.
These people who come in don't have any documents like this, they are just walking in wanting S.O.'s records, information because they are the live in S.O. I'm aware there's legal ways to get around most things if a person really wanted to.
I've been married, and I've also lived with someone. Marriage, to my mind, was nothing like "shacking up." That I lived with a guy beforehand was a sign that I had some serious doubts about the relationship early on in, and my suspicions were well founded. Had I known then what I know now, I would have never done it.
But hey, they man involved got the sweet end of the deal. He owned his own home, and the rent I paid him helped him pay off a piece of real estate that I would never see any interest in. I will never do that again. Ever.
Divorce is an unpleasant experience. But at least there are legal mechanisms in place to make sure (to a degree) that the divvying up of property is equitable when/if the marriage ends. I realize that there are some people who take their ex-spouse to the cleaner, but I wasn't one of those. I only asked to receive back what I put into it, and that was only fair.
I don't think there's a right or wrong answer here. It's just personal preference. In some ways I wish I'd lived with my ex husband for awhile before we got married, maybe then I wouldn't have married him! I'd have to be serious with someone before I'd consider living with them. I'd prefer to at least be engaged, but that's just my preference.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
