Does money gifted to me also belong to DH?

[Xitt]

Pregnancy and weight loss have left me with an apron of skin that’s constantly sore and affects my mobility and self esteem. I need it surgically removed but can’t afford it. Unexpectedly my DF has offered to pay for it. He also wants to pay for me to retrain so I can return to work.

DH and I have had a huge argument because he insists that any money gifted to me by my DF is OUR money because we’re married, so therefore he gets a say in how it’s spent. And maybe he might need some of that money for something. Or he might just not agree with spending it on my tummy tuck and retraining; maybe he’d prefer to pay it off the mortgage. We have joint finances and I’m currently a SAHM so his salary and savings etc is joint money. He thinks it’s unfair that he has to share his money but when I’m gifted some money I’m not sharing.

I sort of see his point but DF has offered this money for a specific purpose. AIBU to think it’s my money for my tummy tuck and retraining, and DH has no say in how it’s spent?

Honestly, I'd be keeping the house money and everything for myself that I could get. He gets his career whereas yours has had to pause.
This is one of my main reasons for not having children, I refuse to sacrifice myself to someone else in this way, that I'll be on the back foot helping them with their career cos if it all goes tits up, the lower earner is the one in the shitter. No wonder OP wants to keep any inheritance as a precaution for herself. At the moment, with her DP basically doing what he wants at work, she is going to struggle for a job that will fit in.
I would have the tummy tuck and retrain, then think about your options over the long term.
I put myself first and partner second because in the event of a break up, his fancy careers isn't going to help you out of a financial black hole you'd be in if you have to take a minimum wage job

OP, have you ever considered a career as a medical writer? A LOT of post docs which used to be in research go that way (I know a lot of them ) and no retraining is needed, unless it's on the job. PM me if you think it might be of interest - the industry is female dominated and pretty flexible around working hours for that reason.

On other matters, your DH doesn't sound very kind.

Having read all 26 pages of this thread I get the impression the OP is just modifying her answers to whatever she thinks will get her the most sympathy.

DH won't let me do x and y with a gift from my dad turns out to be DH hasn't vetoed anything and appears to want a discussion on how the thousands of pounds potentially coming OPs way may be best spent.

OPs career was initially a dead end, zero hours job hence why she had to retrain. Then she revealed she was actually in academia and had to sacrifice her dream because of the pregnancy.

DH was in an ok job with his wages just covering the bills and leaving no room for luxuries but he's now changed into a career obsessed workbot who's just been highly promoted.

DH and I have had a huge argument because he insists that any money gifted to me by my DF is OUR money because we’re married, so therefore he gets a say in how it’s spent.

So when you are given presents for Xmas & birthday, does Dh feel entitled to share thise with you too?

He's being a dick.
Your dad is offering you a cash sum for a specific purpose - to help your self-esteem & to get you back on the career ladder.

Could it be that DH prefers you feeling low, & doesn't want you challenging his role as main breadwinner?

Either way - DH is a selfish, greedy fucker.

Also - He thinks it’s unfair that he has to share his money
Boo hoo.
Presumably you mutually agreed this share of the workload once you had popped out HIS children for him?

I found this thread very interesting ... I divorced a very high earner as a sahm, having given up a PhD to facilitate his career moves including moving to another country. I had no issues doing the “wifework” provided I had a faithful DH, but looking back he was borderline financially controlling and it would have tipped toward being financially abusive if I were a different sort of person.

Xh had some weird views on family assets, but I luckily got divorced in a jurisdiction which clearly delineates joint and separate assets. For example property purchased individually before a marriage remains separate but any increase in value is joint property. So for furniture or personal items this almost never means the other person can claim a share. But for a house, the other person can claim half the increase in value (if there is any). Anything purchased during the marriage is considered joint, unless it’s a gift. Gifts belong solely to the person to whom they were gifted. My mother gave me some jewellery when I got married - upon separating my ex tried to claim they were a gift to him also and he should get half the value. He also tried to take a number of things I had owned for 10+ years before I met him or use them to balance the division of actual joint assets (like large appliances we bought together during the marriage). So, even though the car is a large monetary value gift ... for me it’s clear the car is not a joint asset but the OPs. As would be any other gift. If she gets an expensive bottle of perfume is the DH going to say if they split up, she owes him half the value of the bottle of perfume? The car is no different because it’s useful to him or had higher value.

Also, it is indeed possible for your PhD work to become pretty much useless depending on the circumstances. After two years, I would also have had to start over if I wanted to go back to the specialty I was in and would not be able to get a related job with what I have now, despite having multiple publications etc. So that’s not out of the realm of possibility.

Similarly, my ex despised any money being spent solely for my benefit. While he’d go off on weeks long business trips, leaving me to look after baby DS (no family nearby etc to help) completely solo, he begrudged me getting a babysitter for a couple of hours once in a two week period just so I could get things done. Begrudged me paying for a haircut. Or for massages for my back (injured in a car accident). Etc. In the end turned out half of his business trips were vacations with his girlfriend spending family money.

When he tried to say he was stressed by me not having a job (believe me we were not short of money and he wasn’t working crazy long hours and we had a huge savings pot), and i said ok we need to put ds in childcare, and he would need to pick up his slack at home (he did no housework and never cleaned up after himself, no cooking, no night wake ups, rarely looked after DS and couldn’t be trusted to look after DS, etc), he shut up fast. Even after he got caught with his GF, and he was supposed to be changing his ways and with an eye to my returning to work (along the lines of show me you can pick up your share of the home responsibilities, and I’ll happily go back to work. But fuck thinking I’m going to go back to work full time and still do all the childcare evenings and weekings, cook every day, clean up after everyone, etc) - he couldn’t do it because it wasn’t to his benefit in his eye.

No matter how many posters say childcare responsibilities are shared once mums go back to work, let’s face it the realities are that the majority still falls to the mum. Of course there are men who do their part but I think there are still more who don’t. She can’t force him to step up and take on his share of responsibility, and this sort of thing continues on after divorce - even now ex won’t visit DS as much or when he’s supposed to, and plenty of other fathers do the same. We have a signed court order but there’s nothing I can do to force him to actually follow the visitation in there. What makes anyone think OP can get her DH to shoulder any of the childcare if she goes back to work? She’s already said he changed the goalposts without consulting her once she had the baby. Is she just supposed to say I’m going to work, you sort DC and trust all will be ok if he doesn’t do his part?

All I see are red flags for the future unfortunately.

*weekends, not weekings (oops!). Also all night wakings. He couldn’t even do one on weekends.

@ExpatTrailingSpouse really great post. I feel the same as you and I think the behaviour of the OP’s husband is escalating. He’ll never look after his own child and @Xitt herself has said that he prefers keeping her in her little box. The best thing to do IMO is to leave.

Buccanarab
I'm inclined to agree with you and the more people have suggested it's financially abusive and that SAHP are the sole reason WOHP can do their job, the more the version of events has twisted to match. You're spot on with the changing situation, changing explanation of a job and so on.

Before long we'll be told that he denies them food money and they need permission to go to a baby group whilst he polices a joint account whilst rolling in money because that suits the MN double standard view of money and relationships.

I see this has developed into a battle of the nuances, with some posters competing to see who can stick up for the man the most so as to show their awareness of how men are "usually expected to pay for everything on mumsnet". Or similar. But there aren't any rules which apply to this. So stick with what we do know.

The OP is unhappy for the following reasons:

• her career and body have gone down the pan due to giving birth (albeit this isn't the only reason for a downturn in her career but its certainly been a major catalyst) and her DH doesn't care enough to let her resolve it
• her DH has objected to her receiving a gift from her father (who does care) from her DH

The common factor is that the OP is unhappy with the way her DH is treating her. She doesn't want to be a SAHM financially dependent on her DH. She doesn't want to give up her life to further his career. She finds is risky and his behaviour is giving her cause for concern. The sensible course of action is for her to follow her instincts on this, because there are no rules. Her DH could have an affair and walk out on her leaving her with no career, needing a tummy tuck and alone with their child, because there are no rules.

However, another person has offered to give her a gift. Not the DH. Her. This is something which does have rules attached. In law this is a voluntary unilateral obligation, or a promise. If its put in writing, its binding in law. There is no requirement amongst these rules that such a gift should be made to both parties to a marriage. It is in fact perfectly normal for a gift to be made to one person.

Is the OP selfish in accepting such a gift? Almost certainly not. Its from a direct member of her family, to help her with two problems that she has, so she can enjoy her life. Only the meanest of husbands would begrudge their wives making themselves happier by accepting a gift. Its actually very rude for the DH to try to step in and insist that the gift is changed and given to them both.

In a different vein, I remember reading somewhere that it was rumoured that Meghan Markle had some sort of co-habitation agreement in writing with her former boyfriend prior to Prince Harry, which included that if she got pregnant and had their child, she was entitled to sums to recompense her financially so she could restore her body and career to its pre-pregnancy status, e.g. gym membership, diet planning and preparation, goodness knows what else. Now this might be rumour about Meghan Markle but it is likely that such contracts do exist amongst romantic partners in Hollywood and amongst the wealth at least. I don't think the OP is being unreasonable here, given that she isn't asking her DH to fund the surgery and education.

Ethically / morally it’s yours but legally it’s both. He’s being too controlling. Plus having his children led to the apron

EL8888 Ethically / morally it’s yours but legally it’s both.

Oh Christ, no its not. Of course people don't lose their capacity to own property individually once they marry. There may be certain joint tax implications on marriage regarding the CGT on your main home, and certain guidelines which apply upon divorce, depending on many factors, but of course married men and women can bloody own things without it automatically becoming joint property!!

Its not 1852. Its scary to think that people actually believe this.

Expat, interseting post. I am the other way round - we both worked full time but I earned 10x and we both did as mukch as the other at home. I had to pay him on divorce and did not have the benefit of that lovely fair clear system you describe. i was saddled with English law where pre marriage gifts, inheritances, everything is all in the pot in most cases with a starting point of 50% each and the moving from there - he got almsot 60% and more importantly no obligation to support the 5 children and a clause that I pay the school and university fees for them all and the icing on the cake as it were - no obiblgation ever to see or help with the children which is a huge loss of a working mother or father who would expect to split out of work care with the other parent. Anyway it's done.

So back to the original post we should really start with the law and there are lots of us lawyers on MN.

If someone gives you something under English law and you are married it is your property in law.

If you come to divorce at is a different matter and it may be up for grabs. Once she spends it on the surgery it cannot be got back or taken off her share of the equity in the house. I would prefer though lots of exercises etc than these slightly dangerous tummy operations - do think about it. It may be better to take the money for training to get back into work.

her DH has objected to her receiving a gift from her father (who does care) from her DH

No we dont know that.

We know that he said they should discuss how it was spent.

But if money is offered for one purpose that is the only purpose. Eg I have given the children money for housing (and university fees). I do not agree it can be spent on anything else and would certainly not hand it over for cosmetic surgery for example. In fact in my case to protect my aims I have paid it direct to universities and direct to solicitors/mortgage companies (I know that with a house it could later be so.ld of course and the money gambled away).

The father in law could just send the money to the private hospital direct or else to wherever she is going to retrain - law school institution etc.

He’s be right if it weren’t for the fact that your dad offered to pay for something specific for you.

The dad didnt offer to pay for something specific.

I see this has developed into a battle of the nuances, with some posters competing to see who can stick up for the man the most so as to show their awareness of how men are "usually expected to pay for everything on mumsnet
It's not about competing to stick up for the man.
It's about believing that in marriage both parties need to communicate and so either party making unilateral decisions and expecting the other to lump it is problematic.

There is a double standard regarding finances on MN and I think it's clear here given that the mere suggestion that a couple discuss how a substantial sum of money is spent and the nature of retraining is deemed financially abusive within the first few pages. MN can be very, very quick to decide that things are financially abusive (or abusive in general to be honest). What's surprising is that normally given how quick people are to identify abuse based on not a lot, that normally goes hand in hand with LTB but in this thread he has been deemed abusive by some and yet posters are still advocating remaining married and dictating that the money will be spent on what she wants.

As the thread has developed so have the contradictions (e.g. issues in zero hour job before maternity but not enjoying it much if I recall correctly then later being on the track for a good career in academia which was ruined by being forced to give up work / DH is WOHP and there's no money for luxuries then later some high flying career man who couldn't do anything without her being home).

Even other posters have sought to create evidence for financial abuse (eg the OP says they can and do spend money from the joint account because it's joint and why shouldn't they ... Then later other posters start arguing he is financially abusive because it might be a joint account but what if she isn't allowed to spend anything)

In all of this, go back to the OP where it doesn't mention DH vetoing anything, just he thinks they need to have a discussion about their situation and finances etc.

Some of us have said that the lack of communication is a problem and that the starting point should be some discussion between both parties (Vs complain to parent, get money and decide DH should suck it up). Surely any sensible person can see that the way to resolve a situation dripping with poor communication and resentment is that the two people in the marriage communicate properly to find a solution?

He is a dick. I don’t know If I’d be able to forgive that behaviour either . The op is as a result of carrying his kids and is for your health and comfort and ability to bring money in.. its shocking behaviour and I seriously would be thinking about leaving him if he didn’t see light as fuck staying with someone like that

@FlapAttack23 actually as loads of pps keep saying he just wanted to discuss what the money would be spent on.

LolaSmiles most academics now start out on zero hours contracts, hoping to get a permanent position if and when one becomes vacant. Particularly if you stay in the same institution or build up enough experience/publications. So that computes. If the OP had said anything else it wouldn't actually make sense. That is very, very normal in academia.

I agree that mumsnet is very quick to shout financial abuse but equally its really worrying that there are people out there who confuse potential for division of assets on divorce with some made up rule that any property owned or acquired during the marriage is joint property. I would also say that's really common on mumsnet, perhaps due to their being a lot of SAHMs for whom joint bank accounts with one large salary and one smaller salary or nothing going in are the norm. So they assume that legally everything is joint property when it is not. I think the OP is actually quite typical of someone with qualifications and a professional career - someone who is not afraid to put a value on her skills and experience and who refuses to be told what is best for her and what to do with her life and her money.

There does seem to have been a discussion here, albeit in the form of an argument. The discussion seems to be that the DH wants the gift to take an entirely different form from that which is being offered. If it were me, I would fail to see the point in further discussion, since the only purpose to it would be to compromise on the gift terms in favour of the DH somehow. And I unfortunately fail to see the point in DH's who don't have their wife's needs at heart, when it is so obviously something she would benefit from.

I think with a DH showing such tendencies, it is best for the OP to avoid being overly generous. In these circumstances ( it seems that the gift hasn't been given yet) it seems wise for the father to pay for the surgery and for the education directly to the providers.

I think once you are getting into that territory of feeling unable to put a financial gift of money into your daughter's bank account to avoid a husband making a claim on it, then that is already a sign of an unhealth controlling relationship.

QualCheckBot I think you have a lot of information correct.

The money is (probably was now) a lump sum of money. All the dh wanted was to discuss it. He didnt veto anything.

OP has clearly said she doesnr give a shot if then end up living in a box as long as she gets the operation. She actually doesnt care about possible complications or how the recovery will take place.

She has also been posting for a while, and possibly name changed like many of us do, and is really very quite depressed but refuses to address that. But poster recognise her as someone who is very low in general.

Can you honestly say that if you partner was clearly depressed, felt an operation would fix everything, wouldnt even think about complications or how recovery was going to work and had got to a point hat waa boardering on obsessive (not caring about being homeless is getting into obsessive territory) about the operation, was wouldnt seek help, for their depression hanging their mood changing on having the operation, you wouldnt want to discuss it?

You wouldnt be concerned?

I'd recommend counselling, before your child becomes aware of your resentment. It is no fun being raised by a resentful mother.

as loads of pps keep saying he just wanted to discuss what the money would be spent on.

That's not true though, is it? He thinks the money is "half his" because they're married.

The money is not his - it's a gift to the OP, by her father. It's legally and morally hers. Gifts do not become shared just because you're married, or they're high value items/cash gifts.

QualCheckBot
Very true. Friends of mine post doccing seemed to have a whole range of interesting contractual arrangements, including separate teaching contracts conveniently semester at a time for the exact hours lectured/demonstrating.

That said, that still doesn't change the shift from "zero hours contract in a job that's not enjoyed with issues surrounding maternity, this coincided with DH getting a promotion so I stayed at home" to "but I was on my way to a career in academia and loved it and was forced to give it up because of a drip feed presenting DH as some wild high flier who forced me to give everything up"

Pages and pages ago lots of us said that the best use of the money, if it will make a massive difference, is for the father to pay the surgery fees directly.

Its just one of those threads where some are very quick to do the usual "man must be a knob and woman must be long suffering, passive and have no agency at all for her choices" thing and then as the thread has developed, the replies from OP lean more and more towards whatever will get the response they want.

Give it 5 pages and I'm sure advocating discussion about a households money and retraining will be something that only "cools wives" do (because for anyone else it's totally reasonable to bitch about your marriage to your parents, make decisions with you parents without involving your spouse and then expect your spouse to suck it up).

QualCheckBot that's not what we know at all.

We know thatXitt is deeply unhappy with life as a Sahm

We know that Xitt is deeply unhappy and bitter and miserable about the way pregnancy has changed her body, and this has impacted her self esteem. She has loose skin following weight loss which she perceives as a birth injury.

We know Xitt has a PhD and was doing post doctoral work until mid pregnancy, that contract expired and she believes that she was unable to secure a new contract due to her visible pregnancy.

We know that she had other career problems even before her pregnancy/ before her contract ended - one of the reasons she lists for not returning to her field is that she doesn't get on with her former supervisor.

We know that finances are shared with her DH who pays all his salary and bonuses into the joint account and does not have any prospect of receiving money or gifts from his side of the family.

We know that Xitt believes she would only be able to secure a zero hours teaching contract if she returned to the labour market at present - she believes this would cover childcare but no more. She misrepresented her prospects as minimum wage work before going on to mention her PhD and the fact the unsatisfactory work prospect was teaching.

We know that Xitt cries a lot, including to her father

We know that Xitt 's father has offered her a gift of money to make her stop crying and feel better

We know that Xitt feels upset and wronged by the way her life is going

We don't really know how Xitt feels about her child, whom she refers to as her husband's child rather than "my" or "our" but feels 100% responsibility for childcare for.

We know that Xitt's nuclear family live paycheck to paycheck on one salary and cannot afford holidays or savings.

We know that Xitt would like to spend a lot of the money on a tummy tuck

We know that tummy tucks are high risk cosmetic surgery with really significant recovery periods so Xitt would be putting her life and health at real risk, and a fairly long period of childcare also needs budgeting for which is an issue as the family live paycheck to paycheck on one salary.

We know that Xitt tells issue currently does all childcare and her husband works unpredictable hours, which is not what she expected while pregnant.

We know that Xitt says she doesn't care about the risks

We know that Xitt wants to ringfence money for retraining but does not have any idea whatsoever what she wants to retrain to do.

We know that Xitt expects to inherit her father's estate and has already decided that her husband must not benefit in any way from any money or property inheritance especially not by "frittering" money away on "luxuries".

We know that her husband has suggested using the money her father is offering to improveXitt 's life, (or part of it) for something other than plastic surgery and retraining in an unknown career, with paying part of the mortgage off being one suggestion.

To be honest I started out feeling supportive of Xitt - it's a bugbear of mine how society colludes to minimise and downplay the serious impact of pregnancy and birth on women, and devalues unpaid female domestic labour. I wanted to say she was right.

However a lot of what she posts is deflection. It's pretty clear she's very, very unhappy and very, very angry and depressed (probably clinically)

She is absolutely unwilling to look into the massive negatives of the quite serious plastic surgery she is proposing using her father's money to finance. She is completely unwilling to consider ways to return to work in some area related to her PhD (she must have invested many, many years in her higher education already) without retraining, and is committed to using the money from her father for retraining, yet has absolutely no idea what she might want to retain as.

We do not know how Xitt or her husband will cover childcare during the long recovery period after her cosmetic surgery, nor while she's retraining but not earning, given the family has no spare money nor savings.

To be honest we know very little about whether her husband is a good or bad person, all we know is that the OP is a very, very unhappy and quite probably mentally unwell person since becoming a mother. This is obviously not her fault, but I really, really question whether a serious and risky cosmetic surgery operation with a long, painful recovery period, and a random determination to spend money on retraining without any idea at all of direction will help her.

I'm not sure telling her that her DH is a prick and she should go for surgery asap is actually helping her.

I think she needs to see her GP about her mental health, not her loose skin. I mean that kindly - the obsession with the tummy overhang is diverting attention from a far more serious mental health crisis IMO. She's talking about preferring to lose her 2 year old's home and live in a box, and about suicide, rather than live with the loose skin left by a caesarean and losing 4 stone. It's disproportionate to say the least, as is all the angry, catastrophism about working.