Finances

[cleanlaundry]

Just wanted to get everyone's opinion on this. DH and I don't have joint bank account, I know sharing finances is the norm but I can't get my head around the fact that I have my own debts to pay back, which is we have a joint account, then essentially we would both be paying my debt? I have a credit card balance to pay off but most of the stuff I bought was for the baby. But I see that as my purchases that I wanted to get the baby so essentially I'd pay it off.

However if we did have joint finances then Is it unreasonable to then divide the leftover money equally between ourselves?

He earns a whole lot more than me but I'm part time because of DC. I don't know how he'd react to giving me half the leftover money because he does sometimes make a point about having to pay for everything (big things like bills and food etc but I pay almost half the mortgage and any other little bits we might need around the house) but that's obviously because he's full time and earns 3x as much!

If you're the higher earner how would you feel having to share your leftover money with your other half?

I have earned more than my husband for about 80% of our time together, including now. Some of that time he made nothing or a part-time wage. All money has always been pooled and the leftovers split equally after bills, food, debt, savings etc. I simply wouldn't allow it any other way when I earn more and neither would he when he earned more. We wouldn't want for one of us to have days out or nice things when the other one couldn't. SImilarly neither income is thought of as 'For childcare' or 'children expenses.' We both wanted and contributed to making our ds so anything for him comes out of the account like it was a bill, not from either of our 'spends' (which is good because at the moment there is no leftover money!)

I earn almost nothing (£1000 over the past 2 years).
I probably spend more than DH. He needs thermals because work are sending him to Finland in December? I buy them. Kids need new clothes? I buy them. Birthday presents, me. Top up shops, me (we both go to do the weekly shop, as i don't like bringing everything back on the bus when I've got the chance to have someone with a car with me - lazy me!!). And it's nearly all with "his" money. Because it's our money. He earns well because I've made sacrifices which are best for the 4 of us.
If your husband is saving money, earning 1% interest. And you have debt earning 20% interest, is not the family better off clearing the expensive debt? Then everyone has more money?
When everyone has enough money to do pretty much what they like without thinking, individual money is fine. But if one part of the family is struggling, while the other has money.... That's just wasting money in my opinion.

And buying stuff for baby IS NOT YOUR DEBT!

Thanks for all your replies and experiences. Really appreciated. I need to sit down and have a talk with him about how we define our money, we've always had separate finances since we've been together. It worked before but now after marriage and a child it's bringing us down.

I thought a joint accounts didn't affect credit ratings? But just to clarify the credit card debt isn't gathering interest, it's interest free for 24 months - got an offer for it - and I budgeted it into our finances so I know it would be cleared off well before the 24months is up. And it's not designer stuff - I couldn't bring myself to buy a Ted baker outfit that will only be used for a few months!

I'll read the article too, thank you for posting.

How on earth does he provide more than you do?

You are a family and you both spend the time you have in your daily lives doing activities which mean that your lives together can continue and that all the needs are met.

Him earning more is a red herring - the fact that his job happens to be well paid doesn't mean that he is 'doing' more to contribute to his family than a person doing the same hours for minimum wage.

If he didn't earn, you wouldn't be able to pay the mortgage etc.
If you didn't take care of the baby, he wouldn't be able to go out to earn because he would have to look after the baby, or pay a handsome amount of money to get, what - 12 hour round the clock care every working day?

You contribute equally as your life would simply not function if either person let the side down.

If he doesn't subscribe to the idea that basically, as a family, all funds are joint - just joint - then maybe shrug and say, fine, if the 'things' which you are in charge of 'belong' to you and not us equally, then the same goes for my 'things' - so don't bother having an opinion on what our baby should eat or schools or anything, because the baby is less yours because I do the caring.

See?

Really agree with that newspaper article too

Right, well if you've had to go into debt to get ordinary and reasonable things for the baby, that's a problem. Neither of you should be getting anything at all until the baby's clothes are paid for, in fact, but after that you split the surplus. Separate finances like that don't work when one party reduces their earning capacity to do childcare.

The way it works in our household is that we each pay a contribution from our wages into a bill payment account (proportional to our salaries) that covers all household bills. Then what's left in our personal accounts is our own to do what we want with. So my husband spends a bit on his personal hobbies. I tend to save for purchases of things I would like. We have a joint credit card too. I earn about twice what my husband does though we both work full time. It works for us. I tend to pay the bulk of things like big household purchases and holidays.
If your only debt is stuff that was bought for your child, I'd consider that joint debt. If you brought preexisting debt to the relationship, I'd be inclined to consider that personal debt.

You just need to discuss this. It's a shame you didn't before maternity leave, babies and part-time work entered the equation, really.

Anything you bought for the baby is a shared parental cost, unless you've been extravagant and bought a lot more/more expensive things than you need.

But it's time now to share the bills and the 'spare' money equally - you don't have the same opportunity to earn as your DH if you are doing childcare, so you and he need to start thinking of finances more as a team effort.

I was the only earner for a while. All the money was joint and DH had equal access to it and full rights to spend whatever we had.

I have earned more than my DH. It might be my wages but its a joint money for our family. We are married to each other. We share a bed. We share a life. We are a team. We share children. My mind cant understand not sharing money. But my DH isnt financially abusive.

He is your husband OP, not your flat mate!
I'm actually staggered and saddened that posts like this crop up in MN most days. What did he think would happen when he married you? My DH has been sole earner for years, but never once made me feel as if it's his money. Who the hell are these men that have no concept of supporting a family?

I've done it both ways...

Me and my ex-h had one account. He earned a lot more but we pooled all our money and gave ourselves an equal amount of 'pocket money' each month. This worked fine, there was never any issues with money.

Now me and current DP have our own accounts where wages are transferred into and both transfer an amount into a joint account for all bills, food, savings etc (he earns a bit more and I have more outgoings so he pays almost the whole mortgage) I then pay for a loan, credit card, car lease payment and phone. We keep our leftover money to spend ourselves. He is very generous and buys big purchase items for the house we need and also regularly asks if I need anything. It's better for us as we can treat each other, and surprise each other. I'm currently pregnant and DP will cover all the bills when I'm on mat leave, and also will cover my personal bills if I want to take a full year off as last 3mths would be unpaid. Again, this works well and we've had no problems with money at all.

My now ExH and I never had a joint account - his wages into his account, mine into mine. He paid mortgage and household bills ie utilities, council tax, insurance etc and the costs of running the 2 cars. Mine paid for everything else - food, kids school stuff, kids clothes, sports clubs and lessons, holidays, presents for christmas and birthdays. It worked out quite even when I worked part time then as I earned more, I took over some of the other costs.

It worked for us as i was always better at managing my money.

When we found out I was pregnant DH offered to pay off my debts but I refused as they were from before we met.

If the debt is only for baby stuff then it's a joint expense surely?

You'd be a pushover for an abusive ex like mine OP. Not only did he believe I should pay for child things but he also declared I "owed" him for 50% of mortgage payments when I was on maternity leave.
When I finally countered he then owed me for childcare things went rapidly south for our relationship.
Stop allowing the "i pay the bills" rhetoric to make you feel you are somehow contributing less to the family. Utter bullshit.

I agree with others that you need to discuss with your OH (if you haven't already), that bringing up a child is a shared cost, and that sometimes the value of the time a parent spends with their child is overlooked too (I could go on a whole separate rant about society's persistence in undermining the efforts of roles that women stereotypically might do, but that's not what you're posting about!)

I earn more than my hubby so we have an agreement. We put equal amounts in a joint account each month. This will only cover necessities (mortgage, bills, food, petrol etc). This means he has a little left over in his personal account for things he wants or to save, and I buy the extras and the things our DS needs. Sometimes hubby will have something unexpected happen (sitting on his ridick Oakley glasses with lenses that are practically made by NASA) and I will sort that out. This would cover the types of thing you have on your credit card, I would have paid it, if he had bought them, no point him having a bit less each month!

This works for us but I know it wouldn't work for everyone and some people would think it's more complicated than it needs to be! but how else would I hide how many pairs of shoes I buy?!

Hope the conversation goes well! Xxx

I'm the exact opposite my DP is the stay at home parent (3 kids) and I work full time so all money goes into one pot. We each have regular personal bills which come out of this as well.
DP has debts before me but we work together to pay them otherwise childcare for 3 would cripple us ( 2 school age)
It works for us though, large expenses we talk about, anything that's needed for home, children and us as long as it's not breaking the bank just gets paid. I siphon money off though because my hubby is not a saver so this pays for holidays....he does know this btw 😀

I am the higher earner and we share leftover money. I pay all the direct debits as DH works irregular hours and we don't want to take the risk of missing a payment. He pays for ad hoc things - petrol, supermarket etc if he is the one doing the shopping. He lets me know if he isn't expecting a good wage and I know to watch my own spending and transfer him what he asks for.
We don't have a joint account but mostly out of laziness - our way works for us.

Should have said I consider our debts to belong to both of us as either one of us paying a debt would affect the other anyway.

"If you're the higher earner how would you feel having to share your leftover money with your other half?"

I am, and I find the idea of not sharing mad- why be married if you constantly have to keep score? I provide for my family, DP does a bigger share of the housework, both contributions to the relationship are of value.

Legally it is both your money. You have a household and a kid together. Surely its easier to administer things together?

People can do what they want, but the only point I can imagine to separate finances is if it avoids arguments. From the evidence on MN that's not usually the case.