Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
Well, it's easy to say these things until the worst happens, someone is in the hospital, a death occurs, there is an estate to settle, insurance beneficiaries, advanced directives, etc. "Are you family, or friend?" If you are a "friend" (an unmarried partner), you may be asked to sit in the waiting room, and frankly, you have no rights to anything. You're left out in the cold as if you were never a part of this person's life. If you are a spouse, you can sit with your partner and give them love and support to the very end. As an unmarried partner, you don't get a say in the outcome during a health crisis. There's a bit more to this than some sort of social and legal gesture. Even renting a car on vacation, a spouse may be allowed to be another driver, where am unmarried partner is not. Whether you are heterosexual or homosexual couple, there are a lot of benefits to being legally married over being loving life partners.Let's just say I give little thought to marriage compared to love and long-term companionship.
One amounts to a social and legal gesture, while the other has considerably more significance IMO.
Easy to say? You're preaching to the choir, with my having to deal with all those considerations.Well, it's easy to say these things until the worst happens, someone is in the hospital, a death occurs, there is an estate to settle,
I agree with both of you. I realize I am imposing my thoughts onto someone else's reply, so I may be way off. But I think Judge just means that the priority of thought is given to the much weightier issue of how to maintain relationship with the one you are married to. We all know people who are married, legally they have a governmentally assigned document to prove their union, but they are not, in reality, even friends. Of course Neonatal has an excellent point about the legality issues, and those are all certainly legitimate concerns. But I liked the way Judge shifted the conversation away from the governmental construct of marriage, and instead focused on the quality of that marriage to your long-term partner. Again, sorry if I over-stepped. I just valued both perspectives and actually think you are both in agreement. : )Well, it's easy to say these things until the worst happens, someone is in the hospital, a death occurs, there is an estate to settle, insurance beneficiaries, advanced directives, etc. "Are you family, or friend?" If you are a "friend" (an unmarried partner), you may be asked to sit in the waiting room, and frankly, you have no rights to anything. You're left out in the cold as if you were never a part of this person's life. If you are a spouse, you can sit with your partner and give them love and support to the very end. As an unmarried partner, you don't get a say in the outcome during a health crisis. There's a bit more to this than some sort of social and legal gesture. Even renting a car on vacation, a spouse may be allowed to be another driver, where am unmarried partner is not. Whether you are heterosexual or homosexual couple, there are a lot of benefits to being legally married over being loving life partners.
Personally I would never attempt to marginalize estate law considerations over marital status alone. We single people can and do have uphill battles every bit as married persons do in this respect. What I considered a "personal nightmare" in my own case. A task that had to be completed with no choice in the matter.Of course Neonatal has an excellent point about the legality issues, and those are all certainly legitimate concerns.
Got it. I misread your response a bit with the unwarranted assumption, on my end, that you were married and speaking into the idea of where a person's real focus should be. I understand what you mean now. Sorry for the misunderstanding.Personally I would never attempt to marginalize estate law considerations over marital status alone. We single people can and do have uphill battles every bit as married persons do in this respect.
However when it comes to the dynamics of dissolution, there's a point to be made. All the ugly things that can and do happen between a failure of matrimony or palimony. However relative to the original post, it does bring into consideration reasons to avoid relationships where financial interests can get "complicated".
No problem. Nope, I've never been married. Yet I've experienced similar responsibilities with a divorcee with a child, as a caregiver to my mother and as a legal trustee of an estate.Got it. I misread your response a bit with the unwarranted assumption, on my end, that you were married and speaking into the idea of where a person's real focus should be. I understand what you mean now. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Still try to figure that out on my end. I’ve seen that life from the outside. From marriage to kids to spouse arguments and abuse toward each other. Lies and fighting. I was around a lot of it and heard a lot of it.Not everyone is cut out for marriage, despite the desire.
I’ve seen a lot and read a lot. And frankly it’s depressing concerning marriage. But, I wanted to hear from the community on it.
Your experiences and what you know.