Political prisoner, activist, journalist, hymn-writer, emerging thinktanker, aspiring novelist, "tribal elder", 2019 parliamentary candidate for North West Durham, Shadow Leader of the Opposition, "Speedboat", "The Cockroach", eagerly awaiting the second (or possibly third) attempt to murder me.
Thursday, 29 October 2009
Inheritance Rights For Cohabitees
How could they prove it?
You'd have to sign something, so why not the register of marriages?
Cones, but how could they prove it? You'd still have to sign something. If you don't want the inheritance rights of marriage, don't get married. And if you don't get married, don't expect the inheritance rights of marriage.
John, a friend of mine who is a senior Labour Councillor always does that. My father used to cross out the "or fore" in "Christian or forname", but the "Christian" option no longer appears.
If it ever came down to it, there would be an enormous amount of evidence that two people had lived together: electoral register, utility bills, signed rental contracts or mortgage agreements. That's not counting any amount of eyewitness statements from parents, neighbours, family etc.
I don't think it's quite the obstacle you make it out to be.
It's a lot more complicated than simply signing the marriage register.
All sorts of people are in the situation that you describe but their relationship is not - how shall we put this? - quasi-marital. In the days when I worked in a benefits office, people who lived at the same address and had children together were sometimes ruled not to be partners when investigated for fraud, on the grounds that past intimacy proved nothing about the present. You can't get away with that if you are married. You are just married.
It's not complicated at all - all the stuff Rod listed happens anyway, as a naatural function of living together. There's no special effort required whatsoever.
All your proposal does is transform marriage from a binding commitment before God to a mere legal formality. Anyone who signs a register just to make sure they'll inherit doesn't really respect the institution of marriage - they're just ticking the boxes.
This is precisely about legal marriage. You already don't need to go anywhere near a church for that. And what is theologically wrong with the inheritance aspect of marriage? Nothing. Quite the reverse, in fact. It's not the totality. But it is integral, and it is important. Legally. And theologically.
It strikes me that a man can only have one wife but the possibility for legal wrangles over co-habiting is endless. As Jolly Jack Tar might put it a "girl in every port".
"I'm sorry, but I don't understand."
ReplyDeleteDon't worry David, it's not about you. It's for people who want to cohabit but who, for whatever reason, don't want to get married.
Neither do I.
ReplyDeleteI routinely amend any form which would have me describe my wife of 27 years as my "partner".
She isnt.
Cones, but how could they prove it? You'd still have to sign something. If you don't want the inheritance rights of marriage, don't get married. And if you don't get married, don't expect the inheritance rights of marriage.
ReplyDeleteJohn, a friend of mine who is a senior Labour Councillor always does that. My father used to cross out the "or fore" in "Christian or forname", but the "Christian" option no longer appears.
If it ever came down to it, there would be an enormous amount of evidence that two people had lived together: electoral register, utility bills, signed rental contracts or mortgage agreements. That's not counting any amount of eyewitness statements from parents, neighbours, family etc.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's quite the obstacle you make it out to be.
It's a lot more complicated than simply signing the marriage register.
ReplyDeleteAll sorts of people are in the situation that you describe but their relationship is not - how shall we put this? - quasi-marital. In the days when I worked in a benefits office, people who lived at the same address and had children together were sometimes ruled not to be partners when investigated for fraud, on the grounds that past intimacy proved nothing about the present. You can't get away with that if you are married. You are just married.
It's not complicated at all - all the stuff Rod listed happens anyway, as a naatural function of living together. There's no special effort required whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteAll your proposal does is transform marriage from a binding commitment before God to a mere legal formality. Anyone who signs a register just to make sure they'll inherit doesn't really respect the institution of marriage - they're just ticking the boxes.
This is precisely about legal marriage. You already don't need to go anywhere near a church for that. And what is theologically wrong with the inheritance aspect of marriage? Nothing. Quite the reverse, in fact. It's not the totality. But it is integral, and it is important. Legally. And theologically.
ReplyDeleteIt strikes me that a man can only have one wife but the possibility for legal wrangles over co-habiting is endless. As Jolly Jack Tar might put it a "girl in every port".
ReplyDeleteIsn't the relevant document called a will?
ReplyDeleteBut not everyone leaves a will, Neil.
ReplyDeleteJJGM, benefits are already payable for "polygamous partners". Seriously.