Time was the majority of couples would get married in their early twenties – the recent news story of the 80-year wedding anniversary of Frank and Anita Milford is testament to that. But couples are now exchanging wedding rings much later in life. For some couples, they vowed they would live together but felt they didn't need to get married to prove their commitment, opting for eternity rings instead of platinum wedding rings. But a recent report in the Guardian newspaper shows that these couples are now opting to do what they swore they never would: get married.
Platinum Wedding rings – Love and Marriage
The old Sinatra song expounding that love and marriage goes together like a horse and carriage has long been seen to be an old-fashioned view. But the couples who vowed never to exchange wedding rings are now queuing up at the church later in life. Is it because of the all-conquering nature of love and romance? Or, as the Guardian asks, because of the tax breaks?
Exchanging vows; Exchanging Wedding Rings
For some, the idea of matrimony was equivalent to an old-fashioned ideological institution that was out-dated and out of step. They didn't need wedding rings to prove their love and commitment. But research shows that long-co-habiting couples are increasingly turning to wedlock. Those who once mocked the marshmallow frocks are pouring over bridal magazines and hunting down the perfect wedding rings. Although for some, it's simply a question of going through the motions.
Investing in Platinum Wedding Rings: Romance versus Rights
As the report shows, romance isn't always top of the list for exchanging wedding rings. One couple in their sixties tied the knot because they discovered that unmarried, if one partner died, the other is liable to inheritance tax on their property, regardless of the fact it belonged to both of them. Exchanging wedding rings gives couples certain rights; some pensions for example can't be passed to your partner unless you are married, no matter how long you've co-habited.