MARRIAGE: FASHION, FINANCIAL PLANNING AND THE ENDURING IMPACT OF THE ‘SILVER SPLICERS’ 

Published on 12 November, 2024 | Hannah Durkin

Fashions can change dramatically from season to season.

Equally, if we lift our eyes from our wardrobes and consider how we all live, we can notice great societal shifts over time.

The fact that the attitudes and habits of our parents’ generation now seem comparatively dated is not necessarily a negative reflection on them.

It is rather an illustration of the impact which economic, professional and technological differences have had in recent decades.

I have been reminded of that in the last week while reading a magazine article describing how people – particularly, those aged under 35 – “fell out of love with marriage” (https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/love-sex/relationships/a62649618/marriage-decline-in-young-people/).

The author indicated that the scale and nature of parental divorce, the cost of marriage and a reduction in the stigma associated with cohabitation have all played their part.

There is, I suppose, some justification when we take into account estimates that the average UK wedding this year would have set couples back close to £21,000 (https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/uk/consumer-advice/a565872/average-cost-of-uk-wedding/).

After a couple of years in which a rise in the cost of living has tightened purse strings across the country, it is easy to see how people might regard such expense as excessive.

It is perhaps unsurprising, therefore, that couples – young and old – are still choosing to set up home together without getting married.

The most recent data published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) shows that there were just over 3.5 million cohabiting couples in England and Wales in 2022 – an increase of two-thirds in two decades (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationestimatesbymaritalstatusandlivingarrangements/2022).

The fact that cohabitation has become increasingly regarded as a social norm demonstrates that marriage is no longer thought of as a priority by many people.

Some couples opt for cohabitation over marriage for apparent financial reasons, while others prefer it because of the lack of formality.

Even so, there are those who still see marriage as something of a milestone to be addressed in the future.

Regardless of their reasoning, I would suggest that living together without formalising relationships carries the risk of significant consequences should those relationships not last.

That is because, as things currently stand, there is not the same legislative framework for untangling financial ties for cohabitees as there is for married couples.

Resolving questions such as the content of joint bank accounts or ownership of a home – and, in fact, how a deposit to buy a home might have been raised – requires the use of property and trust law.

At its last party conference before this summer’s General Election victory, Labour had promised to introduce a law providing some measure of financial rights for separating cohabitees (https://www.emilythornberry.com/shadow-attorney-general/2023/10/10/making-the-law-work-for-women-my-labour-conference-speech-2023/).

However, since the current Government was formed, there have been no further announcements about how that will happen or even whether it remains a priority.

As my colleague Laura Guillon wrote recently for The Times (https://www.thetimes.com/article/91128a5c-b78e-49dc-a2ef-e9fed7927bcf?shareToken=3983518ebbf7a1403c6b205ea97938e3), the focus remains on clarifying whether the law relating to financial remedies on divorce is fit for purpose.

Determining whether reform is needed and enacting change may take some time, meaning that legislation to regulate the financial affairs of cohabitees could be several years off at least.

Given that timeframe and how costly and unpredictable cohabitee disputes can become, it surely makes sense to put in place some reassurance in the form of a cohabitation agreement.

Contrary to the idea of it being unromantic, I prefer to think of it as equivalent to the sort of financial planning that many cohabitees will already do, like having insurance policies or setting up pensions.

Many older cohabiting couples decide to marry precisely because of the protections which marriage affords, particularly when it comes to inheritance.

Again, figures published by the ONS tell some of the story, showing that the percentage of under-35s in England and Wales who marry has fallen by 11 per cent in 20 years. (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/marriagecohabitationandcivilpartnerships/bulletins/marriagesinenglandandwalesprovisional/2021and2022).

But they also reveal that the number of men and women aged over 55 who marry – a group which has come to be known as the ‘silver splicers’ – has increased dramatically during the same period.

Marriages among those in their sixties, for instance, have more than doubled in 20 years.

My experience is that many of them do so because they want to provide for their partners, either in the event of death or break-up as they recognise that marriage carries greater weight in terms of financial protection than cohabitation.

They appreciate that they have a choice about how they structure relationships but they want clarity. They also know that relationships can be a source of tremendous challenge if not regulated properly.

Choosing to marry or not is an intensely personal decision.

I would strongly encourage those who want to live together but conclude that marriage isn’t for them to consider having a cohabitation agreement and seek advice about how to do so.

It is a step which can prevent the natural upset of a failed relationship being compounded by costly financial complications.