Well I currently live with my b-friend, we saw each other for about 10 mo. before deciding to move in together and knowing what I know now I don't think I'd have it any other way.

Think about it...the divorce rate is at 50% and lets say that most of these couples never lived together prior to being married. Then why is the divorce rate at 50%? There is no REAL way to tell if this will be good for your relationship or not. YOU have to make the best decision based on YOUR relationship. I regret to tell you that most peoples advice come from their own experiences and this site is respectfully called MARRIAGE BUILDERS, hence the advice you are being given most likely is coming from those whose relationships are in trouble, hence you may not be getting the full spectrum of all the benefits of living with your guy.

There are WAY TOO MANY people who jump into marriages WITHOUT REALLY knowing who they are marrying. Then they become legally bound and it's so hard to get out, not to mention the fact that now you are forever known as DIVORCED or SEPERATED and those titles follow you for the rest of your life wherever you go. Why not make a COMPLETE informed decision BEFORE you tie yourself legally and contractually to ANYONE?! It's SUPPOSED to be a LIFETIME commitment so if you're planning to spend the rest of YOUR LIFE with this person then what is the harm in seeing what you'll be getting????? If this relationship is meant to be, and this guy is who you think he is, when the time is right, HE WILL want to marry you whether you live together or not. If he doesn't then at least you'll KNOW what type of guy he is BEFORE you bind yourself to him and you are both free to walk away. Believe, I speak from the other side of the fence and there are WAY too many married couples who NEVER lived together who are unbelievably unhappy and headed for divorce court. They should be happy b/c they didn't live together BEFORE getting married right?? So what happened? Each relationship is different. YOU make your own rules. You don't have to automatically assume that YOUR relationship will NOT work just b/c someone else's did not. Be unique. JMHO>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ayslyne:
<strong>I just dont understand why any woman would give all the benefits of being a wife without recieving any of the benefits of being a wife? And I am not talking about sex. You do realize that beyond all the relationship stuff which makes absolute sense the realities in your situation should give you pause. For instance...you as the live-in have no rights in terms of assets or property...even if you sign as joint owners etc...this is a world of difference in reference to dower rights. If something were to happen to your live-in, you realize you have no rights in determining what sort if any treatment is given. Legally you are no one. NO RIGHTS, NO OPINION.
ayslyne</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm sorry Ayslyne, but this is so sexist and old fashioned a mind-set. Many women today are the ones with the assets and the money. Many women today don't want marriage for exactly the reason you state, they don't want to risk losing what they own in a divorce. My situation is somewhat similar to this.

I live with my SO. Its she who has the pension, it's she who has the assets, its she who makes more money? So why do I live with her when I have, as you say, no rights? Because I LOVE her.

We own property jointly, and though what you say is true about dower rights, that only hold if the couple has done nothing about it. You can draw up legal papers giving power of attorney, durable power of medical attorney, wills, assignation rights, all types of things. For some people, marriage just isn't necessary. We don't believe that we have a "right" to things a person had prior to marriage, we don't believe, we have a "right" to a retirement fund that one spouse, and only one spouse, contributed too.

Marriage makes many things easier, things are legally assumed. However it also makes things legally more difficult, legally assumed things, that neither of you wishes where.

I'm not against marriage at all, been there, done that. But perhaps that's what helped formed some of my opinions about the legal hassles it entails. My SO and I have discussed it, but for now, are happy with the status quo. We've no intention of leaving one another, but, with both of us in our 40's, we realize the changing nature of relationships, and the damage, both emotionally and financially, that splitting can cause, and feel that our current arrangement offers protections to us both. It gives us a change to love one another, without any feelings of resentment over financial situations, without any feeling of entitlement, or indebtedness.

<small>[ November 13, 2002, 07:46 AM: Message edited by: OHCopLover ]</small>

I am just curious here. If you are not married and recomend living together w/o real commitment,WHY ARE YOU POSTING ON MARRIAGE BUILDERS? Is there a live-in builders site? Your arrangements sound like a continuous one night stand as long as its comfortable.

FYI it is proven that couples that live together before marriage have DOUBLE the likelyhood of getting divorced. I was one who waited in this marriage to have sex-still going!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ezra:
[QB]I am just curious here. If you are not married and recomend living together w/o real commitment,WHY ARE YOU POSTING ON MARRIAGE BUILDERS? Is there a live-in builders site? Your arrangements sound like a continuous one night stand as long as its comfortable.[/q]

And Erza, I'm curious as TO WHY YOU ARE ALWAYS SO NEGATIVE. In any post I read from you you are putting other people down. I'm sure glad I know everything like you do.

[/QUOTE]FYI it is proven that couples that live together before marriage have DOUBLE the likelyhood of getting divorced. I was one who waited in this marriage to have sex-still going!!!

Where exactly is it PROVEN? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> and I'd like to see exactly where it "proves DOUBLE" as well or is this just the facts by ezra????
And so b/c you waited to have sex, that means that all those that don't wait to sex irregardless of whether they live together or not do NOT still have sex going????
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

For some of the smart ones, I'd say if you're not yet married this site could be a very useful tool to know BEFORE you get married that way it won't just be MARRIAGE BUILDING that you'll be doing but RELATIONSHIP BUILDING. ANYBODY can be in a marriage if they stand before someone, say "I do" and have a certificate, ANYONE, but not many people can be in RELATIONSHIPS, there is a big difference.

And besides that this IS the Living together Before Marriage section which is a subsection of marriage builders so why are you in the particular section????

<small>[ November 15, 2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: anyse ]</small>

Oh cplover;
You are right here. I do sound awfully negative. I have realized that I post in this negative manner when I am not happy at home. Now that I have come to this realization, I hope that I will be a better friend here. I am sorry. I need to post here for my own problems and not take out my dispair on all of you here. I realize that I am wrong. I just hope that you can forgive me-I really am sorry. I really like all of you here.
FORGIVE?? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />

This is a very tough question. I have seen situations where people who lived together, married...and are happier then they ever could have thought. Others, who did the same, and cannot stand each other. At the same time, my Ex and I never lived together before marriage, and yet we still divorced.

The thing that a couple needs is to be inter-dependant. This keeps the NEW in the relationship, and together, the two of you learn, and grow together. This is a stronger bond, and is very hard to break. I also feel that marriage is something that we make in the heart first. It is the commitment that "This is the one...and I want to spend the rest of my life with them."

I guess a long story short, a strong marriage requires commitment, love, confidence, COMMUNICATION, and inter-dependence. If any of these are missing, work on them before living together. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Old fashioned....sexist...welcome to reality. The facts are the facts. Women still make about 2/3 what men make. Very few women have more assests than men, and less opporitunity. OK women in the US have it better than women living under tha Taliban...sure...women have it better than they did 100 yrs ago. Just look at the US census, check out the dept of statistics, your state and local laws. Forget love, forget we respect each other. It is all blah blah. For the very small precentage of women who prefer to remain unmarried but living together fine. But why play against the odds. The house always wins in the end. Why set yourself up for a fall? Love is great, marriage can be great. All I am saying for the people who actually realize that the politically correct version of living together because...insert whichever insubstantial reason you choose (they really are all the same)...is a bunch of whoey that tears at the foundation of marriages and 9.9 times out of 10 leaves women in a worse postion than before they created their non committed love nest. (Not an opinion a fact)

BTW sure people who live together can hire lawyers and set up legal documents to protect joint assests...however, why spend that sort of money on something that you could 1. spend on some sort of relationship counseling to determine if you should marry in the future...or 2. get married and cut the lawyer out of the loop because the legislature has already got you covered.

Also when it comes to medical decisions I defy you to find any case in common law history where a designated partner was recognized instead of next of kin. I'll save you the research time....it doesnt exist.

So bottom line Sexist/Old Fahsioned=REALITY...please live in reality dreams have a funny way of turining into nightmares

ayslyne

<small>[ November 24, 2002, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: ayslyne ]</small>

ayslyne:

It's funny, but where you see an argument for marriage, I see an argument for women ensuring their personal financial stability and not leaving their fate 100% in the hands of someone else (married or not). Note that that is NOT an argument AGAINST marriage. I read this board and see so many women who planned to stay married through it all, but their husbands had a different idea. Then these women are terribly disadvantaged financially. Marriage didn't protect them once the marriage was over. Women must take measures to protect themselves, no matter what their marital status is.

I'm not trying to get "in your face." I'm just trying to point out that the issues you cite as reasons for marriage can be interpreted in other ways. I do not think that marriage as an institution is a bad thing. But I think MANY MANY marriages were mistakes from the get-go. I don't even recommend living together as insurance against a misbegotten marriage. There are too many live-ins who get married in an attempt to fix the problems (never works). How to get people embarking on those guaranteed failures to jump ship is a question I struggle with and can never find an answer.

FYI...I am not arguing for marriage...I am arguing against living together. The criteria for getting married is vastly different than the pitfalls of living together. TWO DIFFERENT PLANETS...Living together makes no sense in any situation other than platonic roommates for financial gain. Marriage is a committed, respectful institution that is afforded recognition by society and the law. One has nothing to do with the other. I am telling no one to get married rather than live together. I am saying if you are not ready financially, emotionally, and spiritually to get married then do not do it. But do not dellude yourself into thinking that living together is a positive alternative.

ayslyne

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ayslyne:
<strong>.. the pitfalls of living together. ... Living together makes no sense in any situation other than platonic roommates for financial gain.
... But do not dellude yourself into thinking that living together is a positive alternative.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hello. Can you expand on these quotes I pulled from your post, please? Why would it be okay to live with someone you didn't love, and not okay if you did love him/her? And ... alternative to what? What if you are not interested in marriage? Does that mean you live alone the rest of your life? Just curious where your slant on this comes from.

Well it would seem to me that there is no definite answer as to which is better. There are lots of couples who live together who end up having wonderful marriages and then there are those that have never lived together before M and are headed for a divorce.

For a poster to have such a definite, know it all response only reveals that there is probably anger about the subject and it most likely is not real constructive advice. nothing is absolute so there is no way to say that there is no benefit, whatever the reason, for living together. If I can find only 1 case of a happy marriage where the couple lived together before saying "I do", then that's all I need.

And for those who say that it will never work, then why exactly are there so many mariages on this board in shambles from the so-called high and mighty who never co-habited who now have cheating spouses. I thought you knew them so well before you said "I do". Just makes me wonder how legitimate some of the advice on this topic is. Everybody has an agenda.

I don't want to say that any of the advice on this thread isn't constructive. Each responder is trying to give his or her best understanding of the issue based on personal experience. (However, I think some are confusing causes and effects sometimes.)

But I definitely agree that some of the responses seem to be coming from a place of anger. I would like to ask why that is. I'm not talking about why you believe what you believe. I'm asking why this topic seems to really hit a nerve [and an angry one at that] with some of you. I'd be very interested in hearing what's behind that emotion.

When I talk about living together platonically I am referring to the college roomate sort of relationship. You just risk too much emotionally/financially by playing married when you truly are not. When you love someone why would you not want the fullness of that love and the respect that if affords in polite society. Again some posters who bow to popular hype about tolerance may deny the respect afforded married people vs. shack-up relationships again I say stop living in a tv sitcom and welcome to reality...come on in we have room. The dellusional part comes from the idea that cohabitation means a greater bond or committment when in actuallity it only means that in your mind...and only for a finite period.

As to those who question where my passion may come from concerning this subject...I say passion not anger...I would be happy to explain. When any subject becomes clouded by popular opinion rather than actual facts to the point where intelligent people are actually looking to legitimize irrational behavior I become passionate. Anyone is welcome to do statistical research on the ratio of divorce for people who live together prior to marriage is startingly higher than those who do not...why? several reasons do the research find out. There are several good sources for factual non biased information on this subject. As I have suggested before...the US census...local, state, federal statistics...legal journals, case law...all at one's finger tips. Ofcourse there are abborations. And there are people born with 11 toes...so what?

Also this board is filled with marriage in shambles because it is a marriage builders board. It doesnt take a statistical genius to come to the conculsion that the ratio of people on this board have had more problems than your average random selection of the population...This is what researchers refer to as a biased focal group.

Bottom line...Free country...do what you want...its your life. Just dont shoot the messenger because you dont like the facts.

Facts are facts...good luck at being the anomoly...you'll need it.

I think this article sheds some light on why stats for some marriages are less positive. It may not be so much the fact of living together first, as it is the mindset that that reflects...

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5025_qa.html

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Facts are facts...good luck at being the anomoly...you'll need it.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">First of all whatever statistics you've gathered, and I have yet to see you reveal any, could really be questioned b/c in doing research to gather statistics the majority of the time the results fall way to many other factors. There are too many other factors involved to say that the reason a marriage failed is b/c the couple lived together prior to being married. So let's talk about the 50%+ divorce rate. Now surely, all of these marriages did not come from a cohabitating environnment so what exactly are the "facts" when it comes to why a marriage did or did NOT survive? It could have many a number of different contributing factors ie, money, children, communication, and the list goes on that led to the breakdown of the marriage. The fact that they lived together or not before M is neither here nor there. That's just like saying "Oh, you know there marriage failed b/c African Americans have a higher rate of divorce and b/c they were African American BEFORE they got married their marriage had less of a chance to survive. Ridiculous!

Like I said, each relationship is different. Each person should take the time to evaluate whether living together is going to be best FOR THEM, not based on any statistic or what ANYone else thinks.
I'm more than a statistical number, I am a person and I don't think anyone life should be dictated by what the "numbers" say.

<small>[ December 04, 2002, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: anyse ]</small>

FYI, I have offered many options as to where to glean specific "FACTS" regarding this topic on several different levels.I dont know where you live, what age group in which you fall, or even what sex you are. Frankly, I dont care. Look it up yourself. Ofcourse statistics should not dictate to anyone however being aware of information beyond...we love each other...we are soul mates should be important. For example, how does this affect my credit? Who is responsible for particular expenses? What rights do I have to property? I am not suggesting that living together and divorce rates directly correlate. I am suggesting living together unprotected by legal statute can have a direct correlation on poverty statistics of women and children. I am only suggesting that people weigh all the risks of both options: marriage and living together. Check the laws in your municipality you may be suprised at what rights married people are afforded that single people are not. Especially women who have children unmarried. In a majority of states a child is the natural heir of their mother's husband regardless of biology. So saying a married woman is more protected than a non-married woman with regards to children and support. A non married woman would have to take a punative father to court for DNA testing which could take up to a year and in many states women are asked to divulge their sexual history for publication so that if another possible father may exist his rights will not be ignored. These statements of sexual activity must be sworn to and carry a punishment similar to that of perjury if proven false. How very degrading...but true. Even if a child born during a marriage is proven to be biologically not the child of the father it is an irrellevant fact...IRRELLEVANT. That is the law...in Ohio, NJ, California...and several other states. (See the Ohio Revised Code for particular language...also USA today ran a recent story on the rights of men/non dna fathers) Most people like to weigh the pros and cons before making a life altering decision, some however are of the opinion that they way they feel should be the most important factor. All I am saying is we do not live in a vacuum, if things do not work out are you sure you know what you are risking...sorry to say most people are risking way more than a bruised heart.

Well it seems like all your reasoning has to do with finance and money which is exactly why I feel the system has a glitch. It's exactly that pattern of thinking that disempowers a woman and makes it seem as if M is the only way she can take care of herself and her child. Why on earth would you get M without having a COMPLETE informed decision? To each his own. There is NO right or wrong and the fact that legally the law protects a wife over someone who is just a girlfriend is no reason to get married w/o really knowing who you plan on spending the rest of your life with. It can be JUST as hard if not harder to get out of a failed M. It can be hard on the finances as well as the children. Being M does NOT guarantee you any riches and if you're looking for it to secure your wealth in this world then your biggest problem is not whether someone you don't even know should live with the SO before getting M, it should be figuring out why you look at the world in such a narrow, materialistic light.

And futhermore, if you go about spouting statistics this and statistics that, then you could at least give some examples to try and prove your point. Naming a source does NOT mean that you actually know whay you're talking about. You could've just typed in a word on your search engine.

I think it's good to examine the source of where the supposed "advice" is coming from. Your H cheated during your engagement and you mean to tell me that it would not have been more benefical to have lived w/him prior to getting M so that you'd have SOME clue as to what type of man you were marrying? And now he has an OC. He propositions YOUR SISTER and you married him anyway. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> Now you could have very well lived w/this man prior to marrying him and if you did then you knew what you were getting BEFORE you got it. But I'm sure that you are happy b/c "the law" has given you recourse to be financially stable in the mist of being M to this man whom you obviously didn't know as much about as you thought you did.

Anyse,

First of all, I do not spout statistic and I gave you exact references...Check the Ohio Revised Code...Martial assest, lease law etc.

Second, you seem to be under some misguided dellusion that I support marriage over living together. I do not. I support neither without intense communication and research but when analyzing the two it is a no-brainer to outline the pros vs the cons. I have never suggested getting married rather than live together. What I am encouraging people to consider is things they generally ignore and then are devestated by. I cannot understand why being aware of all of the facts about a situation is a bad thing.

Third, my past is exactly why I encourage people to be aware of everything before they make ANY decision based heavily on emotion. Obviously it can be devestating.

Fourth, I hope your personal attack on me and my personal tragedies will help others recognize exactly what I am saying. I made deciscions based on emotion...although many of the events listed in my sig were not revealed to me in that particular time line, it was only after years that some events came to light. Would I be better off now if I had only lived with him? I can say with 100% certainty NO. Would I be better off if I had not married him? MAYBE.

Try if you can to see my point clearly. I am not saying run out and get married rather than move in together. I am saying that if you are conteplating a partnership role that you consider a lifetime match be ready to make that committment with your eyes wide open. Also I narrowly focus on the material aspect because too many people ignore this devestating factor. Personally my religious beliefs and personal upbringing, guide my beliefs in this area but I realize these aspects are uniquely mine. However, everyone is affected by legal jurisdictions and monetary issues. These issues are more universal yet generally not considered.

And yes my husband does have a child with another woman. I consider this child a gift from God. For some reason God wanted me in this child's life. She is innocent and Lord knows her mother is no role model. I think it is you who have a narrow view and judge me without cause.

I wonder why you have so much venom? What have I done but encouraged people to learn, do research, be aware, and demand the best possible life for themselves? I am sorry if you have misunderstood me, although I do not apologize for any of my comments.

Best wishes

ayslyne

Bit o' rambling here so...

Gordo 44,
It is, after all, your starter marriage.
Is that like a starter house? Not really good enough for you to keep?

Curious53,
My boyfriend and I have been living together for four years, and I love it. We are not talking about marriage. I’m not saying we never will, but I just have too many “issues,” and prefer just to let it lie for the foreseeable future. He seems content with that plan.
So you aren't comfortable bring up "issues" with him? Of course he is content. He owes you nothing. If he doesn't like something, he can leave.

We maintain a joint account for the house payment and other household expenses.
In most states, that is almost (legally) being married.

Our commitment to each other is quite strong.
But not THAT strong (enough to get married.)

anyse,
Think about it...the divorce rate is at 50% and lets say that most of these couples never lived together prior to being married. Then why is the divorce rate at 50%?
Because those people who live together BEFORE getting married divorce at 60-70 percent and bring the divorce rate up for all married couples.

There are too many other factors involved to say that the reason a marriage failed is b/c the couple lived together prior to being married
Very true. Simply living together does NOT in itself increase the chance of divorce. This would be akin to saying being born leads to death. It's what happens in between that matters.

Since you decide to live together vd. marriage, it would seem that ou are not quite willing to share everything with your partner, therefore some sense of it may not work out as opposed to doing wha you have to to make it work out. Much easier to jump ship than repair it.

Why on earth would you get M without having a COMPLETE informed decision?
So I guess you highly support having sex with someone BEFORE they get married? After all, they may not know how to do it or do it very well in ways which please you.

The main idea behind dating is to get to know the person well enough to decide if they are worth marrying. But lots of people get the feeling of love and decide it's great. But they should wait until the "honeymoon" period is over before making such an important decision as spending the rest of their lives with someone.