Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Are you financially independent?

201 replies

GuybrushThreepwoodMP · 23/02/2014 20:38

So I am massively in favour of financial equality in a relationship. DH and I have a joint account into which both our salaries go and we both have free access to this. We don't have much spare money, but we manage our general life costs and spend within our means. DH earns more than me and since we had our daughter 18 months ago, I work part time (20 hours a week). We share everything.
But I'm not financially independent am I? Because if we split up (not something that is likely to happen, but it's good to plan!), I wouldn't be able to manage. The majority of what I earn goes on childcare (in reality, we obviously party childcare from our joint money, but if I didn't work we wouldn't have to pay it at all do it's a legitimate calculation to make). Alone I would be left with maybe £300/month after childcare and not much more if I went full time. We rent in an expensive city and it's a struggle to find anything under £1000/month.
So I guess what I'm asking is how does one become truly financially independent? Do you just have to earn loads yourself- enough so that you could manage everything alone? Or doesn't it matter?

OP posts:
Lifeisaboxofchocs · 23/02/2014 20:57

Oh if DH died, I would be a very wealthy woman as he has life assured himself up to the maximum. He takes the responsibility of being the sole earner very very seriously.

Annunziata · 23/02/2014 20:57

No. Everything is DH's.

thatswhatimtalkingbout · 23/02/2014 20:57

imho, you have to recalibrate what financial independence is once you have children.
I used to think in terms of strictly coping completely alone (as I did as a single childless person, no bother - no benefits, no hand outs, no partner, no loans, no nothing - easy with no dependents). but why should you think this way when you have children? they have a father; and also they are an investment by the country in its future. So benefits and the dad and the community at large all have a role to play in keeping you afloat - both morally and legally.

If you really think you should be able to manage with no benefits and no support from your children's father and no benefits in kind from anyone else (say, free or cheap childcare from a grandparent) you will have to be a very high earner in relative terms (either high for the area you live in, taking advantage of low housing costs and childcare costs; or actually eye-wateringly high in the high-paying south east, while paying excruciatingly high housing and childcare and commuting costs). This by definition (outside average) is not within everyone's grasp. Why should you be independent in that sense? why are you the only parent with responsibility?

this interests me:

"in reality, we obviously party childcare from our joint money, but if I didn't work we wouldn't have to pay it at all do it's a legitimate calculation to make"

Or, if he didn't work, you wouldn't have to pay it at all.
You are obviously subconsciously seeing responsibility for the children as more yours than his.
Maybe this is how you would like it to be in the sense that in case of a split they should be with you.
but this doesn't mean that he doesn't pay. or shouldn't pay.

Original poster
GuybrushThreepwoodMP · 23/02/2014 20:59

What about sahms then? Is it a big risk to be a sahm? That's awful if it is! It's such a hard and amazing life- IMO harder than any job and arguably more important. It seems ridiculous if that choice could leave some people so financially vulnerable. I guess you just have to be in a really strong and equal relationship? It wasn't something that ever really occurred to me and I did plan to be a sahm but changed my mind because I wanted to work and wasn't really happy as a sah, not because it offers much financially.

OP posts:
Blu · 23/02/2014 21:00

But yes, I am financially independent - It was important to me that my job and earning power and pension (ha ha) didn't stagnate while DP's raced ahead. We shared all aspects of parenting, worked 4 days a week each during the early years, shared money and time down the middle. It has been important to me to keep my share of the equity of the house I brought into the relationship, too.

thatswhatimtalkingbout · 23/02/2014 21:01

By the way, in answer to your question, I earn more than dp but I am not financially independent in the sense that without his input our life would be untenable. we pool all our money and we both have a bit of personal money, not much. If we split neither of us could afford the house, and neither of us could afford to get a "family style" place on the side to take the children for shared custody. I would have to work less as I can only do my commute because dp does morning and evening childcare, so I would have less money in absolute terms as well as needing it to go further. I am a higher rate tax payer with no debts but a modest mortgage, but I can't see financial independence being remotely conceivable. Just as well I love him.

Lifeisaboxofchocs · 23/02/2014 21:01

guess you just have to be in a really strong and equal relationship?

Correct

georgesdino · 23/02/2014 21:03

Dh is soon to be at home, has had no idea of any bank balances (his or mine as they are together but all money comes from me) for about 10 years + etc but Im not going to fuck him over so it doesnt even matter.

Original poster
GuybrushThreepwoodMP · 23/02/2014 21:04

I guess maybe I am seeing the childcare as more my responsibility than his; that's an interesting observation. I think it's only because I was lucky enough to have had a choice- stay at home or go back to work. DH didn't have a choice because we couldn't afford for him not to work. So when deciding, it seemed worth calculating how much better off we as a family would be. If that makes sense.Smile

OP posts:
Drquin · 23/02/2014 21:04

Many years ago on a pensions training, I came across the phrase "financially interdependent" which probably covers the majority of folk in relationships where both are earning. It covered the stereotypical SAHP who didn't earn a salary dependent on the partner for earnings into the household; but also two partners earning but enjoying the lifestyle that come with economies of scale; and one partner enjoying a lifestyle only possible when supported by a higher-earning partner.

I'd say OP is currently financial inter-dependent with DP ..... For as long as he supported the DC you're likely to be inter-dependent to some degree.

That doesn't mean you'd never be able to afford to live on your own - that's more important than the terminology you give it though.

Financially independent I'd say is someone who has no financial links with another.

nkf · 23/02/2014 21:04

But money can change the dynamics. There are some shocking threads on MN started by women who really do need some money of their own. And the relationship often didn't start with such meanness on the man's part.

And the relationship has to be strong and equal for a long long time.

ShellyF · 23/02/2014 21:06

Yes, I am higher earner.

NoArmaniNoPunani · 23/02/2014 21:08

It's a big risk to be a SAHM if you are unmarried.

velvetspoon · 23/02/2014 21:08

I can remember my dad telling me at a fairly young age that I should always protect my financial independence, and make sure I could support myself.

I was a single parent to DS1 on a relatively low salary at the time, but I also had a v low mortgage (this was back in the late 1990s when house prices, and therefore mortgages, were far lower than now). I am now a single parent to both DS1 and 2, earn more but also have a far higher mortgage. I don't get a penny from either DS's father; I have no idea where DS1's dad is, and DS2's dad only 'earns' £4k a year (rest is paid to him as dividends). Even if I could prove his actual earnings, he would give up work and fold his company rather than pay me a penny. So it's not worth it.

Hence I'm glad I can earn enough not to need to rely on him.

DontCallMeBaby · 23/02/2014 21:08

Just - the amount we pay into our joint account, out of which we pay the mortgage, all bills, grocery shopping etc IS in total more than my take home pay, but there is a lot of slack in that account, and we overspend on food etc tbh. So I reckon I'd be okay - at a tad under average wage, one child, no childcare costs, I'd rather hope I would be.

I did work out the other day that so far I've lost £1,500pa pension by being part time, that was a bit depressing.

eurochick · 23/02/2014 21:10

Yes, I am. I am the higher earner by a split of about 60/40 and our house was purchased in my name. We each have our own savings (although they will be pooled to buy the next house). We are expecting our first child and our plan is to share the childcare fairly equally using the new parental leave provisions (probably with me taking 4 months mat leave and him 3-4 months pat leave) and then perhaps each try to work 4 days a week for a while.

I couldn't imagine being financially dependant on my partner. It would unnerve me.

AnyFuckerHQ · 23/02/2014 21:11

yup

dh and I are equally independent

joint everything

similar salaries

we would, in the event of a split, have to sell up and buy 2 smaller properties but we would both manage

MeMySonAndI · 23/02/2014 21:12

I am rising a child on my own, have two jobs, own my house, pay the bills, have 2 jobs and I don't think I am financially independent. As long as I receive tax credits I am not (independent or free, but incredibly thankful for them and battling hard to get out of needing them)

edwinbear · 23/02/2014 21:15

OP my mum was a sahm for 35 yrs my 'd' dad left her 6 months before he died, changing his will to leave everything to his mistress of 6 months. This included his share of the marital home (owned as tenants in common rather than joint as part of tax planning), which mum then had the humiliation of selling and handing over half of the proceeds, along with money from insurance policies, jointly owned savings etc to the OW. He also tried, but thankfully failed, to have his pension split 50/50 between mum and his mistress. My mum spent 3 years fighting it through solicitors and i subsequently vowed I would never let myself rely on anyone but myself for money. Ours was an unusual situation, but nonetheless, it happens.

NoArmaniNoPunani · 23/02/2014 21:17

I watched my mother have to fight very hard in court for her share of pensions when my parents divorced. I also vowed then to always have my own money.

BitchPeas · 23/02/2014 21:18

Finacial independence has always mattered to me greatly.

I left school at 16, with 2 GCSEs and worked my nuts off.

I'm now 24 and earning 50k.

I also had DS along the way.

I've always paid my own bills with no man/benefits to help me out. I lived with DS's dad from 16-19 but he was a lower earner and feckless idiot with his money so no help.

DP is actually moving in in 2 months time. It's freaking me out. I've lived alone since splitting with DS's dad at 19. I have serious trust issues with other people and money!

I wish I could chill out, but I could never ever depend on someone for money, even if it meant having no more children Sad the thought terrifies me tbh.

Sparrowlegs248 · 23/02/2014 21:18

Not sure really. We have a joint account for mortgahe and bills. We pay an equal amount per month into it. The rest of my life i fund myself, including expensive hobby.

Some of my outgoings would be much less alone - food, electric, heating oil. But i probably couldn't manage in this house alone (due to mortgage)

MuttonCadet · 23/02/2014 21:20

Be very careful of "tax planning" moving ownership away from you, retain ownership of your own property, only be a SAHM is you have independent means.

MyCatIsFat · 23/02/2014 21:20

Rather than being strictly 'financially independent' within a relationship, I think it's more important to have the potential to be able to support yourself and the children financially in the event of a breakup.

That means having the ability to go back to work to support yourself and the children if you're a SAHP, or increase your hours if you're not full-time and aim to be able to cover living expenses through own income plys the benefits that you're entitled to i.e. tax credit, family allowance etc, rather than relying on child maintenace payments from the ex-H/P that he/she could stop paying at any time.

MaryWestmacott · 23/02/2014 21:21

Not now, but I could go back fulltime and that would cover all bills except for childcare and I assume they'd be financial help or maintenance to cover that... (plus it's high now as DCs are preschool but that's such a short period of my working life, once i've got 2 at school, I could probably just about cover everything on my own).

It's worth thinking about not just if one of you walked out on the other, but what if one of you died, and then there's not even maintenance. I know that it was important to us that we are both insured, because if I was to die, DH wouldn't be able to cover all the bills and all the childcare for 2, esp as he would probably have to hire a nanny rather than use nursery because he couldn't do both drop off and pick up on his own.