Hacker News Reader

Comment by TacticalCoder | Hacker News Reader

> Or here is a neat trick lawyers don’t want you to know: just don’t get married.

This 100%. Eleven years into our relationship, with now a 7 years old kid. We were raised in non-religious families and we are non-religious, so why get married? Why then bring the "religion of the state" in our lives? We don't need no public servant to officially declare us married. We don't need no state-endorsed paper. We don't need no more administrative burden.

A breakup would, indeed, be bad enough in itself to then add insult to injury by having lawyers on both sides competing to see which of them has the sharpest teeth while they'd be bleeding us dry.

Just screw that entire system.

View on HN

Just curious, what about medical insurance for the family if only one works? what about the signature thing when you need it most(e.g. in hospital that you need some signature), there are many inconvenience in daily life if you opt to not married but staying as partners with kids? there might be a long list of those things other than the marriage tax penalty.

There are something like 1200 rights that get conferred onto you when you get married. Most you can take care of with signing a power of attorney affidavit. Health insurance is a tricky one but the cost of adding a spouse vs getting two single plans is typically not that different.

if one spouse/partner is taking care of the kids and house(i.e. not working), it's hard to get a plan for single.

some company does provide medical insurance for "partners", but most probably don't, and that's a big headache.

A lot that cover partners cover only registered domestic partnership, which was created as a lesser option to avoid providing same sex marriage, but has generally been retained because it's been adapted to other uses. But it's still a state-defined legal relationship, so if you are against that with marriage...

Also has a tax consequence, unlike 'married' health insurance.

> Health insurance is a tricky one but the cost of adding a spouse vs getting two single plans is typically not that different.

Sure.

Where being married is cheaper for health insurance is when you have kids, at least with employer group plans.

(Premiums for 2-party plans tend to be about, often exactly, double single plans. Family plans, for 3+, tend to be about 2.5 times. If your coparent isn't eligible on the same plan the marginal cost of each of the first two kids is higher.)

Most people in your situation — if they break up - will still have lawyers involved and spend about the same as a divorce.

It’s the children and fights over custody that cause the greatest drama and attorneys fees.

Yes, that’s correct. But the situation is actually much simpler as it is just about the kids.

You have it backwards.

Custody, possession schedules, who gets to pick the school, who gets to make medical decisions for the kids, who decides if they ought get braces, who decides what extracurricular activities the kids are in and which parent has to take them, which parent can hold the kids passport and what counties can they take them to, geographical restrictions, morality clauses, right of first refusal, and on and on and on...

The vast majority of cases that got to jury trial are custody cases... rarely property issues.

(Indeed, in most states you aren’t even entitled to a jury trial on property issues.)

Well, the simple answer is that marriage is the formal consent that lets you have sex. That's what the "I do" part is all about. (No, it's not just a pretty tradition.)

Consent was very important in the middle ages, and it's making a huge comeback in the 21st century.

(The monetary issues can be settled with standard contracts, but the sex part is what requires a special and distinct form of agreement.)

wow. just.... wow.

Holy shit what did I just read? I think it was justification for marital rape, but… what?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com