To say we can’t afford to visit DF’s family at Christmas

[Ambivalence]

My DF ( fiancé) is pretty hopeless with money and so I have been nagging him for ages to prepare a list of his incomings/ outgoings so that we can prepare a joint budget. I have also been nagging him to check his finances before committing to things, rather than just spending the money and asking me to bail him out. He is not good at living within his means, which I realise is unlikely to ever change as he is 46!

He has now just texted me with the conclusion that we should not go to Holland for Christmas as it would be cheaper to stay at home ( he doesn?t get paid time off anyway).

I have texted back to say we will discuss it tonight. I feel really mean to agree with him, and let him spend Christmas without his family and friends but it would be a lesson to him about working out what you can afford before making plans ( we just went to Holland a week ago for his birthday ? he booked the wrong flights and so lost 2 days wages as a result, and spent £200 hosting a party in a bar for his friend).

I am a bit annoyed with him about money anyway as he has been in a low paid call centre (£9/ hour) job since he moved to London in the spring ? despite promising to look for something in his field and at a professional salary comparable to the job he left ( her hasn?t put much effort into this), and he is disorganised about giving me money towards the bills ( no rent as I pay the mortgage on my flat) and I have been asking him for months to set up a weekly standing order/ direct debit to me, as he is paid weekly and his budgeting skills are poor.

I feel really mean saying we can?t afford to go to see his family, but in the end I think this might be a lesson learned for him. He never saves anything for a rainy day. I have just had to spend my rainy day fund on some unexpected building work and so don?t have funds to bail him out. Should I agree with him we can?t afford the trip at Christmas or be kind and pay for it?

Although he is secretive and selfish about his own money, he does give me back any money I lend him, it just takes several weeks. I have decided therefore NEVER to lend him any money again. My friends all like him, they say that he is honest and kind and thoughtful ( which he mostly is), and they know that he makes me happy ( mostly). I have raised it with a few of them that I feel like I am being used as a meal ticket, and their views have been that he just isn?t a forward planner or materialistic, and that is why he has never saved/ bought a property/ got a pension. Until recently he was earning the equivalent of £30,000/ year and he appears to have spent that on CDs, he didn?t save any of it, and was living in the same rented studio flat in Holland for 6 years, because he had friends in the building. He just isn?t motivated to improve his living situation, which to me indicates a lack of self respect. I don?t think his primary reason for being with me is financial, as i don?t think he is very calculating. It is a nice side effect of him being rather unambitious though that if he lives with me he enjoys the same lifestyle I do

A lot of my friends are in similar situations too ? being the primary earner, and having a less ambitious spouse. Some of the others are single and say that I shouldn?t complain about the finances when otherwise he is so lovely, and think I am being very materialistic

Aaaaaaaaaaaaah op yet another red flag. You think this is down to lack of self-respect - presumably marriage and children will give him the self-respect 'backbone', after all it worked for your father didn't it?

But what if (kind version) he really, really doesn't give a stuff about the things that you do? Or (less kind version) he does but he's not willing to work/contribute/save to get them so is happy to pick your pockets for the rest of his life.

Once you marry, he becomes entitled to a share of the wealth accumulated during the marriage by the way. Even if you're the one doing the accumulating.

Pre-nups are not worthless, they can and usually will be taken into account. It's just that they are not binding on the court deciding ancillary relief. So the court can disregard a pre-nup if it decides that is the just thing to do.

OP, it does sound as though in certain important areas (money, lifestyle, aspirations) you and your partner have very different values. This is a fundamental difference you seem to be glossing over. What does he think of your attitudes and your desires for the future?

If it is that he "just isn't a forward planner" or more accurately cannot even cope with the actual present nevermind the future and they think this is a reasonable way to be then why do you have a right to control him or change him?

I don't think you will be in the same situation either. I bet some of your friends have children, I bet also the lower earner is not refusing to do something to improve the financial situation like your DP. As for the single ones and the "shut up any man is better than no man"... Urgh...

I honestly think you seem to have surrounded yourself with very unhelpful people here! Either that or they are trying to placate you because they no you won't leave him.

"He is secretive and selfish about his own money" in a marriage this should be a total deal breaker IMHO. It is actually insane in your situation!!

Living in a studio flat is not in itself problematic: why should he have spent more money on a place to live than is necessary to make himself comfortable and happy? Its that he then happily frittered the money which is the problem...

Offred ? it will all have to come to a head at Tuesday?s Relate session, he will have to accept a budget and stick to it or move out.

Although I am a solicitor, I am not that highly paid and he needs to contribute.

Do not marry this man. A pre-nup is not currently legally recognised in this country (although they can be taken into account). This means that he may be entitled to half of your assets on your marriage, and you may be responsible for half of his debt.

I'm not surprised he wants to get married. I'm sorry, but I think you're being incredibly foolish and I also think it would be irresponsible to bring a child into this mess.

Bear in mind that lower earner does not equal selfish unambitious cocklodger.

Plenty of lower earners in relationships work very very hard for their families, and indeed are the lower earners precisely because they take on all or most of the childcare, or caring for elderly relatives, or whatever.

I hope you don't mind my saying so, but there is an inkling in your posts of monetary contribution being the ultimate arbiter of a person's worth in a relationship, something with which I disagree profoundly. It isn't his smaller income that makes your DP such a dismal prospect, but his attitudes and behaviour.

OP if you stick with this man you'll never have: a honeymoon, a bigger home, the ability to afford children or the chance to just enjoy your life and your relationship. You'll always have to control and manage him and everything about your lives. Doesn't that just sound exhausting?

I don't think the budget is the issue. The issue is that he is selfish and secretive over his own money AND feels entitled to yours. You are never going to be able to have a joint account with him, lots of people choose not to because that is their preference, but if you couldn't have a joint account with him I don't think you can be married really can you?

What do you think will happen if you do this budget? Do you think he will stick to it?

Cos he doesn't seem so keen on making it... What are you going to do if he overspends? The thing is the things you would have to do to him to force him to be the kind of man you need him to be are abusive. He is quite financially and by the sounds of it emotionally abusive to you, the only logical answer is to just split up. A relationship is not about power but partnership and what you are doing is attempting to escalate the power struggle. It is very messed up.

No, I agree that financial contribution is not the only contribution, if he was doing most fo the childcare/ caring for an elderly relative, i wuoldn't mind. It riles me that my DF could get a better paid job, but chooses not to.

At work he seems to work hard, e.g. last month he won ?employee of the month?, and he leaves the house at 6.30 and returns home at 5.30, so he works a longer day than I do. He also does the lion?s share of the housework, all of the shopping etc.

His attitudes and behaviour are appalling though ? he thinks that because he has moved countries to be with me ( as he always says ? I have moved countries twice to be with you), that absolves him from having to contribute to a shared life.

If he exists which I'm not sure.... he certainly doesn't sound like what you want. However if you want babies he is presumably going to be the one at home so that will solve all your chidlcare problems for the next 20 years. If you want babies and need to get on with it and think you love him then go for it but take the financial precautions people suggest. Make sure the fact he will be the stay at home father is part of the Relate session although again don't marry as if you do and split then he is more likely to get the property and the child if he is the primary "care giver".

Also no need to marry and then you can preserve your separate finances.
Pre nups have indicative force but not legally binding so not a solution.

You do know relationships are not supposed to be so bloody hard all the time?

Yes of course you have to work at them - but seriously, look at the stage you are at and then look at the words you are using - where's the fun? Where are the fireworks? Where is the respect, partnership, joy? You are talking about control and sanctions, not enjoying a life and planning a future with someone who supports you and shares your plans.

I have been thinking of not legally marrying him, but aswe want to have children, my family are keen that they be ?legitimate?. I am also one of those marriage vows unto death types, so likely wouldn?t seek a divorce ? if anyone did, it would be him.

Other than issue, I am happy with him, in fact my best friend
Just sent me an email saying that in the last few months I am happier than she has seen me in years.

I am not miserable - just frustrated.

What is the answer then?

Because the choice is accept him as he is or don't be with him as I see it. Do you think it would be ok to control all his money and/or set budgets/limits for him? What if for some reason (ill health, child etc) you needed to depend on him? What if when you had a baby you wanted to stay at home and not go back to work? Staying at home with the children is often thrust onto the lower earner but I think it is better for it to be based on who wants to and would be best at the job. If he is how you describe would you trust him to raise a well rounded child? How would he function without being able to "future plan" or budget?

As anyone who is at home with children will happily tell you planning and organising your life, being responsible with money and budgeting are really important.

And without being patronising, plenty of people find it hard to imagine how having children changes your expectations, your life and your choices until it happens, you might be happy for him to be SAHD living entirely off your wage, although I doubt it based on this thread, but equally you might find you really want to stay at home and I just think it is better to give yourselves the option of discussing it later as well as now rather than forcing yourself into a corner. He may not even want to be SAHD or he may change his mind when he works out it is hard and thankless!

Purely going off the OP, he hasn't asked you to bail him out, he's suggesting not going to Holland for Christmas. If you want to go then I guess you could pay if not then stay home as he has suggested.

Why would it be bailing him out if you decide to do something he hasn't asked for purely because you think that's best for him, speaking as someone who regularly has to bail out a financially incompetent husband, I'm confused.

Maybe if you are really wanting to keep it together insist that he gets a better job, becomes more responsible with money and starts contributing equally to your relationship before you consider marriage and children. If he won't then don't marry and have children with him. Being a family is difficult and stressful and I think you need to stand strong and together to survive.

She won't home with the children but few women want to be anyway so that's not ap roblem but before they marry they need to establish he would do the stay at home father bit. Then he would have no money to manage so it could all work out pretty well.

I think that is right Offred, to not have kids until he has a better job. I would be happy for him to be a SAHD, my father was a SAHD from when I was 10 ( and my youngest sib was 3) and it worked really well.

he is very good with children, housework etc - he knows how hard it is because most of his friends have kids ( and a coupke are SAHDs)

I wouldn't want to be a SAHM - it seems very lonely and isolated, and I would not suit the lack of adult conversation (I am a chatterbox)