My SO doesn't want to relocate with me for residency

[deleted1005514]

I think it's great that you went back to school at an older age and followed through with your own plans in life. But that being said, why did you need to be the one to stay at home? Also why not avoid this all together and steer clear of starting a family in the first place? Maybe our priorities aren't the same and I don't mean to single you out personally, but this is likely something many aspiring doctors have gone through and I would say a vast majority are not willing to try getting into medical school at age forty something.

I don't feel singled out or attacked...I've made my choices in life, and this is where I am, studying medicine at 40 while my kids are in their teens/early 20s. I didn't have to stay home with my kids, I chose to because it was very important to me. I didn't have to return to school, complete an entire bachelors and masters degree from scratch and go to medical school, I chose to because it is important to me. I respect the choices of others and fully acknowledge that they have completely different priorities. I think there's room for all of us here.

Yeah I think it's good to have both if thats what you want. But 12+ years of schooling in somewhat unpredictable locations comes with a lot of sacrifice that I see ruining a lot of my colleagues lives. It was one thing decades ago when most people went straight from college to medical school with no gaps. But the starting age of medical students now is approaching 26 in many schools. I can't imagine dealing with all the stress and conflicts that come with a committed relationship on top of being in the pressure cooker that is medical training in this country.

My relationship with my husband is full of compromise on both sides, every day. Our goal is to always put the other first, and to seek out ways to be happy and fulfilled ourselves, so that we can then pour support & love into one another's lives as well as the lives of our children.

I'm not sure what your definition of a healthy relationship is, but I've dated while in college/medical school and found it to be very taxing and stressful. It was a huge distraction from academics and I can definitely see it being something that leads to people failing classes/exams. As far as long term commitment goes, I can only imagine that the burden is increased ten fold. Who wants to get pummeled by professors/attendings all day just to go home to another high maintenance commitment that you need to pour even more energy into? Most people get married for the financial benefits that come with it. As a physician, you will make more than enough to support yourself so making this sacrifice makes no sense. Why go through so many years of training/hardship just to have someone else tell you what you are allowed to do with your money and spare time? (not to mention a 50/50 chance of it leaving you financially and emotionally ruined)

I'm not sure what to say about this, except that maybe you're not in a place in your life to be in a long term relationship yet, or maybe you've been burned in the past. A healthy relationship would be two people thinking in terms of "us", not "me", and making decisions together. A good relationship should be a safe haven at the end of the day...a place where you go and you know you'll be supported and loved when the world beats you up. In turn, you should be with someone that you feel like you want to support and love, not just another person you feel obligated to with your time, emotion and money.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Neuronix]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I expect the probability of becoming a single parent to be much higher in non-married couples.

There are too many confounding variables to control for. Obviously non-married couples tend to be younger, be together together for less time, have less education, have lower incomes, etc.

Still, divorce rates are 40-50%. My parents seemed to have no problem divorcing when I was young as did many parents of people I know. My mother has divorced many times over. So there hardly seems to be a guarantee of stability in any relationship.

For two high earning spouses there is usually no financial benefit, and typically a pretty significant annual tax penalty. See: Unmarried Couples: Pros and Cons of Delaying “I Do” - The White Coat Investor - Investing & Personal Finance for Doctors

 

[deleted171991]

There are too many confounding variables to control for. Obviously non-married couples tend to be younger, be together together for less time, have less education, have lower incomes, etc.

Still, divorce rates are 40-50%. My parents seemed to have no problem divorcing when I was young as did many parents of people I know. My mother has divorced many times over. So there hardly seems to be a guarantee of stability in any relationship.

For two high earning spouses there is usually no financial benefit, and typically a pretty significant annual tax penalty. See: Unmarried Couples: Pros and Cons of Delaying “I Do” - The White Coat Investor - Investing & Personal Finance for Doctors

My wife and I are among those who pay that tax penalty every year. May we pay it for many decades more! Marrying her was the best decision I have ever made.

The fact that some people keep on divorcing says more about those people than the institution of marriage, no offense. People who truly love each other usually end up marrying, sooner or later, at least if it's their first marriage. Especially with the tax penalty, it's a symbol of commitment and love; that's why gay people have fought so hard for that right. It also provides some legal protections to spouses and children.

I am not an expert in marriage (dis)advantages. I decided to marry my wife the night I realized that I cannot imagine my life without her. Decades later, I still can't.

 

[Raryn]

There are too many confounding variables to control for. Obviously non-married couples tend to be younger, be together together for less time, have less education, have lower incomes, etc.

Still, divorce rates are 40-50%. My parents seemed to have no problem divorcing when I was young as did many parents of people I know. My mother has divorced many times over. So there hardly seems to be a guarantee of stability in any relationship.

For two high earning spouses there is usually no financial benefit, and typically a pretty significant annual tax penalty. See: Unmarried Couples: Pros and Cons of Delaying “I Do” - The White Coat Investor - Investing & Personal Finance for Doctors

Divorce rates are 40-50% overall but much less for people in their first marriage. The raw divorce rate is driven by people getting married and divorced 2/3/4 times. It's also lower in those who get married older, those who are well educated, etc.

I posted a recent article based on census data that for married physicians it's closer to 25%, and my bet is it's even lower for those on their first marriage.

 

[CalmAndCollected]

There are too many confounding variables to control for. Obviously non-married couples tend to be younger, be together together for less time, have less education, have lower incomes, etc.

Still, divorce rates are 40-50%. My parents seemed to have no problem divorcing when I was young as did many parents of people I know. My mother has divorced many times over. So there hardly seems to be a guarantee of stability in any relationship.

For two high earning spouses there is usually no financial benefit, and typically a pretty significant annual tax penalty. See: Unmarried Couples: Pros and Cons of Delaying “I Do” - The White Coat Investor - Investing & Personal Finance for Doctors

Married couples can also file separately.

 

[rokshana]

I think it's great that you went back to school at an older age and followed through with your own plans in life. But that being said, why did you need to be the one to stay at home? Also why not avoid this all together and steer clear of starting a family in the first place? Maybe our priorities aren't the same and I don't mean to single you out personally, but this is likely something many aspiring doctors have gone through and I would say a vast majority are not willing to try getting into medical school at age forty something.

You are apparently single, male, and young..she doesn’t have to justify why she wanted...wanted not forced... to be a SAHM... and she got something so many women this day and age don’t get to... spend time with their kids, see them grow, and get to be focused on them...her kids are better for it. And if you think raising kids is easy, well...

And you don’t see the power and ability of the non traditional student ...site there probably aren’t that many people who shift gears and start a second career, but you would be surprised by how many people do...
And babies...they don’t always come based on the career schedule you plan on...you adapt. Are you really saying that she should have chosen to either be a doctor or have a family? Because that’s what it sounds like to me.

 

[CalmAndCollected]

My wife and I are among those who pay that tax penalty every year. May we pay it for many decades more! Marrying her was the best decision I have ever made.

The fact that some people keep on divorcing says more about those people than the institution of marriage, no offense. People who truly love each other usually end up marrying, sooner or later, at least if it's their first marriage. Especially with the tax penalty, it's a symbol of commitment and love; that's why gay people have fought so hard for that right.

It isn't a tax penalty. If you are filing together, there is just less amount of income that is taxed at the lower rate than if you are filing separately. Filing together is really only for single income families, if you are both earning money, you should file separately.

 

[Raryn]

Married couples can also file separately.

MFS does not get you the same tax benefits as filing single. Or single+head of household.

The deduction limits are different, the tax brackets are different, lots of things are different.

 

[Raryn]

It isn't a tax penalty. If you are filing together, there is just less amount of income that is taxed at the lower rate than if you are filing separately. Filing together is really only for single income families, if you are both earning money, you should file separately.

This is absolutely wrong. The vast majority of married couples are better off filing MFJ. Only in a few rare circumstances (primarily related to student loans) does MFS work out better than MFJ.

For two earners though, they *may* be better off if they were single rather than married (and as I mentioned, single is very different from MFS)

 

[Mass Effect]

Yeah I think it's good to have both if thats what you want. But 12+ years of schooling in somewhat unpredictable locations comes with a lot of sacrifice that I see ruining a lot of my colleagues lives. It was one thing decades ago when most people went straight from college to medical school with no gaps. But the starting age of medical students now is approaching 26 in many schools. I can't imagine dealing with all the stress and conflicts that come with a committed relationship on top of being in the pressure cooker that is medical training in this country.

You sound like you're in junior high.

 

[rokshana]

You sound like you're in junior high.

Lol...if mass effect is judging you, there is something wrong!

 

[CalmAndCollected]

MFS does not get you the same tax benefits as filing single. Or single+head of household.

The deduction limits are different, the tax brackets are different, lots of things are different.

This is absolutely wrong. The vast majority of married couples are better off filing MFJ. Only in a few rare circumstances (primarily related to student loans) does MFS work out better than MFJ.

For two earners though, they *may* be better off if they were single rather than married (and as I mentioned, single is very different from MFS)

Would love to know of any specific examples. My understanding is you don't really get much bonuses unless you have dependents involved.

 

[rokshana]

It's harder to leave a marriage than a non legally-binding relationship. Also it's harder to deny that the children are yours.

There is also the aspect of commitment. Many people who are perfectly fine with being in a long-term relationship will have trouble committing to a marriage. If one cannot commit to a marriage, one should probably not make children either, because that's another long-term and expensive commitment.

Because of the latter, I expect the probability of becoming a single parent to be much higher in non-married couples.

You are kinda putting your foot in your mouth...

 

[deleted171991]

You are kinda putting your foot in your mouth...

Maybe you could be so kind as to explain...

Being in a long-term relationship is not a significant commitment. Legally it's not marriage. It doesn't come with either the same legal/moral rights or duties, even among atheists. It can be something as convenient as friends with benefits. It's a poor foundation for child-rearing.

Marriage is something more difficult to get into and out of than just saying "I love you/I don't love you anymore". Beyond a promise taken before one's god, family and friends, it's a WRITTEN legally-binding contract for a partnership in almost everything.

There is a reason people don't just sign oaths, but they have to repeat them, in a solemn festivity. It's psychologically-binding. Because of bias towards consistency and commitment tendency, humans have a much harder time breaking such a promise.

 

[Small Cell Carcinoma]

You are apparently single, male, and young..she doesn’t have to justify why she wanted...wanted not forced... to be a SAHM... and she got something so many women this day and age don’t get to... spend time with their kids, see them grow, and get to be focused on them...her kids are better for it. And if you think raising kids is easy, well...

And you don’t see the power and ability of the non traditional student ...site there probably aren’t that many people who shift gears and start a second career, but you would be surprised by how many people do...
And babies...they don’t always come based on the career schedule you plan on...you adapt. Are you really saying that she should have chosen to either be a doctor or have a family? Because that’s what it sounds like to me.

I’m not saying that she personally should have to decide between the two. Just that people who are in medicine in general (and are early enough in the process) could benefit from only choosing one or the other. There are plenty of other ways to find fulfillment in life than trying to start a family just because society has historically told people that they should do that. The happiest physicians I have ever seen are the ones who aren’t married and actually enjoy the career they’ve worked to obtain. As opposed to giving it all to someone else and potentially a few children to strip you of all your resources and time. Sure there may some benefits IF everything goes to plan, but the risk of things totally collapsing on you don’t seem to be worth it. At least not in this decade. Potentially destroying the entire career/lifestyle you’ve spent half your life working for seems like a pretty steep price to pay for some occasional at-home support and a warm body to sleep next to at night.

 

[ThetisAntithesis]

I’m not saying that she personally should have to decide between the two. Just that people who are in medicine in general (and are early enough in the process) could benefit from only choosing one or the other. There are plenty of other ways to find fulfillment in life than trying to start a family just because society has historically told people that they should do that. The happiest physicians I have ever seen are the ones who aren’t married and actually enjoy the career they’ve worked to obtain. As opposed to giving it all to someone else and potentially a few children to strip you of all your resources and time. Sure there may some benefits IF everything goes to plan, but the risk of things totally collapsing on you don’t seem to be worth it. At least not in this decade. Potentially destroying the entire career/lifestyle you’ve spent half your life working for seems like a pretty steep price to pay for some occasional at-home support and a warm body to sleep next to at night.

Wow, what a take (and not in a good way) on marriage/relationships and children.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

Marriage and children aren't for everyone, but yeesh. I'm in no rush to get married, and at this point in my life can't really picture myself having kids, but I still see the value in it. For now, I get the most fulfillment from my hobbies and career path. But at the same time I absolutely admire people like @pagingdoctormom who have lived their lives and relationships in the way that fulfills them, with wise & clear priorities. I'm still young and my priorities might (likely will) change in the future, and thats okay too. Changes in priorities (even requiring some sacrifice) don't have to be failures.

 

[Mass Effect]

Lol...if mass effect is judging you, there is something wrong!

Not sure if that's a compliment or insult, but I'm glad you're back!

 

[deleted1005514]

I’m not saying that she personally should have to decide between the two. Just that people who are in medicine in general (and are early enough in the process) could benefit from only choosing one or the other. There are plenty of other ways to find fulfillment in life than trying to start a family just because society has historically told people that they should do that. The happiest physicians I have ever seen are the ones who aren’t married and actually enjoy the career they’ve worked to obtain. As opposed to giving it all to someone else and potentially a few children to strip you of all your resources and time. Sure there may some benefits IF everything goes to plan, but the risk of things totally collapsing on you don’t seem to be worth it. At least not in this decade. Potentially destroying the entire career/lifestyle you’ve spent half your life working for seems like a pretty steep price to pay for some occasional at-home support and a warm body to sleep next to at night.

We’re not going to agree on this point, I see that clearly, and I’m sorry for whatever relationship issues you’ve had in the past that have led you to feel like a relationship and/or children would have negative effects on your life. I also fully acknowledge that there are many ways to be fulfilled in life that do not include marriage and children. However, my choice to be married and have children is not just for “some occasional at home support and a warm body to sleep next to”, or “stripping me of my resources and time”; and while I have never once insulted or demeaned your life choices, here you have chosen to put down mine.

To the others in this thread who have come and stuck up for me: thank you so much, I have very much appreciated your kind words.

To the OP: I’m sorry your thread has turned into this train wreck. I truly believe that most of us on here were simply trying to share what relationship knowledge we have gained in our lives in order to help you.

 

[rokshana]

Maybe you could be so kind as to explain...

Being in a long-term relationship is not a significant commitment. Legally it's not marriage. It doesn't come with either the same legal/moral rights or duties, even among atheists. It can be something as convenient as friends with benefits. It's a poor foundation for child-rearing.

Marriage is something more difficult to get into and out of than just saying "I love you/I don't love you anymore". Beyond a promise taken before one's god, family and friends, it's a WRITTEN legally-binding contract for a partnership in almost everything.

There is a reason people don't just sign oaths, but they have to repeat them, in a solemn festivity. It's psychologically-binding. Because of bias towards consistency and commitment tendency, humans have a much harder time breaking such a promise.

You should do a little research on posts here ... smq and neuronix... in long term relationship... not married... just had a baby...

Maybe you should update your idea of love, commitment, and child rearing to the 21 st century... getting married is no guarantee one will stay married, be happily together, and be successful in raising kids anymore that not is a recipe for disaster.

And the ease of getting a divorce and the rate of divorce, belies that it’s harder to break that commitment

 

[rokshana]

Not sure if that's a compliment or insult, but I'm glad you're back!

It’s a compliment... I don’t always agree with your take, but I appreciate your POV, passion and concern for resident and physician well being...

And thanks!

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

You should do a little research on posts here ... smq and neuronix... in long term relationship... not married... just had a baby...

Maybe you should update your idea of love, commitment, and child rearing to the 21 st century... getting married is no guarantee one will stay married, be happily together, and be successful in raising kids anymore that not is a recipe for disaster.

And the ease of getting a divorce and the rate of divorce, belies that it’s harder to break that commitment

Umm, not even close.

Getting a divorce is way harder than ending a long-term relationship that isn't a marriage. The former typically involves lawyers, judges, stuff like that.

The latter requires at most a text message.

A long term relationship doesn't mean you can't have a child and raise it successfully but I'd wager there are way more single mothers who never were married than single mothers who got a divorce. Plus in the latter case child support is usually part of the divorce agreement while in the former you have to actively seek out child support.

 

[NITRAS]

You are explaining that married is different than non-married. . . .

You should do a little research on posts here ... smq and neuronix... in long term relationship... not married... just had a baby...

Maybe you should update your idea of love, commitment, and child rearing to the 21 st century... getting married is no guarantee one will stay married, be happily together, and be successful in raising kids anymore that not is a recipe for disaster.

And the ease of getting a divorce and the rate of divorce, belies that it’s harder to break that commitment

Married persons and co-habitations persons are statistically different in many ways. Kids do better with married parents. People are more successful if they are married.

Rates of divorce is a lot lower when you factor in a few things (educations, income, first marriage, alignment of life goals). Co-habitation prior to marriage is a very strong risk factor for divorce.

And just cause it is the 21st century, it doesn’t mean we are doing things better.

 

[deleted171991]

You should do a little research on posts here ... smq and neuronix... in long term relationship... not married... just had a baby...

Maybe you should update your idea of love, commitment, and child rearing to the 21 st century... getting married is no guarantee one will stay married, be happily together, and be successful in raising kids anymore that not is a recipe for disaster.

And the ease of getting a divorce and the rate of divorce, belies that it’s harder to break that commitment

Of course there are no guarantees. But there are some long-fought legal protections, especially for women, especially in certain states. Good luck to you!

I personally wouldn't want to raise a child outside of a marriage, and it's not about being old-fashioned; it's about protecting the child. Just because one can doesn't mean one should.

Also, in my book, anybody who cannot legally commit to a couple of decades together (at least till that child becomes an adult), shouldn't make one. A child needs a 2 parent-household, because it increases his/her chances of success in life.

 

[rokshana]

Umm, not even close.

Getting a divorce is way harder than ending a long-term relationship that isn't a marriage. The former typically involves lawyers, judges, stuff like that.

The latter requires at most a text message.

A long term relationship doesn't mean you can't have a child and raise it successfully but I'd wager there are way more single mothers who never were married than single mothers who got a divorce. Plus in the latter case child support is usually part of the divorce agreement while in the former you have to actively seek out child support.

it may take a little longer and have more paperwork, but getting married is no guarantee that they will stay married.

I come from parents that were married for almost 55 years...but seems like a lot of my classmates/residents come from divorced families...though they say people who have still married parents tend to be friends with people who's parents stayed married...and most of my close friends have parents that are still married...my friends...well...

 

[rokshana]

Of course there are no guarantees. But there are some long-fought legal protections, especially for women, especially in certain states. Good luck to you!

I personally wouldn't want to raise a child outside of a marriage, and it's not about being old-fashioned; it's about protecting the child. Just because one can doesn't mean one should.

Also, in my book, anybody who cannot legally commit to a couple of decades together (at least till that child becomes an adult), shouldn't make one. A child needs a 2 parent-household, because it increases his/her chances of success in life.

so what happens to the child that has a parent die and is raised in a 1 parent house...they are screwed? Should they couple have not had children because there is a chance that one of them will die before 20 years are up?

 

[deleted171991]

so what happens to the child that has a parent die and is raised in a 1 parent house...they are screwed? Should they couple have not had children because there is a chance that one of them will die before 20 years are up?

You're obviously exaggerating. I'll let you figure out the psychology.

My psychology: my parents were married and stayed married, and were fantastic role-models for me.

 

[rokshana]

You are explaining that married is different than non-married. . . .


Married persons and co-habitations persons are statistically different in many ways. Kids do better with married parents. People are more successful if they are married.

Rates of divorce is a lot lower when you factor in a few things (educations, income, first marriage, alignment of life goals). Co-habitation prior to marriage is a very strong risk factor for divorce.

And just cause it is the 21st century, it doesn’t mean we are doing things better.

cite your source that kids do better with married parents?
Men are generally more successful and happy if they are married...doesn't necessarily translate to the married woman

Married men earn more than everyone else (including married women and single men)

A sobering reminder on International Men’s Day: Men fare better than almost everyone else in the workplace.

www.marketwatch.com

 

[rokshana]

You're obviously exaggerating. I'll let you figure out the psychology.

a bit...but your point is an absolute...you are saying if you don't plan on being around for 20 year to raise your child (and BTW, its not just 20 years), then you shouldn't have one for the best interest of the child...my point being is that there are plenty of people raised by single parents, either by choice or by circumstances and the kids are just fine.

 

[deleted171991]

cite your source that kids do better with married parents?
Men are generally more successful and happy if they are married...doesn't necessarily translate to the married woman

Married men earn more than everyone else (including married women and single men)

A sobering reminder on International Men’s Day: Men fare better than almost everyone else in the workplace.

www.marketwatch.com

My wife would disagree. I have always put her career first, because I want her to be happy (and I strongly believe that there cannot be true love and respect without equality). As a result, she's the more successful one (and very happy with her job). This is most likely due to what I saw at home.

What one does becomes the model for one's children: either what to do, or what NOT to do in their own adult life and marriage.

You have committed to a different path, so you either had no other choice or you disagree. That's fine. As I said, I wish you the best of luck. You may need it.

But if you think marriage was invented by men to oppress women, think again.

 

[NITRAS]

cite your source that kids do better with married parents?
Men are generally more successful and happy if they are married...doesn't necessarily translate to the married woman

Married men earn more than everyone else (including married women and single men)

A sobering reminder on International Men’s Day: Men fare better than almost everyone else in the workplace.

www.marketwatch.com

Its called google.

The Changing Profile of Unmarried Parents

One-in-four parents living with a child in the United States today are unmarried, up from 7% in 1968. A growing share of unmarried parents are cohabiting partners.

www.pewsocialtrends.org

Cohabitation and Child Wellbeing

In recent decades, writes Wendy Manning, cohabitation has become a central part of the family landscape in the United States—so much so that by age 12, 40 percent of American children will have spent at least part of their lives in a cohabiting ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Here are a couple.

 

[rokshana]

My wife would disagree. I have always put her career first, because I want her to be happy (and I strongly believe that there cannot be true love and respect without equality). As a result, she's the more successful one (and very happy with her job). This is most likely due to what I saw at home.

What one does becomes the model for one's children: either what to do, or what NOT to do in their own adult life and marriage.

You have committed to a different path, so you either had no other choice or you disagree. That's fine. As I said, I wish you the best of luck. You may need it.

But if you think marriage was invented by men to oppress women, think again.

lol...im not neuronix or smq...go back and read my posts again...i never said that marriage was a bad idea...I have a lot of faith in marriage...but i'm not going to judge or condemn someone who has decided to go a different path...and tell the very person you are responding to (neuronix) the way he and his partner are living their life, is wrong and they are not suited to have children...you realize that is what you did, right?

 

[MedicineZ0Z]

I'm not sure what your definition of a healthy relationship is, but I've dated while in college/medical school and found it to be very taxing and stressful. It was a huge distraction from academics and I can definitely see it being something that leads to people failing classes/exams. As far as long term commitment goes, I can only imagine that the burden is increased ten fold. Who wants to get pummeled by professors/attendings all day just to go home to another high maintenance commitment that you need to pour even more energy into? Most people get married for the financial benefits that come with it. As a physician, you will make more than enough to support yourself so making this sacrifice makes no sense. Why go through so many years of training/hardship just to have someone else tell you what you are allowed to do with your money and spare time? (not to mention a 50/50 chance of it leaving you financially and emotionally ruined)

Most people are not getting married for financial benefits in 2020.

 

[rokshana]

Its called google.

The Changing Profile of Unmarried Parents

One-in-four parents living with a child in the United States today are unmarried, up from 7% in 1968. A growing share of unmarried parents are cohabiting partners.

www.pewsocialtrends.org

Cohabitation and Child Wellbeing

In recent decades, writes Wendy Manning, cohabitation has become a central part of the family landscape in the United States—so much so that by age 12, 40 percent of American children will have spent at least part of their lives in a cohabiting ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Here are a couple.

your first article seem to support my POV than yours...in that while, people think its a bad idea for single parents to raise children (and seemingly they also think its a bad idea for gays and lesbians to raise kids as well), the % of people thinking children are ok in a solo parent family has gone up in 2012 from 1994.

the second article really seems to be more about poverty as SES that the concept of cohabitation vs married families and doesn't seem to make any comparisons with the situation of solo parenting.

in this day, the nuclear family isn't strictly defined by a female mother and male father and it not wrong or right to have a family group that by definition the "traditional" family...and children raised outside of the "traditional" family aren't going to be screwed up...and conversely, just because one maintains the traditional family doesn't mean those kids are going to be guaranteed to be perfect and successful.

 

[deleted171991]

lol...im not neuronix or smq...go back and read my posts again...i never said that marriage was a bad idea...I have a lot of faith in marriage...but i'm not going to judge or condemn someone who has decided to go a different path...and tell the very person you are responding to (neuronix) the way he and his partner are living their life, is wrong and they are not suited to have children...you realize that is what you did, right?

My mistake. I apologize.

I am not saying it's wrong, just dumb unwise.

 

[smq123]

You should do a little research on posts here ... smq and neuronix... in long term relationship... not married... just had a baby...

Maybe you should update your idea of love, commitment, and child rearing to the 21 st century... getting married is no guarantee one will stay married, be happily together, and be successful in raising kids anymore that not is a recipe for disaster.

And the ease of getting a divorce and the rate of divorce, belies that it’s harder to break that commitment

Thanks for standing up for us. But it's ok. I don't expect a lot of people to understand our thinking behind our decisions.

I personally don't understand the argument for marriage. The argument seems to boil down to that you need to make it difficult for the other person to leave. But why? Isn't that person's pledge of loyalty enough? Isn't YOUR pledge of loyalty enough? If it isn't, and you need some kind of contract to make it hard for them to leave....what are you saying about your partner? Or about yourself?

And other people say, "Well, it's a promise that you make in front of friends, family, and God." But you can do that in a commitment ceremony, and STILL not be legally married. If my Sunday school teachers were correct, and God can see what's in our hearts and minds, then shouldn't God know if I'm committed to my partner, whether or not I sign a legal contract? And finally, if your friends and family can't see the depth of your commitment to your partner in your everyday actions, then what does a piece of paper change?

Yes, getting married makes it easier for estate planning purposes, POA, etc. None of those things, however, are that difficult to remedy. If most of your assets are tied up in investments, most investments require that you name a beneficiary. POAs are easy to set up if necessary, but - I'm a physician. My sister is an ICU physician. My partner is a physician. They know how I feel about those people in the ICU who have no hope of meaningful recovery but the family still insists on doing everything, including CVVHD, trach, G-tubes, PEGs, etc. I trust them to come together to make a reasonable decision for me if it comes to that.

The argument that children do better with married parents is oversimplifying things, I think - which is understandable because these things are hard to quantify. But children do better with loving committed parents who model healthy relationships for them. To believe that being married automatically means that you will have a healthy functional relationship is naive at best, blind at worse.

 

[smq123]

My mistake. I apologize.

I am not saying it's wrong, just dumb unwise.

<sigh>

I've known Neuronix for 12 years now. If I didn't know what kind of person he was before deciding to have a kid with him, yes, it'd be dumb and unwise.

However...12 years. I've known him for a really long time, through two residencies, multiple long distance moves, countless road trips, and one really disastrous vacation in a national park. If I didn't know him by now, then that's my own darn fault.

EDIT: OMG, how could I have forgotten to mention the multiple pieces of IKEA furniture that we have successfully assembled together! We were even still on speaking terms after most of them!!

 

[togaedere]

jumping in late with absolutely no skin in this game just to posit the alternative, if it doesn’t matter, why not just get the piece of paper making things (hospital visits, adoptions, parental right, etc) all that much easier?

I’m married though certainly not a proponent of the institution for its own sake. Ive seen enough divorce (and long term marriage that should have ended in divorce) to get too tied in knots about the sanctity of marriage. So really truly I don’t care what people do in their own lives.

this is more just for the sake of argument.

we have lgbtq folks who fought hard for their right to this piece of paper because of how complex life can get if you don’t have it - so to some people, it matters.

Thanks for standing up for us. But it's ok. I don't expect a lot of people to understand our thinking behind our decisions.

I personally don't understand the argument for marriage. The argument seems to boil down to that you need to make it difficult for the other person to leave. But why? Isn't that person's pledge of loyalty enough? Isn't YOUR pledge of loyalty enough? If it isn't, and you need some kind of contract to make it hard for them to leave....what are you saying about your partner? Or about yourself?

And other people say, "Well, it's a promise that you make in front of friends, family, and God." But you can do that in a commitment ceremony, and STILL not be legally married. If my Sunday school teachers were correct, and God can see what's in our hearts and minds, then shouldn't God know if I'm committed to my partner, whether or not I sign a legal contract? And finally, if your friends and family can't see the depth of your commitment to your partner in your everyday actions, then what does a piece of paper change?

The argument that children do better with married parents is oversimplifying things, I think - which is understandable because these things are hard to quantify. But children do better with loving committed parents who model healthy relationships for them. To believe that being married automatically means that you will have a healthy functional relationship is naive at best, blind at worse.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Thanks for standing up for us. But it's ok. I don't expect a lot of people to understand our thinking behind our decisions.

I personally don't understand the argument for marriage. The argument seems to boil down to that you need to make it difficult for the other person to leave. But why? Isn't that person's pledge of loyalty enough? Isn't YOUR pledge of loyalty enough? If it isn't, and you need some kind of contract to make it hard for them to leave....what are you saying about your partner? Or about yourself?

And other people say, "Well, it's a promise that you make in front of friends, family, and God." But you can do that in a commitment ceremony, and STILL not be legally married. If my Sunday school teachers were correct, and God can see what's in our hearts and minds, then shouldn't God know if I'm committed to my partner, whether or not I sign a legal contract? And finally, if your friends and family can't see the depth of your commitment to your partner in your everyday actions, then what does a piece of paper change?

Yes, getting married makes it easier for estate planning purposes, POA, etc. None of those things, however, are that difficult to remedy. If most of your assets are tied up in investments, most investments require that you name a beneficiary. POAs are easy to set up if necessary, but - I'm a physician. My sister is an ICU physician. My partner is a physician. They know how I feel about those people in the ICU who have no hope of meaningful recovery but the family still insists on doing everything, including CVVHD, trach, G-tubes, PEGs, etc. I trust them to come together to make a reasonable decision for me if it comes to that.

The argument that children do better with married parents is oversimplifying things, I think - which is understandable because these things are hard to quantify. But children do better with loving committed parents who model healthy relationships for them. To believe that being married automatically means that you will have a healthy functional relationship is naive at best, blind at worse.

I would suggest that you guys are the exception that proves the rule. 2 physicians who have been together for that long are not the norm.

As for marriage - it's not just the piece of paper it's the idea behind it. It's (supposed to) be forever. It's why even many of us who were sure we wanted to get married were nervous when the actual moment came.

 

[smq123]

jumping in late with absolutely no skin in this game just to posit the alternative, if it doesn’t matter, why not just get the piece of paper making things (hospital visits, adoptions, parental right, etc) all that much easier?

I’m married though certainly not a proponent of the institution for its own sake. Ive seen enough divorce (and long term marriage that should have ended in divorce) to get too tied in knots about the sanctity of marriage. So really truly I don’t care what people do in their own lives.

this is more just for the sake of argument.

we have lgbtq folks who fought hard for their right to this piece of paper because of how complex life can get if you don’t have it - so to some people, it matters.

Because the "piece of paper" that makes things easier isn't worth the tax penalty. To me, at least.

We're both physicians, which makes us both "high earners" in the eyes of the IRS. If we get married and combine our income, we stand to pay a lot more in taxes. How much more depends on who controls the Senate, but it's not an inconsequential amount either way.

If we weren't physicians? Sure, I'd get married. Why not? It doesn't change anything.

The fight for marriage equality is different. Yes, it does make their lives easier (again, unless they're both high earners) but for LGBT people (and correct me if I'm wrong), the fight for marriage equality was to get societal recognition of their relationships. I'm a female in a heterosexual relationship; no one bats an eye if I introduce a male as my partner. Telling an EM physician or nurse that I'm his wife (even if that's not technically true) is easy; no one is going to make me go dig up a copy of my marriage license to prove it in the event of an emergency. That is NOT what happened to gay men and women in the past, so getting married was, for them, much more significant. Particularly as many families refused to acknowledge the long term boyfriend or girlfriend.

 

[smq123]

I would suggest that you guys are the exception that proves the rule. 2 physicians who have been together for that long are not the norm.

Yeah, but isn't the entire conversation about generalities? And if you can prove an exception to the rule, doesn't that negate the general curtain assumption that you're trying to draw?

As for marriage - it's not just the piece of paper it's the idea behind it. It's (supposed to) be forever. It's why even many of us who were sure we wanted to get married were nervous when the actual moment came.

Not to get all new-agey or anything, but if marriage is supposed to represent an eternal union of the souls, then the piece of paper doesn't make it more true. If you feel it, you feel it, and you don't need a contract for that.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Yeah, but isn't the entire conversation about generalities? And if you can prove an exception to the rule, doesn't that negate the general curtain assumption that you're trying to draw?



Not to get all new-agey or anything, but if marriage is supposed to represent an eternal union of the souls, then the piece of paper doesn't make it more true. If you feel it, you feel it, and you don't need a contract for that.

No, that's why it's a generality and not an absolute truth. If I say "in most heterosexual couples the man is taller", finding a few couples where that isn't true doesn't negate the original premise.

Sure, that's absolutely true. But culturally the marriage has more meaning at the moment. And all of the legal benefits, while achievable in other ways, aren't usually done in those other ways in most of the population (I would know, living Will's/advanced directives are a quality measure for my group).

 

[deleted171991]

<sigh>

I've known Neuronix for 12 years now. If I didn't know what kind of person he was before deciding to have a kid with him, yes, it'd be dumb and unwise.

However...12 years. I've known him for a really long time, through two residencies, multiple long distance moves, countless road trips, and one really disastrous vacation in a national park. If I didn't know him by now, then that's my own darn fault.

EDIT: OMG, how could I have forgotten to mention the multiple pieces of IKEA furniture that we have successfully assembled together! We were even still on speaking terms after most of them!!

I'm glad that you're the exception that proves the rule (unfortunately, a lot of people are not like you) .

Still, I wouldn't be surprised if, at some point, you guys felt the need to get married.

 

[deleted171991]

Yeah, but isn't the entire conversation about generalities? And if you can prove an exception to the rule, doesn't that negate the general curtain assumption that you're trying to draw?



Not to get all new-agey or anything, but if marriage is supposed to represent an eternal union of the souls, then the piece of paper doesn't make it more true. If you feel it, you feel it, and you don't need a contract for that.

Amen! (I am an agnostic.)

 

[Neuronix]

I'm fine to get married; I just don't like the significant annual tax penalty that comes with it. I'd like to buy a house, but we live in a HCOL area which means I spend and save a large chunk of my income towards housing. I don't need to throw anything more away.

 

[deleted171991]

I would suggest that you guys are the exception that proves the rule. 2 physicians who have been together for that long are not the norm.

As for marriage - it's not just the piece of paper it's the idea behind it. It's (supposed to) be forever. It's why even many of us who were sure we wanted to get married were nervous when the actual moment came.

That's a VERY good point.

For all the promises of eternal love etc., saying "I do!", even after 5 years together, was not easy at all.

 

[deleted171991]

I'm fine to get married; I just don't like the significant annual tax penalty that comes with it. I'd like to buy a house, but we live in a HCOL area which means I spend and save a large chunk of my income towards housing. I don't need to throw anything more away.

I totally understand, Two high earners here, too.

 

[togaedere]

Makes sense.

I’m sure this is different for everyone though a lot of the high profile lgbtq cases that lead to marriage equality seemed to highlight the vast inequities when one doesn’t have access to the benefits that marriage brings - not having access to pension benefits for a lost loved one, not being able to be legally recognized as an adoptive parent, not being able to visit a loved one in the hospital, etc. which may not have actually be big barriers to heterosexual long term couples for a variety of social reasons. Though I’m not sure.

anyway sounds good.

Because the "piece of paper" that makes things easier isn't worth the tax penalty. To me, at least.

We're both physicians, which makes us both "high earners" in the eyes of the IRS. If we get married and combine our income, we stand to pay a lot more in taxes. How much more depends on who controls the Senate, but it's not an inconsequential amount either way.

If we weren't physicians? Sure, I'd get married. Why not? It doesn't change anything.

The fight for marriage equality is different. Yes, it does make their lives easier (again, unless they're both high earners) but for LGBT people (and correct me if I'm wrong), the fight for marriage equality was to get societal recognition of their relationships. I'm a female in a heterosexual relationship; no one bats an eye if I introduce a male as my partner. Telling an EM physician or nurse that I'm his wife (even if that's not technically true) is easy; no one is going to make me go dig up a copy of my marriage license to prove it in the event of an emergency. That is NOT what happened to gay men and women in the past, so getting married was, for them, much more significant. Particularly as many families refused to acknowledge the long term boyfriend or girlfriend.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

That's a VERY good point.

For all the promises of eternal love etc., saying "I do!", even after 5 years together, was not easy at all.

My wife and I got engaged after dating for 3 months, and I had no problem saying, “I do” a few months later. And then we had 2 kids in 2 years. But we were both in our thirties, and we’ve been married 7 years so far.

That’s not a dig at your marriage. I think some people will be nervous and some won’t.

I actually agree with the idea that you don’t necessarily need to legally marry to make the commitment before God. But even in Biblical times, the Ketubah was a legal contract.

 

[PTPoeny]

You can have commitment without the piece of paper and you can get the piece of paper without any commitment.

God has nothing to do with any of this for many people. As an atheist my state's self-uniting licenses were very important to my husband and I deciding to get married versus other expressions of our commitment. The only commitment that matters to me is mine to my husband and his to me. Marriage was a convenient way to cover a bunch of legal bases when we decided to formalize our commitment to each other with our families.

It seems maybe we all agree that there is something special about committed relationships? Despite the differences in what those relationships look like?