finances in a marriage

[vincenzo]

I agree Wylie, but there are girls out there who think that staying home with a baby or two is a free ride. They just leave the baby with grandma or whoever as often as they please, as if having a baby shouldn't interfere with thier social life

@Francine: Other members have already mentioned most of these points, but i'll say what I think anyway
I think the best a friend can do is be honest with thier friends. Let them know what you think. You can't force other people to live the way you want them to. You can offer your help if you wish, but that's about it.

I would suggest that generally speaking, people should make sure that they are being honest to thier partner, not just telling a close friend everything. Unless for example she is planning on dumping him and starting a relationship with you

Not that i'm reccomending she do that btw! Especially if she doesn't know that you are telling strangers on the internet so much detail about her personal life I think any relationship should be built on honesty.

 

[Nathan]

I look at it, if I make sacrifices, and commitments in my life to benifit my future, I would expect a partner to contribute aswell.

One way shape or form...

Depends on whatever works for them, I guess thats the beauty theres no right or wrong. Personally I would expect the relationship partner to put in the same, and if they cant financially I would expect to have commitment in other angles of helping out around the place.

Theres a cheap lunch, and theres stealing your lunch.

Everyone has different mindsets and two must work together if not then thats where there are dramas.

 

[crc_error]

Playing babies is NOT a free ride, and anybody who thinks a woman would give up a career/job to have an easy free ride with babies and housework as the things to fill the day and night obviously has no idea.

I'm not talking about Francine's friend here, but the general idea of women having babies and looking after a household doing so because they want a "free ride". What a hoot

buying a sports car is also not a free ride. you have to pay for it, but in the end you get a reward. Women choose a lifestyle, ie having babies, and then expect a man to come in and pay for it.

if I choose a lifestyle and buy a $100k sports car, then I pay for it and maintain it. I don't expect someone else to come in and subsidise it.

Women need to realise that in todays climate, both man and woman need to go to work.

and in case you didn;t realize, everyone has house work, everyone has to cook, everyone has to wash cloths. Just because you have babies, doesn't mean all these chores all of the sudden come up.

 

[crc_error]

Personally I would expect the relationship partner to put in the same, and if they cant financially I would expect to have commitment in other angles of helping out around the place.

From what I see women expect the man to work full time - miss out on the childs growth - and then come home and help with 'house work'.

When the relationship doesnt work out women get 75% of a mans assets, which include the house, super, cash, cars, business, etc and a further 75% of his wages till the child grows up.

To me this isn't fair, and its simply gold digging.

 

[kathryn d]

Interesting thread.
Rob and I are a blended family, and divorced once.
We had completely different divorces.

His partner had him in court constantly and child custody was a nightmare.He finally ended up with sole custody and was financially wiped out.

I on the other hand, had a very straight forward divorce. We split everything down the middle. We agreed to keep the children in the house. Either or both of us could reside in the house (and we did for a year) and split the child costs and bills. If one moved out, the remaining parent was responsible for all child costs and bills.We deemed having the responsibility of the children a privledge, instead of a burden. Eventually my ex moved in with his new partner.
After all children were finished school , the house was to be sold and to split the proceeds. Instead I purchased his share before that time, as I wanted to buy more properties and needed access to my equity.

In both of my marriages, we have always had joint bank accounts.
There is no such thing as yours or mine. It is ours.

Having children can be very challenging when trying to maintain a balance.Sometimes, it is just not financially worth going to work, after considering the child care costs.
Not everyone has the luxury of a day job.I worked shift all of my working career.

I think child support, after a divorce should always be 50/50 whenever possible.This way child support never need be an issue.

People should discuss these things before marriage.

 

[crc_error]

kathryn, your situation is very fair!! well done! obviously you were not interested in gold digging, and I like how you view child care as a privilege, not a burden.

Good on ya for splitting the assets down the line.. this is how it should be, not that the man is wiped out financially..

 

[skater]

Women choose a lifestyle, ie having babies, and then expect a man to come in and pay for it.

Women need to realise that in todays climate, both man and woman need to go to work.

and in case you didn;t realize, everyone has house work, everyone has to cook, everyone has to wash cloths. Just because you have babies, doesn't mean all these chores all of the sudden come up.

From what I see women expect the man to work full time - miss out on the childs growth - and then come home and help with 'house work'.

When the relationship doesnt work out women get 75% of a mans assets, which include the house, super, cash, cars, business, etc and a further 75% of his wages till the child grows up.

To me this isn't fair, and its simply gold digging.

Obviously with the comments above, you have either experienced or witnessed someone who has done the wrong thing, but you have some serious misconceptions here.

We all know there are plenty of youngsters that go out and get pregnant (repeatedly) so they can get benefits and not work. But I believe this is wrong and I think that in many of these cases it is the poor child who suffers.

Likewise there are women who enter into a marriage with the wrong mindset. That if things don't work out, they can walk. But women are not alone in this. Men do it too. Of course, once a child appears this then complicates matters and there are times when what you have described does happen. It does usually mean that custody of a child is given to the female, and there are times where the male has to pay substantial amounts until the child is 18.

But don't try to tell me that this is what all women are about. It most certainly is not.

Having babies is HARD work. It is not a case of staying home and doing nothing all day long. A baby creates a lot more house work. A baby demands your time costantly. They need things done for them all the time and it is a very demanding job. When mine were young, I didn't go out socialising all day long. And as someone so rightly pointed out, childcare costs are not inexpensive, so that there are times where it costs MORE to send a child to childcare, than to stay home and care for them yourself.

I believe that a marriage is a partnership and that both partners do what they can to bring about a harmonious family life. We have both worked towards this. I have not worked a conventional full time job since I fell pregnant with the first child.

During our childrens formative years we had several times where money was very tight. Together we worked whatever part time/casual jobs we could find in order to bring in an income. We also had several Businesses where I worked alongside Hubby.

For most of my children's school years I have been waiting for them when they get home from school. I then do the taxi rounds of taking them to sport.

During this time I have not at all had endless social outings at the expense of my husband. I have been instrumental in educating myself about investing, in order to grow our income. I have worked various part-time jobs on & off. I have made all the family outfits for sporting events, which if I had to purchase would have come in at several thousand of $$ per year. I have researched where to locate items at low prices to keep the budget in order, both on a personal level and when renovating IPs.

Now, my children are grown, I still do various small jobs for several companies. I do the accounts for our portfolio. I still make outfits. I manage the PMs that require managing. I paint houses. I do not have a conventional full time job, but I still bring value to the household.

 

[RumpledElf]

Children are one of those 'choices' that isn't financially win-win at all. Unless you are on a reasonably high earning job, you have to go back fulltime just so you are ahead after childcare costs. Childcare is horrendously expensive unless you use family day care and are a single parent and/or on a very low income with a partner earning very little too so you can actually get it for near free. Actually having a baby - all the medical tests, the birth etc - can also be very expensive if you're not exactly in the demographic (also as above) who gets the lot for free. Sure, its a 'lifestyle choice' but it only works out to be a 'profit' if you're extremely low income.

Worst is, if you return to work parttime or even fulltime without the obligatory unpaid overtime you can completely screw up any prospects of career advancement, depending on where you work. You get overlooked for everything because you're just not 'dedicated' enough.

Last thing you need is to be in the situation of having to pay for all that yourself when our delightful welfare system takes the partner's income into account when working out your entitlements (ie, if he earns a lot more than the $4000PA partner threshold you're allowed before it cuts down, she'll get zero welfare even if she earns nothing and will be 100% reliant on him). But of course Francine has no idea if this is their situation at all ...

Funny thing is, in this day and age some men still get married just to have children to carry on the family name, its not just women who *have* to have babies.

 

[crc_error]

Having babies is HARD work. It is not a case of staying home and doing nothing all day long. A baby creates a lot more house work. A baby demands your time costantly. They need things done for them all the time and it is a very demanding job. When mine were young, I didn't go out socialising all day long. And as someone so rightly pointed out, childcare costs are not inexpensive, so that there are times where it costs MORE to send a child to childcare, than to stay home and care for them yourself.

no one said having babies is not hard work, what I said is having babies is a lifestyle choice. its a choice where many women expect the man to work, and pay for their choice. and in the case of the OP, the women is getting upset cause the man might be 'tight' with his money. so obviously she is entering this marriage with the view that he is a cash cow, to support her lifestyle choice of babies.

whats it got to do with you not socialising at all when the babies are young? if a guy chooses to buy a IP, car or expensive holiday, then he might need to work 60 hours a week, hence he also wont socialise. you choose a expensive lifestyle, so this is the price that has to be paid. but the difference is women expect the men to work, and they stay at home to enjoy the baby growing up, in many situations the men miss out on the vital years of growing up because they work, but the woman gets to see it all.

then to top if off women can leave the man, and wipe him out 75%, and still continue to suck his wage for years to come.

and I'm sure men also help out with house work, they also have to wake up at 2am in the morning, they also help out with cooking, shopping etc.. so the 'hard work' isn't limited to the woman.

so from where I'm standing, its a win win for the woman.

 

[skater]

no one said having babies is not hard work, what I said is having babies is a lifestyle choice. its a choice where many women expect the man to work, and pay for their choice. and in the case of the OP, the women is getting upset cause the man might be 'tight' with his money. so obviously she is entering this marriage with the view that he is a cash cow, to support her lifestyle choice of babies.

whats it got to do with you not socialising at all when the babies are young? if a guy chooses to buy a IP, car or expensive holiday, then he might need to work 60 hours a week, hence he also wont socialise. you choose a expensive lifestyle, so this is the price that has to be paid. but the difference is women expect the men to work, and they stay at home to enjoy the baby growing up, in many situations the men miss out on the vital years of growing up because they work, but the woman gets to see it all.

then to top if off women can leave the man, and wipe him out 75%, and still continue to suck his wage for years to come.

and I'm sure men also help out with house work, they also have to wake up at 2am in the morning, they also help out with cooking, shopping etc.. so the 'hard work' isn't limited to the woman.

so from where I'm standing, its a win win for the woman.

Yes, it is a lifestyle choice, but you know, it takes two to tango and in many relationships both partners decide to have a child, not just the woman. If you don't want kids, and/or don't trust your partner to use birth control, then you can take the upper hand on this. In many instances the male earns more money than the female, so if someone is going to stay at home, then it makes sense that the one on the lower income is the one to stay at home.

BOTH partners should share the expense, so it is right that the man should contribute in the case of a marriage breakdown, but if you BOTH enter into that marriage with the right mindset, then there is less risk that there will be a breakdown. So, with this in mind, if the male feels that he need to protect himself for this eventuality, then he should re-think who he is going to end up in bed with, so to speak.

When you buy a house you do your due dilligence, don't you. Well, it is the same when having a baby. If a male wants to go sleep around unprotected he really gets what he deserves, I think, kind of like the person who drives into a town & buys something simply because it's there. In both cases, you know nothing about what kind of risks you are taking. With a long term relationship, I think you really need to get to know the other person, their values, what you both expect from the relationship, etc and you can think of that as the research you might do in an area of interest. Interviewing PM's, finding vacancy rates, yeilds, good/bad areas etc. It's all about risk mitigation.

 

[crc_error]

it might make more sense for the woman for the man to work because he earns more, but the man might think its more important for him to spend time with the child, rather than earning more money for the family.

again, perfect example how women only think of the $$$, over the child's welfare. having more money is less important than BOTH parents spending as much time with the kid as possible..

 

[kathryn d]

When Rob and his son moved to Canada to be with me and my kids,we made the decision he should stay home.I already had employment, and he wasnt permitted to work anyways for the first 18 months (going thru immigration).

I was lucky to have been able to leave employed work and stay at home while my kids were small, and I thought he should have that same opportunity.
Even though our IP's have grown a lot over the last few years, Rob still does most of the domestic work.( I make the meals.) He works about the same of hours now as me, with self managing.

 

[weg]

it might make more sense for the woman for the man to work because he earns more, but the man might think its more important for him to spend time with the child, rather than earning more money for the family.

Most women I know work nowadays, and some make more than their husbands. The ones taking time off are only doing so for a short while, and the wealth they create is due to both of them. I don't think many of these women are going to prefer living on welfare supplemented by the exhusbands income if they divorce either, not when they're used to much more.

I also doubt women are getting 75% of mens income. My understanding from statistics I've read, is that women are worse off tha men after divorce.

And regardless what you think, the woman might think, the man will work the hours he wants. The man can also claim joint custody if he wants. This reduces what he pays and may mean the exwife pays him.


again, perfect example how women only think of the $$$, over the child's welfare. having more money is less important than BOTH parents spending as much time with the kid as possible..

Obviously everyone thinks of dollars, but that's because many dollars are required to cover the basics, and even more dollars required if it's to support a parent and children v a parent only. Not too many divorcees are living the high life following divorce.

 

[Piston Broke]

So let me guess...
She does'nt have any money saved, or invested because she does'nt think it's all about money or that money is all that important, but he should put up the bux for whatever wedding or party she wants and/or overseas expenses cause he's loaded?
And he's a greedy heartless ******* if he does'nt think that's right and/or brings the up the money issue, cause he's loaded.
Can't say it's the first time encounter with that line of thought thou.


Though it's not really anybody bizness but their own.
They are adults and should'nt require babysitters.
Anyone elses interference will only be grudged later on.

 

[pennyk]

I agree with the comments before that finances and how to manage them are issues which need to be discussed before the marraige, to get a feel for the difference between the 2 parties backgrounds, attitudes, experiences etc.
Both our families had similar amounts of money, but my family was more "generous", and spent much more than his family did. Also I had worked and saved up money before we got married, and because of his previous work and family history, he brought pretty much nothing to the marraige.
I was the only daughter, and in a very social family, so my family expected a big fancy wedding.
This was his second marraige, and his family never did big events anyway, and would prefer a little wedding on the property with 5 or 10 people attending. (With him being dirt poor, it was a good challenge for him to think outside the box, to come up with ideas that wouldn't cost too much money, but would give the appearance of being a fancy wedding! My parents also contributed a considerable amount of money... but they had also paid for my brothers weddings, so it wasn't about gender - they were just generous people)
But you can imagine that there were also lots of compromises and challenges for us as we prepared our wedding. I remember that he nearly died when he found out how much it was going to cost to get the icing on the wedding cake done!!! I think that cost more than my engagement ring.
There are so many different attitudes and expectations related to money that coming into marraige is frought with problems.
But I also think making generalisations about men and women in marraige is fruitless... each marraige is different, and has different circumstances.
I bought I supported him for the first few years of our marraige while he retrained at university. When we had kids, I took time off and he supported me. Right now, I earn significantly more than him. I don't think either of us have ever been resentful about the stage of life that we were at at those particular times.... its been decisions we made together.
We set some boundaries about money - upper limits of what we can spend without discussing with one another etc. Major decisions are discussed together - financial, work related, child care related. If we disagree, then generally we wait until we both come to an agreement. We have had both financial disaster and financial success, and both require "solutions" in the marraige to learn how to cope with them. Both of us compromise at different stages, and we are both opinionated and have strong values, which quite often differ from the other...... and obviously we are not perfect, and we fight quite regularly about these things...

Marraige is all about 2 people becoming 1 unit..... this requires discussion, compromise, agreement, from both sides. If this doesn't happen, resentment is likely to follow. and decisions made from a place of resentment are generally the worst decisions made.

So, its not about whether one party makes the money, and one party spends the money... or whether one person stays home with kids, or whether both people work..... its about how a couple learn to work together, and find a solution that works for them. Every couple's solution will be different.

And, Francine, I also agree with the comments that this is something couples have to work out for themselves. If you really want this couple to succeed, then refer them to someone who does pre-marraige counselling. For us, this was also something that was extremely helpful, and helped identify potential problems before they occured, and gave us some strategies for managing them....... don't get involved directly, because that will just create more problems. And often what outsiders see as problems in a marraige are completely acceptable for those within the marraige! Each family is different, and they need to find their own solutions.

Pen

 

[skater]

it might make more sense for the woman for the man to work because he earns more, but the man might think its more important for him to spend time with the child, rather than earning more money for the family.

again, perfect example how women only think of the $$$, over the child's welfare. having more money is less important than BOTH parents spending as much time with the kid as possible..

Again, I see from this post someone who is bitter for some reason. When you have a child you incur many financial burdons. It is important for the child's welfare to earn enough to keep a roof over your head and meals on the table. If I was earning a high income and my husband a low income, I would have no hesitation to keep working while he stay home.

The fact is, that I am probably a fair bit older than you and when I was having babies, it was a whole lot more accepted that the wife just give up work when babies come along. These days more & more women are going back to work soon after the birth. More and more senior positions are also opening up for women meaning that incomes are likely to be more even across the board.

Regardless of who brings in the money and who stays at home with the children (if any), a marriage is a partnership and as Penny stated not everyone works by the same rules within this partnership. That is OK, so long as both parties are on the same page and treat each other with respect.

 

[pennyk]

We also had the added complication of my husband paying child support for the first 5 years or so of our marraige... so I understand the frustration of that side of things as well, particularly when the ex is with another man.

We were fortunate, that the amount payable was quite low, and not enforced through salary deductions. ....... but essentially that meant that during the years I was supporting my husband, I was also contributing to his child maintenance, and ex-wife's lifestyle!

But again, that was all part of getting a "package deal" for me (husband and child).... I knew what I was getting into, and what that would involve. If I didn't like it, I shouldnt have gone there in the first place.

Its easy to get bitter about these things, but better to move on and accept that its part of the fractured society we live in, and work out a way to live with it.

Pen

 

[coastymike]

And people wonder why I think human beings were never meant to be in long term monogamous relationships. Time we realised that most of the animal kingdom seems to get on just fine without this sort of thing.

 

[pennyk]

And people wonder why I think human beings were never meant to be in long term monogamous relationships. Time we realised that most of the animal kingdom seems to get on just fine without this sort of thing.

I don't know.... one of my motivations for not getting a divorce is that its all too difficult, and who would want to start this all over again. As for an affair, who has the time and energy to manage more than one relationship!!

15 years on, we are just beginning to get the hang of being married........... i don't want to have to go through the painful early years again. One time is enough for me!

My parents were married for over 50 years, and the last 5 years were by far the best. So, I'm hanging on expecting that it will get better and better!

Pen

 

[Ms Jade]

Interesting to see all the points of view on this thread. I also think it's disappointing these days that society generally does not have a forum for engaged couples to work through what they think their marriage will be like. I don't belong to a church but I can see infinite value in the counselling framework that some religions provide. I don't know how many couples I've seen who have problems in their marriage largely stemming from the fact that they didn't discuss their expectations first. Not just from a financial POV, although much marital disharmony is apparently about money.

One thing I've noticed is how many young women have an unspoken expectation that the man will somehow "change" because he's married. If these guys had known that the contract was supposed to entail giving up golf weekends away or whatever perhaps they would have reconsidered. One husband didn't realise that the wife decided she would have a baby straight away, and that she assumed it would, for all intents and purposes, be the end of her working life. Sorry, I should have said "paid employment." She has her hands full with 2 now & is certainly working. The only issue I see with it is that they should have discussed what they thought their life would look like, what would change between them, what they thought would stay the same, what their child-rearing beliefs were etc - before getting married.

i find it interesting that married couples have separate finances. DH & I lived together for 6 years before getting married. I didn't think I was the marrying kind. During this time we kept finances separate. We both chipped in for household expenses etc, and it never occurred to us to change this. Until we got married. One thing I said to friends at the time was how much it suddenly occurred to me that marriage is a financial transaction. Promising to stay together forever meant that looking into the future meant planning for that future together. It was not "my" future anymore. We would get there together or not at all. So there was no question that his money & my money became our money. And perhaps I should point out that I have always been the high income earner & this has compounded as the years have gone by. It makes no difference to me. But I suspect it would make a difference to some of you if he was the one with the big pay packet. One person almost always earns more than the other. Sometimes by a big margin. The important thing is that both parties are aware what their expectations are, and that they share them.