all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I got into an argument with some coworkers for calling my biological brother's (then) ex-wife's brother my brother-in-law.

So I agree with you, but I guess other people are a bit bigger on semantics than we are.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Your brother's ex-wife is your ex-sister-in-law. Are there people who don't call their siblings spouse their in-laws?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Looks like this case wasn't sibling's spouse. It's sibling's spouse's sibling. In the US, they should not be technically your in-law. But I don't think it's weird to use it here and kinda surprised people cared.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago

    Yeah, I personally wouldn't argue with them about that. People are really overly pedantic. I wouldn't call my brother-in-law's siblings my in-laws but I don't know either of my brothers-in-laws siblings very well

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    But what about father-outlaw and mother-outlaw?

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    I'm not married and I never was. And on paper I still have in-laws.

    I met this girl around 2008 and we became friends with benefits. Suddenly 17 years later we have mortgage, kids, pets, and everything else together. Some might go as far as saying that it's starting to get serious between us.

    Anyway, due to having had shared address and offspring we're legally considered married for all practical purposes.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Some places are like that, and it makes sense. Others do not, and if there isn't some formal paper connecting the two then they don't get the benefits or penalties of making such commitment. I have a relative that lost their home of 35+ years because when the partner passed there was no mention in a will or any document of them contributing. Suddenly it wasn't their place to live.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    My mom is in a similar boat.

    She's been in Hawaii for decades, living with a guy and they're not married and she's not on the will for the property that he owns - even though she's paid the taxes for it on and off over the years..

    I have asked her why he can't set that up to take care of her if anything happens to him and it's just that he's lazy and thinks - like a lot of people do - that he's going to last forever.

    I worry about it, and mention it often but the answer is always the same.

    Am like WTF mom, he's no spring chicken - neither are you - what ARE you two thinking?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    If anything the rest of our family has taken the lesson to heart to put into place things to protect their loved ones. And like you said, they could have done even a little to help themselves before it got too far, but for some reason they procrastinate, avoid or refuse help, and even lie and say they have everything worked out.

    I hope your mom's situation changes for the better to protect her, and you. If their relationship with each other is still good (some get toxic) I would push it hard and use some guilt and hypotheticals to get him to do something official if he cares for her at all. And if not... now might be a better time to cut loose than it being forced on her.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Thank you!

    Oh, they are absolutely dedicated to each other, he adores my mom and she loves him fiercely but he is just not willing to consider a will and face his mortality. It's common, honestly. I am going to be doing a full court press on the matter this coming year. Mom is in her 80's and is in good health, they both are - but still.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Interesting; I’ve read that more and more jurisdictions are ending the concept of common law marriage. The idea is it existed in a time when a legal marriage was harder to get. Nowadays in those areas a legal marriage is easy to get so the thought is if those people never legally married it’s because they didn’t want to, not because they couldn’t, so there’s no reason to have a marriage forced onto the couple.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 year ago*

    Although I've heard that in French, stepmother and mother-in-law are the same word. Which I can see the logic behind. One is your spouse's parent and the other is your parent's spouse

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Thats hella deep

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    isnt my brother's wife's mother my mother-in-law?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    One of you or your siblings has to be married.

    It otherwise doesn't work: brother/sister in law wouldn't exist. Unless siblings marry siblings, there's no other way to create that link if you all have to be married.

  • source
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)