Probably best to avoid a state marriage license

[ancapagency]

Yes--one of the things a good relationship contract should include is a dissolution provision.  How will community assets be divided, etc.  This need not be extremely detailed--in fact, a simple agreement to agree that division (if necessary) will be decided in mediation can be enough, although it may be advisable to explicitly provide for certain assets beforehand. 

I suggest it is usually best to minimize the co-mingling of finances.  The fact is, relationship stress is usually over financial issues (according to surveys), and anything that can be done to minimize that saves a lot of problems.  This is also why it is generally a good idea to cover the financial responsibilities of all parties in the relationship contract--if everyone is aware of the expectations and responsibilities from the beginning, there is less room for misunderstanding, and less to be taken for granted on anyone's part.  Everything you can do ahead of time to prevent conflict in the relationship is good.

Another suggestion is that all partners examine and explain exactly what it is they want from the relationship:  what are their expectations from their partner(s), and what do they expect to provide their partner(s)?  Explicitly stating expectations, priorities, needs, etc. ahead of time also prevents a lot of problems. 

Also, I would advise building in renegotiation points.  Every so often, all parties should sit don't and go over the contract--has anything changed?  Is everyone living up to their side of the contract?  Are there any new issues that need to be addressed?  Do all parties wish to continue the relationship?

I know that seems a bit cold and overly business-like for a romantic relationship, but it needn't be as unemotional and detached as it sounds.  But too often, issues catch people by surprise, or things go too far downhill, because folks didn't bother to examine their relationship. 

Also, I suggest making sure all parties really understand how they are different from their partners.  Folks communicate in different ways, and understand things differently, and this can be a problem if all parties don't realize the differences.  For example, just in the area of expressing love, there are a lot of different ways people give and receive.  For example, some people need to hear it: "I love you." Others need to see it demonstrated in a particular way, via doing things for them, or even gift giving. And for others it requires a physical expression; that is, some people need to be touched often and be physically close to their partner(s).  And there are other variations and combinations that people respond to, and unless partners are conscious of the differences, the other(s) involved may not feel loved even though they are.  People tend to express their love in the same way they receive it.

For example:

Bob demonstrates his love via "acts of service;" that is, he shows Mary he loves her by doing little things for her all the time because he cares:  he always checks over her car, looking for problems and fixing them while they are small, changing the fluids and keeping them topped up.  He keeps her computer virus-free and defragged.  He makes sure her guns are in good working order (hey, we're Porcupines, and I like guns).  And so forth.  But he's not very verbal--he doesn't often go out of his way to say "I love you, Mary."

Mary, OTOH, is more physically oriented.  She shows Bob she loves him by touching him, and being physically close to him.  She likes to sit close to him, actually touching him.  She likes to hold his hand, rest her hand on his leg, lean against him, whatever--just to be touching him.  She is also somewhat verbal, and is more likely than he is to actually say "I love you." 

Now, these two, if they aren't conscious of their differing styles of expression and reception, could really care for each other, but actually over time feel neglected by the other, because they don't feel loved.  A lot of relationship problems are fundamentally security-based:  If one or more of the partners doesn't feel secure in the relationship, it makes them unhappy, and things that otherwise wouldn't bother them become problems that make things worse.

OTOH, if Bob and Mary know enough about each other to recognize their differing "Love Languages" as one book calls them, they can take this into account, act accordingly, and keep things on a relatively even keel.  Mary learns to recognize that all those little things Bob does are proof of his love for her, and learns to appreciate them as such.  And reciprocates by making an effort to do little things for Bob, to help him feel loved.  Bob learns to recognize the way Mary shows her love is by touching him, and by verbalizations, so he appreciates that, and reciprocates by making an effort to tell her he loves her more often, and to make it a point to sit close to her and touch her in passing, so that she feels loved.  And since both are aware of each others' styles, and make at least a small effort to express their love in each others' styles as well as their own, there is a lot more relationship security--all parties feel loved, don't get so easily insecure or begin doubting, and so other issues that come up don't bother them so much.

Ok, enough preaching, for now.

[mackler]

IMHO if you enter the relationship with detailed plans of how it's going to end, it's not a marriage.

And I never said anything about pieces of paper or government involvement.  Personally, I don't believe in divorce, so as far as I'm concerned, a state marriage isn't necessarily a marriage (could be, doesn't have to be).

What makes a marriage different from an LTR is getting up in front of your "community" and announcing "hey world, we two are part of the same immediate family now and forever.  And if we hit rough times, it's your job to help us through it together...not help us go our separate ways."  Different people can choose different ways to symbolize this: rings, vows, having the same last name, one bank account.  The key element is bringing in the "community" as part of the deal.  What the specific community is--close friends, church parish, the government--isn't the point. 

[MaineShark]

IMHO if you enter the relationship with detailed plans of how it's going to end, it's not a marriage.

A marriage is about people who love each other choosing to share their lives.

That love should demand that they respect each other enough to plan for the potential end of the relationship in such a way as to minimize injury to themselves and their partner(s).

Having a plan for how to deal with "irreconcilable differences" is no different from having a living will or somesuch.  I don't plan to get in a car accident and end up in a coma, but I still have a plan for how I want my wishes to be interpreted in such a situation.

I don't plan to end my relationship with my wife, or have her end it, but we have a plan for how to deal with that.  I love her too much to risk hurting her in such a situation by fighting over assets.

Joe

[Free libertarian]

 One thing is for sure, if you ask the state for permission to marry, you'll also need their permission to divorce, been there.  I'm in a 10 year relationship, no state required or desired.  I'm as "married" as anyone, ups, downs, good, bad. If I were worried about assets, I'd get an agreement.  We're past having kids so that makes it easier there. I hope in 10 years, it will be a 20 year relationship, I'm going to do my part, that's all any of us can really do.   For those who'd rather "lease" than purchase...whatever turns you on.   I prefer a relationship, the one I'm in. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, yada yada yada...if the state says I'm not married good for them, I don't have to define my marriage by their terms.
  I'm henpecked, pussywhipped and we've helped raise each others kids, that makes us married damn it.
Besides I know the answer to "honey does this dress make me look fat?"...if that ain't being married nothing is. 

[porcupine kate]

IMHO if you enter the relationship with detailed plans of how it's going to end, it's not a marriage.

And I never said anything about pieces of paper or government involvement.  Personally, I don't believe in divorce, so as far as I'm concerned, a state marriage isn't necessarily a marriage (could be, doesn't have to be).

What makes a marriage different from an LTR is getting up in front of your "community" and announcing "hey world, we two are part of the same immediate family now and forever.  And if we hit rough times, it's your job to help us through it together...not help us go our separate ways."  Different people can choose different ways to symbolize this: rings, vows, having the same last name, one bank account.  The key element is bringing in the "community" as part of the deal.  What the specific community disclose friends,church parish, the  the point. 

No enters a marriage with the intention of getting a divorce.  I agree with that a marriage should be now and forever.  The idea of discussing what might happen if the relationship would end and what would you couldn't live with need to be addressed at the beginning.  My last relationship lasted 13 years.  It ended because of bad communication and him choosing the worst way to leave me which ended all options for getting back together.   No one in the community or family is responsible for your marriage.  You will find when things get tough you won't see it coming.  Bad communication is the biggest killer of marriages.  The worst symptoms of bad communication are usually the final deal breaker.  If you don't know there is a problem how can you seek help to fix the problem.  If you can't fix the problem or seek help to fix the problem the people around you won't know what is going on until it too late.  Most people won't notice that something is amiss until things are really bad.  Usually it is too late to fix the problem when other people notice something is wrong.

One of the really important things about not taking the government contract is making one of your own. 
The government marriage licence gives you one contract option.  There are things you need to work out if you aren't going to take the one size fits all option from the state.  The government option covers a bunch of things that you should address when you enter a marriage.  Some of these are divorce, property rights, parental rights, inheritance, death benefits, insurance benefits, financially obligations, medical decisions, children, and a whole bunch of other stuff that isn't listed on the license.

You need to discuss all of these things when entering a marriage so you can make it work in the long run.  The two of you need to be on the same page and make sure you can live with the terms you agreed on. 
I would also recommend drawing legal documents to make sure the government and both of your families have to abide by your contract with your spouse.

Most states require you to draw up a will, medical directive, and power of attorney if you want someone other than your parents or children to have any say over your estate or medical decisions.  I know that NH does have common law marriage laws if you die after 3 years living with your S/O.  This is just for inheritance purposes.  In most states parents can toss a spouse that doesn't have a government marriage license out of a hospital because they aren't legally family.  This is why you need the medical directive and power of attorney.  If you don't have children and you die without a will most of your estate will go to your parents.  Things like insurance policies and retirement accounts will go to who is designated on the form as a beneficiary regardless of who you list it to in your will. 
These things need to be addresses along with are you going to raise a family, who is going to take care of what financially, the long term goals like buying a house, starting a business and retirement.

[David]

One thing is for sure, if you ask the state for permission to marry, you'll also need their permission to divorce, been there.  I'm in a 10 year relationship, no state required or desired.  I'm as "married" as anyone, ups, downs, good, bad. If I were worried about assets, I'd get an agreement.  We're past having kids so that makes it easier there. I hope in 10 years, it will be a 20 year relationship, I'm going to do my part, that's all any of us can really do.   For those who'd rather "lease" than purchase...whatever turns you on.   I prefer a relationship, the one I'm in. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, yada yada yada...if the state says I'm not married good for them, I don't have to define my marriage by their terms.
  I'm henpecked, pussywhipped and we've helped raise each others kids, that makes us married damn it.
Besides I know the answer to "honey does this dress make me look fat?"...if that ain't being married nothing is. 

 

[Caleb]

  Besides I know the answer to "honey does this dress make me look fat?"

I know that one too. "No, dear, it's your thighs." 

[BaRbArIaN]

I avoided putting my SSN on my marriage license.   Told the clerk of the 1974 privacy act and how a marriage license isn't an IRS interest or Social Security concern, so she let me leave it blank.    Its not like somewhere else in the building she can't log onto the drivers license database and find it anyway if she really wanted it.  I hope it just sits in a file somewhere for a few decades, then gets microfilmed/digitally stored into obscurity.

[mackler]

  Besides I know the answer to "honey does this dress make me look fat?"

I know that one too. "No, dear, it's your thighs." 

or..."Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but, yeah, you could use some gym-time."

[porcupine kate]

If she is smart she never asks you if her but looks fat.

Any smart woman knows you ask your girlfriends while you are clothes shopping to avoid clothes that make you look bad.

[mackler]

If she is smart she never asks you if her butt looks fat.

Any smart woman knows you ask your girlfriends while you are clothes shopping to avoid clothes that make you look bad.

Women don't ask men if their clothes make them look fat in order to find out whether their clothes make them look fat.  They do it to see how the guy reacts to figure out how much of a wuss he is.  "Oh no honey, you look hot.  What makes you think you look fat?  You look great" is not the alpha-male answer, BTW.

[David]

Malcolm left.  Wonder why.

[Tom Sawyer]

Golly I miss him already.