One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

yogadog — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:21:52 GMT

I guees the only thing I can ask is "Why not?"

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

MagnoliaBell — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:14:02 GMT

Besides giving one or both partners a sense of legitimacy, it doesn't do any harm for the bankbook of the surviving couple. Death benefits? Social Security widower/widow's allowance? Pension allowance? Federal and state tax break? What about dying alone? No need to fear that path anymore. You have someone who you know who is willing to take care of you, comfort you, and give you that sense of well-being despite knowing that you are on the verge of death. Besides, the medical community always give better treatment to patients who have loved-ones overseeing their care. Who would not want to marry? With the right lawyer protecting any children's interests (if the dying even cares to protect their children's interest should they have offspring), it is a win-win situation!!! Only a cold-hearted so-and-so would ever refuse a (former) lover in such a situation. No one wants a refusal ruminating around their conscience years later when the lover is dead, cold, and 6 feet under. Heavens! How the neighbors would talk!

Forgive my cynicism but I find death-bed marriages behavior very narcissistic, not touching. Not willing to make their lover legitimate when they were healthy, wage-earning, and most importantly, had a choice to make them "that special one" speaks for itself.

You know, we prosecute American citizens who lovelessly marry foreigners just for USA 'Green Card' status. How is this financially different? It's just a drain on the taxpayer resources and pension coffers.

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

greymatter — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:29:22 GMT

'An end-of-life marriage allows one to have all the spiritual and cultural significance of being married without the 20-, 30-, or 40-year arguments about whose turn it is to take out the garbage.'

So we are to assume that people living together 20,30 or 40 years never argue about who is taking out the garbage??

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

sieg6529 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:45:08 GMT

why not? Let the dying have what they want.

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

Kytyn — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:09:09 GMT

Having been part of Kay and Dan's life, and his death, and their lives together, they were so happy in their plans to marry. I'm so glad there was a way to make that happen.

To MagnoliaBell: I understand where you are coming from, but understand please that is not why all people wish to make vows on a deathbed - and in this case, Kay's gain is a happy heart, and nothing else - there is no impact on any "taxpayer's or pension coffers".

How wonderful to have the opportunity to fulfill a dream - and to two wonderful people.

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

Kytyn — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:09:52 GMT

Having been part of Kay and Dan's life, and his death, and their lives together, they were so happy in their plans to marry. I'm so glad there was a way to make that happen.

How wonderful to have the opportunity to fulfill a dream - and to two wonderful people.

re: One In Sickness, One In Health: Why Deathbed Marriages Endure

claster — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:41:50 GMT

This article ignores the primary reason for most deathbed marriages, which is legal/financial. A spouse does not, for instance, have to pay tax on inheritance, whereas others do. And that's just one of many examples. Sadly, all too often, these marriages are the result of pressure on the part of the surviving partner to gain control of an estate, and take advantage of the reduced capacity of the dying.