I''m breaking all the rules!

[louisvgirl]

I agree with most of the ladies here. I don''t want to be redundant, but you really need to be honest to yourself. I''m all for women buying their own jewelry. Why not? The ring you bought, however, is giving him credit for something he did not do. I know that as a LIW, I became a little "obsessesed" with wanting a ring and being engaged. (I think most of us have at some point or another). It wasn''t because "I just wanted it", but because I wanted to spend the rest of my life with omy BF and make a life together. I don''t know if this is what your really after or if it''s "the ring." You having gone out to buy a ring and putting it on your left hand, makes me think so. I wonder that if with time, as you continue to wear this ring, you''ll tend to grow feeling resentful of your situation and your BF for not giving you a ring. A proposal, is a proposal, is a proposal. If you don''t think your BF would not get on bended knee or ?????, just doesn''t make sense. A man can and will when he wants to. This just makes me think of those men who spend 8+yrs with their GF, then break up, and he marrys the next girl that comes by in a wink. A guy WILL do it, when HE WANTS TO. (He will propose to someone he truly wants to marry) Try not to fall into the trap of making excuses for him. I know you want to be engaged, but telling strangers that "yeah, I''m engaged", and your not, is going to tick you off with time. I would switch that ring over to my right hand, asap. Have you ever stopped to think what your co-workers might be saying about the ring you told them he bought you? Don''t you think they might be saying "well he could have given her a promise ring, at least". It''s like someone else, said. He just might get comfortable with you passing that ring on as an e-ring and feel that you don''t need one, because your perfectly content with the one you have on. I apologize if I''m being too harsh, but I think you really need to take a look at whole picture.

 

[musey]

Eh, to each his own. But isn''t "pretending to be his wife for doctor''s appointment purposes"... well... insurance fraud?

Maybe (probably) I''m misunderstanding.

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

Elvis has left the building.......

cheers--Sharon

 

[Blenheim]

Date: 12/13/2007 5:16:35 PM
Author: musey
Eh, to each his own. But isn''t ''pretending to be his wife for doctor''s appointment purposes''... well... insurance fraud?

Maybe (probably) I''m misunderstanding.

The way I read it, she''s saying that she''s his wife so that she''s allowed to be there for the appointment. I think that some doctors don''t want non-relatives in the examination room with you. I''ve never personally had problems having my husband in the exam room with me before we got married, but my understanding is that that''s one (of many) benefits that marriage has over trying your best to approximate it legally through wills, power of attorney, etc.

I really doubt that she could just pretend to be his wife for insurance reasons, at least without forging documents. My husband''s trying to add me to his health insurance and is having problems because we somehow misplaced BOTH official copies of our marriage license when we moved a month after our wedding. (We got two so that if we lost one, we''d still have a backup. Ha!)

Is the OP coming back? She could probably clarify.

 

[Sassee]

I pretty much agree with everything that has already been said. But my sense is, that it would be incredibly exhausting to answer the inevitable questions that must follow (whilst propergating the lie), upon people seeing you wearing the ring.

You say that you are telling people that your boyfriend gave it to you as a gift. Do people acknowledge the symbolism of the ring being on THAT finger? And how do you respond? Do you tell people that you are getting engaged "soon"?

Just curious is all...

And what happens if people ask these questions and he is in the vicinity?

 

[brooke.lynne]

Hi ladies.... I''m still here!

Thank you for all of your responses. It took me a while to get through them all, and a lot of you brought up really valid points. I appreciate your (sometimes brutal) honesty.

Reading back over my original post, it struck me that I definitely came of as a little crazy. Okay, maybe a lot crazy. To be honest, I haven''t told a single person that I''m engaged. When I said that I intended to do so, I really only meant people I don''t know well and will never talk to again, like an old lady in line at the grocery store or something. And frankly, those people don''t ask! It just doesn''t come up. The only people who do are creepy guys - and I reserve the right to tell them I am married, and have since before I even met my BF. My neighbors all think that we are married. And what I meant about doctor''s appointments was that he doesn''t schedule his own - I do, by saying I need to make an appointment for my husband.

Which brings me to another point - we are legally domestic partners, under New York law, and are thus afforded pretty much every legal right of married couples. So no insurance fraud - we are legitimately on the same insurance plan.

One co-worker asked about my ring, and asked if I was engaged. I said that I''m not, but that this is to hold me over till I am. I realize this brings up a lot of questions about filling a void - and that''s exactly what it is. My BF didn''t object when I told him I wanted to tell people it was a gift (he didn''t exactly okay it, I suppose, I think he just didn''t want to discuss it). It is like a crutch for both of us. I get to pretend that people regard me differently (they don''t), and he sees that it has kept me a bit more sane. The truth is it takes a lot of work for me to not pressure him. I don''t want it to happen until he is absolutely ready, because I want this to be my only marriage, so it has to be done right.

The idea that he is not likely to get down on one knee for a conventional proposal is true, but is also an excuse. He is staunchly anti-sentimentalism. But he must get this right. That is important to me. But at the same time, the independent aspect of my personality has serious objections to the idea of waiting around for someone else to make a major decision about my life. It just doesn''t seem fair that I am supposed to bide my time, a-wishing and a-hoping while someone else is in the driver''s seat, navigating my future.

Please forgive the earlier rash, moody post. Any suggestions on how to cope with where I am?

 

[brooke.lynne]

One more thing:

This evening we were watching an episode of Friends (which we have never, ever done) and it was the one where Chandler picks out Monica''s engagement ring and tells his friends that he''s going to propose. And I just couldn''t help it: I started to get a little sniffly. In my mind so much is wrapped up in this that it''s starting to impact my otherwise healthy sense of self-worth: like I must not be worth marrying in his mind. Which I know is not true at all - I don''t think married or engaged women are necessarily more loved by their husbands/FIs than I am by my BF. It''s not like there is no commitment: we have taken countless irreversible-feeling steps, quite a few of which can only be undone by a matter of legal procedure. But I still, in the heat of the moment, feel like it is a reflection on my shortcomings that I''m not engaged yet.

Know the feeling?

P.S. - he asked me what was wrong, noticing I was trying to stifle my reaction. but right now I have a no-bringing-it-up policy, which I hope will make it come about sooner, because he says he wants it to be a surprise.

 

[bee*]

Date: 12/13/2007 5:06:38 PM
Author: NewEnglandLady
I think the only danger with wearing a ring on the left ring finger is if you WANT for it to be an e-ring and it isn''t. Then the issue isn''t really the physical ring at all.

Yeah I agree. Although D had bought me three rings before I got my e-ring and I didn''t wear any of them on my left ring finger. I wanted to save that finger for the big one!!

 

[bee*]

Date: 12/14/2007 3:59:09 AM
Author: brooke.lynne
One more thing:


This evening we were watching an episode of Friends (which we have never, ever done) and it was the one where Chandler picks out Monica''s engagement ring and tells his friends that he''s going to propose. And I just couldn''t help it: I started to get a little sniffly. In my mind so much is wrapped up in this that it''s starting to impact my otherwise healthy sense of self-worth: like I must not be worth marrying in his mind. Which I know is not true at all - I don''t think married or engaged women are necessarily more loved by their husbands/FIs than I am by my BF. It''s not like there is no commitment: we have taken countless irreversible-feeling steps, quite a few of which can only be undone by a matter of legal procedure. But I still, in the heat of the moment, feel like it is a reflection on my shortcomings that I''m not engaged yet.


Know the feeling?


P.S. - he asked me what was wrong, noticing I was trying to stifle my reaction. but right now I have a no-bringing-it-up policy, which I hope will make it come about sooner, because he says he wants it to be a surprise.

I definitely knew the feeling of wanting to get engaged as I was with D over 8 years before we actually did get engaged. To be honest, although it was frustrating at times, I never let it take over me or my life, and I think that''s where you''re going wrong at the moment. I think that you need to start busying yourself with other things and also, if you haven''t already, have a chat with your bf and figure out what he is thinking in terms of engagement etc. I had a chat with D early last year, as I thought that we were heading towards an engagement then, and he honestly hadn''t thought of it at all and definitely wasn''t ready. When I asked him would he ever be ready/when he would be ready, he told me that by the end of this year he would like to be engaged, so I was happy to wait as I wanted to give him time to feel ready himself. Do you know if your bf has any plans to be engaged in the next year/5 years etc? For me, having an end point really helped.

 

[gwendolyn]

Brooke, I have a friend who is in almost your exact same position--she has been with her boyfriend for almost 7 years and everyone around her (other than me) is engaged or married already. She has been with her boyfriend the longest, and feels like she should have been first to get engaged. She also hates the feeling that her boyfriend is in complete control of their relationship; he refuses to talk to her about their future, and she is unwilling to set a deadline and walk if he doesn''t at least discuss things with her. She has said multiple times that she feels it is a reflection of what he really thinks of her--that she is good enough to live with and date for so long, but not good enough to marry.

She''s so frustrated that he''s given her every piece of jewelry in existence, besides an engagement ring or wedding band. In protest, she''s stopped wearing all the jewelry he''s given her. Knowing this and being an enabler, when we were out shopping last weekend, we ended up in a jewelry store and I encouraged her to get a right-hand ring that she''d been wanting for ages.

I think you and your boyfriend need to do what my friend and her boyfriend need to do: sit down and talk about whether he wants to get married--soon, in a few years, or ever. I personally think it''s telling if he refuses to talk about it full stop--he doesn''t have to have answers right away, just has to be willing to listen and think about it.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Brooke.lynne, thanks for checking back in! So many LIW (and even those of us who are now married) can really relate to how you feel. I just have a quick question for you--you said that you were already legal domestic partners in the state of NY. I know that NY is a state that still allows common-law marriage, but you still have to go to city hall to declare that you both want to be in a common-law marriage and fill out some paperwork. Is that what you guys did? If so, maybe he feels less pressure to propose since you are sharing the same legal benefits. Or are you just on his insurance as a domestic partner? I live in MA, so domestic partners can be covered under insurance (geared towards gay couples), but without being married they have no other legal rights.

Gwendolyn, maybe you should get your friend a suitcase and some nice running shoes for Christmas because she needs to RUN, not walk, away from that relationship!

 

[brooklyngirl]

I must say that I agree with the other ladies here. I have been in your situation before, and it really bothered me that I had to wait for someone else to decide my future. The only way that I found to cope with it is to set a timeline for myself of when I had enough. This way, even though he has control over when you get engaged, YOU have control over how long he has to ask you.

Also, you mentioned that you''ve imposed a no-talking-about-it rule -- why is that? Have you talked about it, and been asked to not bring it up?

IMHO, you cannot keep your mouth shut about this issue, and not have an internal timeline for yourself, and it''s an awful feeling to be in such a situation.

So, to end this long post, I say you need to talk to him and let him know that there is a problem -- it''s not fair that only one person is bearing the brunt of the this

. Talk to him and figure out if you''re on the same page, and what his plans are. Also, you need to know the reasons that he''s not ready, at least that way you can see if there is progress toward engagement. Otherwise, you''re stuck in limbo indefinitely.

Good Luck!
-K

 

[alyson423]

Hi again-- thanks for coming back and clarifying. I don''t think there''s a person on these boards who can''t sympathize or who hasn''t experienced some of what you''re feeling. I do still have a couple of concerns. You mention:

“He is staunchly anti-sentimentalism. But he must get this right. That is important to me.”

What happens if he proposes in a way that doesn’t measure up to your expectations? I’m afraid that you’re sooo focused on it that if the details don’t align with your dreams, you’ll be crushed. You also say:

“the independent aspect of my personality has serious objections to the idea of waiting around for someone else to make a major decision about my life.”

Of course you have thoughts and opinions about one of the biggest decisions in life! I was with BF (now DH) 4 years, had never particularly cared about getting married, when essentially the feeling hit overnight. One afternoon I just said, “hey, this wasn’t important to me before, but my opinion has changed. It’s important to me now. We don’t have to be engaged tomorrow, but my plans include us getting engaged in the next few months.” DH was surprised but he loved me and wanted to be with me. He said he was committed to me at the same level with or without a ring, so if the ring and engagement were important to me that was fine with him. Two months later we were engaged.

I think it’s important to bring this up at the right time. Don’t bring it up at when you think you might get overemotional. Do it when you’re feeling strong in yourself and clear-minded.

By the way, he may just not be ready, and you have to decide whether you are ok with that. If you aren’t, unhappy decisions may need to be made. You do have the ability to guide what’s happening to you, but you don’t have the ability to make him feel the way you do if he doesn’t.

If getting engaged is important to you, tell him. Someone who is “staunchly anti-sentimentalism” will appreciate honesty and straightforwardness in your approach. Besides, I guarantee that if you’re crying at Friends he already knows.

When you say nothing is wrong, he could feel like you are trying to be manipulative or playing games. Clear the air. Good luck!

 

[janinegirly]

brooke-i still see this as your bf not being ready or willing to commit and no indication of that changing soon. He is doing everything BUT take that last step and it's (understandably!) affecting your self-esteem. I don't understand this firm "no bringing it up" policy. You say it's b/c you want him to move forward on his own pace, but in that case it seems like you'll be waiting a VERY long time !! I mean how much longer till you crack...you've already bought yourself a ring to make yourself feel better even though you and everyone around you is aware it's not actually anything in reality. You say the neighbors assume you're married as if that's a validation.

i mean there's a core problem here--you would like to be married as it is something you psychologically need to feel that he is 100% committed and to satisfy society's view of you as his partner (like many women). You're bf does not (so far). The fact that YOU need this and the 2 of you are already living like a married couple makes it all the more worrying that he's still mulling things over. I don't believe it has much to do with sentimality but about his lack of committment to the long term future of this relationship, even after 4+ years! My Dh was also not a sentimentalist and not a big fan of marriage as a concept, but once he saw how important it was to ME and that it was causing friction in our relationship/hurting my self-esteem, he was ready to take the plunge. Thanfully since then, he's all about marriage and being the dutiful husband--more than I could have imagined. It took a lot of talks though and honesty!

What are your bf's reasons for not moving forward? Have you asked? How long long are you willing to wait? Will you be happy in this relationship as domestic partners but not man and wife? Do the two of you want a family? I agree with the other poster that he has little reason to change the status quo as things stand, and you not having an honest heart to heart pretty much allows that. You say you're avoiding the talks b/c you're tired of the hemming and hawing--but I just see alot of denial and avoidance of the real issues.

 

[SeattleSweetheart]

I totally agree with you Brooke on the hating waiting around for HIM to decide if WE get married. I am an adult woman with my own life to live. I am NOT waiting around for anyone to decide how I live my life.

I talked with my boyfriend about how I was feeling in regards to being a LIW and told him I didn't want a proposal because I disagree with the woman having to wait around for the guy to make a decision that affect both people. He and I discussed it and we have mutually decided that the first week in June we will sit down together, discuss all aspects of our relationship, and then decide TOGETHER that we will or will not get married. If we decide that we are going to get married, then he'll propose sometime in the next 3 weeks following. The proposal will be redundant because we have already decided to get married, it's just an opportunity for him to present the ring in a romantic way. I know it is totally unromantic, but guess what? I'm not physically ill with worry about when he's going to ask me to marry him.

Why isn't the guy every worried and anxious about if the woman wants to marry him? Does every guy just think that every woman they date will wait FOREVER until they pop the question?

Okay, off my soapbox.

Anyway, I wanted to suggest that you read this past post.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/in-limbo.71204/

It's about a guy waiting too long to propose and the affect it can have on his relationship and the woman he is dating. But is from the perspective of the woman he is dating. You might want to have your boyfriend read it too.

Good luck with everything!

Don't wait around forever for this guy!

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

brooke.lynne, I''m guessing you are still asking for opinions, so here goes. Your BF is using you and has no intention of marrying you. I think that most of us on pricescope feel that marriage is more than a piece of paper. You guys are "pretending" to the point of being on the same health care plan, but it is just pretending. You posts sound like just a long list of excuses you are using to cover for him.

Your "don''t bring it up"policy is obviously causing you great distress. If it weren''t, you wouldn''t be posting your situation on a jewelry website for stangers to comment on. You are not happy with just being domestic partners and there is nothing wrong with that. You just want what most of us want-- you want your BF to make you his wife. Your inner struggle is there for a reason. It is a red flag that something is seriously wrong.

Have you ever thought about the fact that me might not be "THE ONE"? If you continue to stay with him, you will forever be in a less than ideal situation that will only further damage your self esteem. Do you really want to force this guy to commit to marriage? You are a feeling, intelligent woman who could do a lot better.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/14/2007 9:20:39 AM
Author: NewEnglandLady
Gwendolyn, maybe you should get your friend a suitcase and some nice running shoes for Christmas because she needs to RUN, not walk, away from that relationship!

Tell me about it! I saw her last weekend (it was just the two of us), and asked if she had anywhere to go if she gave him a deadline (the lease for their apartment runs out in April and he keeps talking about buying HIS house, not their house) just to talk about things even, and she mentioned a friend of hers that''s said she could stay over whenever. BUT when I brought it up later, she said that she would only be allowed to bring one cat with her if she stayed with this friend, and she wasn''t going to leave either of them with the boyfriend.

The worst part is that I''m actually better friends with the guy than I am with the chick--I''ve known him since I was 13, and he''s wonderful....but not with this. He''s being a jerk because he won''t talk to her (which I think is answer enough), and she''s being a jerk because she does nothing but complain about it and isn''t willing to do anything to make the situation change because she''s afraid of losing him. I understand that, but everything she says tells me that she''s unhappy being in limbo like this. But, given the fact that they can''t in 7 years have an adult conversation about where the relationship is going, that makes me think that she''ll be in limbo for years, maybe even her whole life. And if she''s unhappy with it, she needs to DO SOMETHING.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

I''m so sorry to hear that, Gwen, that must be really hard for you to watch. I truly believe that every woman who wants to be married reaches her breaking point at some point, but it''s such a painful process. I''m sure her self-esteem is shot and it sounds like they''re both so full of resentment that even if he did want to propose, they''d probably need some couples therapy just to get back into a healthy relationship. I really do believe that limbo can reach a point where there is so much bitterness the relationship is destroyed.

This happened to a friend of mine--we actually moved out the same weekend. When I left my relationship we hadn''t really gotten to that point, we didn''t blame each other, we both understood the other and we had many loving memories, I just didn''t want to waste any more time with a man who wasn''t ready (he proposed 3 months afer I left). My friend, however, had gotten to the point where she was very resentful and angry with her bf for leading her on. He proposed the day she moved out and she said she just didn''t want it anymore. It''s now a year later and she was just proposed to by a guy she met three months after leaving her ex and she''s happier than she''s ever been.

This is why I think leaving a relationship that does not fulfill your needs is always successful. It allows you to seek a relationship that can fulfill your needs. When I was in limbo I had to seriously ask myself why I was staying--the answer was that I was afraid I wouldn''t find somebody I loved as much as D. The moment I knew I was staying in the relationship because of fear, I knew it was completely wrong. If you can say to yourself "I am staying in this relationship for fear that _____ (I wont'' find anybody else, I''ll be lonely, I will have a different lifestyle, whatever the case may be)" then you know it''s wrong.

Still, even if you know you SHOULD leave, it''s hard. So many women leave only to come back to the SAME relationship with no change at all, hoping that this time he''ll want marriage.

I''m so sorry about your friend, Gwen, I know how hard it is to watch a friend go through such a rough time knowing you can''t do anything because it''s such a personal journey and one she has to take herself. Sorry for the thread hijack--Brooke, take it from many of us who''ve been in your shoes. The moment you take control of your own life is the moment you allow yourself to be happy. Nobody can do that for you. We can just strongly encourage you

 

[vslover]

Why not propose to him? If he says no, you know where you''re really at? Just a thought.

 

[brooklyngirl]

I don''t think proposing to him would be a good idea. IMHO, if he wanted to get married he would propose. Why propose to a person you know doesn''t want marriage at this point? It would only result in hurt feelings

 

[sandia_rose]

>I'm so sorry to hear that, Gwen, that must be really hard for you to watch. I truly
>believe that every woman who wants to be married reaches her breaking point at
>some point, but it's such a painful process.

I agree, it stinks to watch a friend go through this -- especially when you know that
it doesn't have to happen. But as you said, people have breaking points....each person's
is different. I just hope that Gwen's friend "sees the light" sooner rather than later.

I posted a while back on another thread about a friend of mine who was with
a guy for close to 15 years, starting in her early 20s. When she was really young, marriage
wasn't a thought for her - she was just happy living with the guy. 5, 6 years went by, and
she started becoming interested in marriage and starting a family. When she brought it
up to him, his response (and he had been previously married and was raked over the coals
in his divorce, by the way) was, "Been there, done that. I don't want to get married
and I don't want kids, either. After mutual friends and I heard that, knowing how badly
she wanted to be married and have kids and knowing how long she'd stuck it out
already, we begged her to break it off with him. But she insisted that she loved him and
was fine with everything - and she got mad at US for saying something to her. We didn't
tell her he was a bad guy - only that if she wanted marriage and kids, she was barking up
the wrong tree. But she was sure that if she just was patient for a little longer, he'd
somehow/some way change his mind. By this time, she'd already been with him for close
to 7 years! Granted, the guy had a bad experience first time around, but he'd already
lived with my friend for all that time.....how much longer would he need, I wondered,
being that they were practically married, anyway?! Ironically, he lived with my friend
longer than he was with his ex wife - dating and marriage total!

5 more years went by. She brought up marriage again and got the same
answer. By this time, she was in her mid-30s and realized (finally!) that he wasn't budging. She
moved out, told him she didn't want to see him anymore and started dating other people.
Within 6 months, she met a guy who'd also never been married before and was eager to
settle down and start a family. They dated maybe a year and a half, got engaged and married.
They were and are very happy -- BUT here's the kicker: they started trying to get pregnant
after the wedding and tried for over a year with no results. He got tested and was fine.
She got tested and found that she is going into early menopause (she just turned 41).
There is nothing that can be done for her at this point, except adopting or very
expensive IVF or GIFT, which they don't have the budget to consider. She and her
husband are looking into adoption, but she is now angry at wasting so many years with the guy
who wouldn't commit -- especially after her doctor told her that her perimenopause is a
recent development. It was really important for her to experience pregnancy and birth and
have her husband's child, so she's pretty devistated over this. This isn't that unusual of a
situation - especially for those girls that stay with men 7, 8, 9+ years, waiting for them
to commit so they can start families. We hear about all these celebs that have kids in their
40s and grandmothers who give birth....but for most of us regular people who don't have
the money or the free time to work with the best and most expensive fertility doctors, the clock
starts ticking much much slower in your late 30s and early 40s. It stinks, but it's human biology.

Even if you don't want to have children or more children, I think that it's a positive thing
for women to tell men upfront what they want and when. That way, no one is left
in the dark and no one feels led on. I have a son (and my boyfriend has 2 teens) and
neither of us wants more more children at our ages, but I do want to settle down. Move
in together at the very least, and maybe marry a year or so after that. Marriage is
not so important to me as moving in together is. I have told my boyfriend of
2 years many times that the longest that I can "just date" a man without living
with him or without a firm commitment/future plans is 2 - 2-1/2 years...
no longer than that. By that time, a man knows whether or not he sees you in
his life long term. We will be at the 2-1/2 year mark in June 2008. I respect that my
boyfriend had been in a horrible 20 year marriage and is somewhat gun-shy. I also
respect that he's had a lot of stressful things happen in his life (problems with one of
his kids, problems with his ex, his mom is terminally ill) since he started dating
me. However, I told him my "internal timeline" when we started dating. If that
frightened him or he did not agree, then he had the chance to say something
then -- not date me all this time and say nothing and think something else. So,
if he does not propose marriage or moving in by June, then I will not date him
anymore. I love him deeply and vice versa, and breaking up with him would hurt
and take a long time to get over....but I don't want to wait in limbo for years and years.
Limbo - not knowing and waiting - is much worse than healing from a break-up.

>This is why I think leaving a relationship that does not fulfill your needs is always
>successful. It allows you to seek a relationship that can fulfill your needs.
>When I was in limbo I had to seriously ask myself why I was staying--the answer
>was that I was afraid I wouldn't find somebody I loved as much as D. The moment
>I knew I was staying in the relationship because of fear, I knew it was completely
>wrong. If you can say to yourself "I am staying in this relationship for fear that _____
>(I wont' find anybody else, I'll be lonely, I will have a different lifestyle, whatever
>the case may be)" then you know it's wrong.

Agreed! I stayed with my ex-husband for a year longer than I should have - mostly
because I didn't want my son to be a child of divorce and I didn't want to go back to
living in a tiny apartment like I did when I was previously single (real estate in my area
is virtually impossible to own now without two incomes. I can't even afford a condo!).
I also didn't want to go home everyday to an empty house. But I was unhappy,
and my son was getting to the age where he was aware that his father and I
fought all the time. I live alone now and am coping with the "empty house" feeling.
And I don't mind the apartment as much as I thought. It's cheaper and easier/quicker
to clean than the house I had with my ex was. Not to mention the biggest pay-off
of making that choice: my boyfriend is the type of man I wish I married instead of my
ex, and I wouldn't have him in my life or have even met him had I stayed where I was.
Even if my current boyfriend and I don't work out long term, I now know that I
have the desire and ability to meet a good man - and I DESERVE one - as
opposed to someone like my ex.

>The moment you take control of your own life is the moment you allow yourself
>to be happy. Nobody can do that for you.

And the thing is, once you get a taste of how your life could be when you state
upfront what you want and are not afraid to leave if you can't get what you want,
you find that you have much more confidence and make better choices.

Bridget in Connecticut.

 

[mirre]

Sorry if I repeat someone...

What about getting the ring resized to fit on your right hand?

 

[vslover]

If he really doesn''t want to marry her, she''s fooling herself if she thinks that buying herself a ring means that they''re committed (and it sorta seems that she was trying to convince herself they''re *already* engaged when she was saying..."what does it mean to be engaged anyway?"). It was just a thought...putting some of the control back in her own hands, etc.

 

[surfgirl]

brooke, I know how you''re feeling and I think seeing a counselor might help you, and him, work on where you''re really going.

BTW, I was under the impression that "domestic partners" only applied to gay couples since they do not have the option of marrying in this crazy country...Am I wrong?

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/14/2007 4:02:44 PM
Author: surfgirl
BTW, I was under the impression that 'domestic partners' only applied to gay couples since they do not have the option of marrying in this crazy country...Am I wrong?

Depends on which state you live in, but I know that until a few years ago in the state of Maryland, living with a partner for 7 years got you a common law marriage.

 

[MoonWater]

Maryland doesn't have common law marriages (ETA: I just realized you said until a few years ago...how long do you know? I had researched this about 2 years ago and was surprise that it didnt exist). Also, many companies (Starbucks, I believe, was one of the first) offer benefits to domestic partners, gay or not. It's about equality. I actually considered this at my current job because I'm trying to get my bf to quit his very crappy job so he can focus on school. The only issue is that for tax purposes this is considered taxable income, where as for a married couple, it would not be.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Domestic partner health coverage is geared towards gay couples, but some employers allow opposite-sex partners to be on the same policy. We had a domestic partner option where I work before gay marriage became legal in MA and I asked my employer if my boyfriend could be on my plan since his health coverage was not as good. The HR manager said it was only for gay couples, so we couldn't.

As for the common law marriage states, DH and I lived in MD for about 4 years before we moved to MA and he used to joke that I was his common law wife. As it turns out, those states that recognize common law marriages require you to fill out some paperwork, file a joint tax return, etc. for the common law marriage to be recognized (and you have to go through the divorce process if you want it dissolved), so in order to be in a common-law marriage you can't just live together for a few years. When the common-law marriage is filed, it's legal in all states (though you can only file in 11 states).

 

[sandia_rose]

style="WIDTH: 99%; HEIGHT: 82px">Date: 12/14/2007 4:07:20 PM
Author: gwendolyn

Depends on which state you live in, but I know that until a few years ago in the state of Maryland, living with a partner for 7 years got you a common law marriage.

I'm bored in work right now, so I looked it up (thanks to Columbia Law School's website and Wikipedia). Here's the skinny on all 50 states, for those that are interested. I learned some new stuff, too. I was under the impression that living together for X years automatically granted a common-law marriage. Not so:

Common-law marriage, sometimes called informal marriage or marriage by habit and repute is, historically, a form of interpersonal status in which a man and a woman are not legally married. The term is often mistakenly understood to indicate an interpersonal relationship that is not recognized in law. In fact, a common law marriage is just as legally binding as a statutory or ceremonial marriage in some jurisdictions—it is just begun differently.

The essential distinctions of a common-law marriage are:

* Common-law marriages are not licensed by government authorities, although they may be legally recorded in the public records of some governmental entities.

* Common-law marriages are not necessarily solemnized.

* Some states record common law marriages as part of the public record, the same as marriages by license and formal ceremony

* Cohabitation alone does not amount to common law marriage; the couple in question must hold themselves out to the world to be husband and wife.

* In some jurisdictions, a couple must have cohabited and held themselves out to the world as husband and wife for a minimum length of time for the marriage to be recognised as valid.

* The parties must mutually consent to be married, and must be of legal age or have their parents' permission to be married.

* There is no such thing as "common-law divorce". Once a marriage is validly contracted, whether according to statute or according to common law, the marriage can only be dissolved by a legal proceeding in the pertinent trial court (usually family court or probate court).

Common-law marriage can no longer be contracted in the following states, as of the dates given: Alaska (1917), Arizona (1913), California (1895), Florida (196, Georgia (1997), Hawaii (1920), Idaho (1996), Illinois (1905), Indiana (195, Kentucky (1852), Maine (1652, when it became part of Massachusetts; then a state, 1820), Massachusetts (1646), Michigan (1957), Minnesota (1941), Mississippi (1956), Missouri (1921), Nebraska (1923), Nevada (1943), New Mexico (1860), New York (1933, also 1902–190, New Jersey (1939), North Dakota (1890), Ohio (1991), Pennsylvania (2005), South Dakota (1959), and Wisconsin (1917).

The following states never permitted common-law marriage: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Common-law marriage can still be contracted in the following jurisdictions: Alabama, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire (posthumously), Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Note there is no such thing as "common-law divorce" — that is, you can't get out of a common-law marriage as easily as you can get into one. Only the contract of the marriage is irregular; everything else about the marriage is perfectly regular. People who marry per the old common law tradition must petition the appropriate court in their state for a dissolution of marriage.

The requirements for those states that do recognize it are:

Colorado
The elements of a common-law marriage are, if both spouses: (1) are legally free to contract a valid ceremonial marriage, (2) hold themselves out as husband and wife; (3) consent to the marriage; (4) cohabitate; and (5) have the reputation in the community as being married.

District of Columbia
The elements of a common-law marriage are: (1) "an express, mutual, present intent and agreement to be husband and wife"; "followed by" (2) "cohabitation in good faith."

Iowa
"The three elements of a common-law marriage are: (1) the present intent and agreement to be married; (2) continuous cohabitation; and (3) public declaration that the parties are husband and wife. The public declaration or holding out to the public is considered to be the acid test of a common-law marriage.

Kansas
Under Kansas Statute 23-101 (2002), both parties to a common-law marriage must be 18 years old. The three requirements that must coexist to establish a common-law marriage in Kansas are: (1) capacity to marry; (2) a present marriage agreement; and (3) a holding out of each other as husband and wife to the public.

Montana
A common-law marriage is established when a couple: "(1) is competent to enter into a marriage, (2) mutually consents and agrees to a common law marriage, and (3) cohabits and is reputed in the community to be husband and wife."

New Hampshire
"Persons cohabiting and acknowledging each other as husband and wife, and generally reputed to be such, for the period of 3 years," are recognized by the state as being legally married after one spouse dies. Thus, the state posthumously recognizes common-law marriages ensuring that a surviving spouse inherits without any difficulty.

Oklahoma
The criteria for a common-law marriage are: (1) "an actual and mutual agreement between the spouses to be husband and wife;" (2) "a permanent relationship;" (3) "an exclusive relationship, proved by cohabitation as man and wife;" and (4) "the parties to the marriage must hold themselves out publicly as husband and wife." A bill to ban common-law marriage in Oklahoma failed to receive committee hearing and thus died in 2005.
Rhode Island
The criteria for a common-law marriage are: (1) the parties seriously intended to enter into the husband-wife relationship; (2) the parties’ conduct is of such a character as to lead to a belief in the community that they were married.

South Carolina
The criteria for a common law marriage are: (1) when two parties have a present intent (usually, but not necessarily, evidenced by a public and unequivocal declaration) to enter into a marriage contract; and (2) "a mutual agreement between the parties to assume toward each other the relation of husband and wife."

Texas
Common-law marriage is known as an "informal marriage", which can be established either by declaration (registering at the county courthouse without having a ceremony) , or by meeting a 3-prong test showing evidence of (1) an agreement to be married; (2) cohabitation in Texas; and (3) representation to others that the parties are married. In the actual wording of the law there is no specification on the length of time that a couple must cohabitate to meet the second requirement of the 3-prong test. Under Texas law there is no required period of time of cohabitation and an informal marriage can occur if the couple lives together one day if the other elements, (an agreement to be married and holding out as married to the public) have also occurred. Likewise a couple can live together for 50 years and if they never have an agreement to be married, or hold themselves out to the public as married, their 50 year cohabitation will not make them informally married. If a couple does not commence a proceeding to prove their relationship was a marriage within two years of the end of their cohabitation and relationship there is a legal presumption that they were never informally married, but this presumption is rebuttable. In other words, even after two years a party to the relationship, or another interested party such as their estate, can seek to establish the marriage if they can overcome the presumption. Because this rule is only a presumption, and not a statute of limitations, a person in Texas that could be informally married should always go through a divorce proceeding when the relationship ceases or face possible serious legal repercussions.

Utah
For a common-law marriage to be legal and valid, "a court or administrative order must establish that it arises out of a contract between a man and a woman" who: (1) "are of legal age and capable of giving consent"; (2) "are legally capable of entering a solemnized marriage under the provisions of Title 30, Chap. 1 of the Utah Code; (3) "have cohabited"; (4) "mutually assume marital rights, duties, and obligations"; and (5) "who hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as husband and wife."


Bridget in Connecticut.

 

[MoonWater]

Thanks Sandia Rose. I was pretty certain that MD never had common law marriages.

 

[zoebartlett]

Did you see that NH recognizes common law marriages only if the couple has lived together for three years AND only after one of the people die? For some reason, that struck me as funny.