To think that it’s absolutely fine to still have your own money when you are married?

[itsgoodtobehome]

I read so many threads on here about how all money is joint money once you are married. I don’t get it! I am married. DH and I have our salaries paid into our own individual accounts. We then make a regular payment each into a joint bills account (pays all bills, mortgage etc) and a joint spends account (pays for shopping, meals out, family activities, kids stuff etc). The rest is individually ours to do what we want with. I would hate to not have my own money to be able to spend as I like - clothes, lunches out with friends, gym, fitness classes, and DH is the same with his hobby and own pursuits.

However Mumsnet seems to think this is wrong. Am I the only one that thinks like this?

Yeah I forgot to add - when DH goes out with his mates they sometimes do big rounds so I’d not want to pay for that, and likewise if I go out for dinner or drinks with my friends I wouldn’t expect him to pay. Hence another good reason to have “own” money.

However it may be that currently only works for us because we earn pretty much the same. If I stay in my current role and stay 4 days, DH likely to start to outearn me, or if I go back to what I was doing pre-kids I will likely outearn him (and significantly so) so that may well be when there is an adjustment.

OP, I’d say just do what works for YOU GUYS and if it feels fair, it probably is. However, if it isn’t working or feels unfair then seek to change it. I think your gut can tell you a lot in these situations. And whilst it is great and sensible to seek the opinions of others, you’ll never get a consensus and there’s more than one way to skin a cat, hence doing what feels right/fair for you both

I work part time, and because of the sacrifices I made in my career
I'm always amazed at the number of women on MN who sacrificed a high earning career for the family.

I'm puzzled because all the mothers with a very good career I know, and yes, ALL, have continued with their professions even with husbands with busy schedules.

So just curious? Are you solicitors, doctors, directors of companies, oh hight level managers who were earning well over £50k when you gave up your career, or do you mean that you went to Uni, studied Law, or business got pregnant shortly after your first or second entry job, but have ascertained that you would definitely have progressed to top positions if you hadn't had children -which if course is questionable!

wouldn't it give you pride to raise your own children and not outsource childcare

Sorry, I wasn't aware that sending your children to school was known as 'outsourcing childcare'.

I'm also intrigued about all this sacrificing of careers. Most children I know go to school when they are 4, so fair enough you might stay at home with them until then, but that's only 4 years which is only a small proportion of a working life. Why do you need to 'sacrifice' a whole career just for those early years of children?

What sanchezz said. Every word.

There are scales of sacrificing careers. I was on £70 k before children. Mat leaves and part time working have seriously limited my progression opportunities while that period of my life coincided with my husband gaining promotions and pay rises. It’s easy to see how families end up prioritising one person’s career as a lot of the time if there is an earning disparity, it makes economic sense in the short-term. At the lower-paid end of the scale, childcare costs can be prohibitive and again it makes sense for the lower earner to care for children.

I'm puzzled because all the mothers with a very good career I know, and yes, ALL, have continued with their professions even with husbands with busy schedules.

oh stop being so goady.
It's pathetic this need to bring other people's down.

When you decide to become a mother - of course you sacrifice something. I went back to work, so I sacrifice my kids family life to put them into childcare. I am fine with it, but let's not pretend a parent can carry on with their career as if the child isn't there.
I sacrifice attending some sports days, parents evenings, school shows... I am happy with my choice, but let's not pretend that there wasn't choices to make in the first place.

Most children I know go to school when they are 4, so fair enough you might stay at home with them until then, but that's only 4 years which is only a small proportion of a working life.

you haven't got kids, have you? It's when they start school that childcare becomes a nightmare! You need wraparound cover, you need to find childcare for their 13 weeks holiday - or part of - you need to find childcare for inset days, for sick days.

So yes, you can keep a very good career with 2 busy schedules, some of us do. But choosing to spend time with your children is a perfectly valid choice.

And for the record, if it wasn't for all these SAHM, I wouldn't know where to send my kids on many days off, there wouldn't be all the PTA events that my kids enjoy, so it would be bloody hypocritical of me to look down on them when they actually benefit me a lot.

The difference with the goady idiots above is that I don't need to push my career down people's throat to make myself feel better. When you read how many whiney people can't wait for Friday, hate their boss, hate their job, you can tell in which group they belong.

As long as we’re both happy
And surely that's the key factor. If all is happy then there are obviously no issues. The more well off, the most likely.

However I do think there are many couples not happy, women who are indeed financially controlled by husbands who don't want them to work and decide spends to the pennies, but also husbands who despair at their sah wives spending, but can't do much about it because any discussion about it brings conflict and they know that the worse that can happen is the wife asking for a divorce and taking often much more than half their income so they go with it. I think a few are not as happy as they appear.

You sound so blinkered OP! You can’t honestly see why some women might go part time or give up work to spend more time with their children? We must all work full time! Only then are we safe and financially independent.

I’ve worked full time when kids were in nursery. Easier then, it closed at 6 and they got fed. I’ve found (as many women have) that kids need a parent (could me the father) but someone around more in primary school and maybe secondary I don’t know yet.

You don’t know everyone’s situation on here so stop being so judgemental. Some people have no family to help. Some have kids with special needs or husbands who travel. Some of us have tried to compete with this and had a nervous breakdown. Why is your way the best way? Just because you enjoy working full time, doing all the kids stuff and the PTA, well done you. Have a medal.

@Userzzzzz, but if you were on £70k, and your oh earned well too, you could have afforded childcare and you could have continued to work ft and earn that amount.

I don't have any issues with women who decide to give up work to be a sahm, it's s very valid choice to make but the comment that they have sacrificed their career really gets to be as I define sacrificing something as giving up something you care for very much because there are sbsuty no other options, and I think when childcare costs aren't an issue, it is by choice that mothers give their career up long term.

I’ve found (as many women have) that kids need a parent (could me the father) but someone around more in primary school and maybe secondary I don’t know yet
No they don't. It's a choice based on your beliefs, but it is not a 'have to'.

Both my parents had careers they cared for and dedicated a lot of time to. On one hand, I Iost out, but in other ways I gained a lot too.

I was just reflecting in this now that my kids are grown up, and though I too work ft all through their life, as a single mum, I really do believe that it has also been a positive outcome for my kids.

There is no right or wrong we make the decision to work or not for various reasons and what we believe in. Some will later regret their choice, most won't, but whether we work or not beyond the first few years is without a doubt a choice for almost everyone as much as whether to have it one child or 5.

I’ve found (as many women have) that kids need a parent (could me the father) but someone around more in primary school and maybe secondary I don’t know yet
No they don't. It's a choice based on your beliefs, but it is not a 'have to'.

of course it's a "have to"
When my kids were in nursery, I didn't need anyone. Then they started school... What am I supposed to do? Give the key to my 5 year old and tell them to make themselves tea?

I think when childcare costs aren't an issue, it is by choice that mothers give their career up long term.

against, bollocks.

When I add childcare, parking, my train ticket, I need a very reasonable figure at the end of the month to make it worth the aggravation.

More important, WHY is this thread turning into a working mums vs SAHM AGAIN?!?!

Yes it's fine as long as if one earns notably more than the other, then they should give money so they aren't going short. But I can see why people share from one account. I think whatever works best for a couple.

When I add childcare, parking, my train ticket, I need a very reasonable figure at the end of the month to make it worth the aggravation
But if you had a well paid career, surely you would be left with a good income, and all those costs don't last forever unless you opt to have more than 2 children.

It's not a working Vs sahm debate. Either choice is fine and both will benefit the children in one way or the other.

I just believe that saying that one has sacrificed their career for their family is a cope out for not admitting that it was a decision they were quite happy with if not delighted with.

No doubt there will be some who rely had no choice, especially in the case of a relocation, I don't think the number of such sacrificed are as common in reality as what we read here (especially when it comes to threads relating to divorce matters).

swingofthings Yes we paid childcare to enable me to continue working part-time. I would say I have sacrificed an element of career progression but I’ve been quite happy to do that because I personally wouldn’t have wanted the children in full-time childcare. I don’t doubt that my children would be happier if I didn’t work but I’m not prepared to totally kill my career to give them that. You don’t see my choices as a sacrifice but I do knowing what I’ve given up. Neither of us are right or wrong but just have different interpretations. I don’t deny in my cases I’ve had choices though but I think it’s a fallacy to pretend you can have it all.

you haven’t got kids have you

Yes I do actually. I just don’t make a big song and dance about all the sacrifices I have to make, and how hard it is. Because actually I don’t find it particularly hard!

Define ‘choice’. It’s never an easy decision to give up work.
I ‘chose’ to retrain and give up a very well paid career. You can split hairs over whether I ‘sacrificed’ it. Why such vitriol? But I wasn’t happy spending £2,500 a month on childcare and never seeing my children. Yes that was my choice. However, the difference between myself and the OP and others on this thread is that I don’t judge other women on their choices as I haven’t walked in their shoes and I know everyone’s circumstances are different.

But claiming you can only get a sense of ‘pride and achievement’ by being in paid employment is wrong.

Delatron I haven’t made any comment on here about people’s choices. The only ones I have commented on are those who have been really defensive about their choices, and almost trying to justify themselves. I don’t care one way or the other what people choose to do. Be honest about it though - it must be through choice or you wouldn’t make that decision. Like you say, you chose to take a different path, and that’s entirely your choice. It’s not a sacrifice is it though, otherwise you wouldn’t have chosen to do it.

Some people hate working and can’t wait to give it up. Fair enough, but own that decision rather than going on about sacrifices and how you need to be at home to do all the housework and admin - as that really doesn’t take all day every day!!

Every single financial professional and solicitor I have met through work and in my personal life have always advised against joint accounts and to be honest I think it's a very old fashioned way of doing things that only seems to be in evidence on MN.

None of my close friends have joint accounts although some have them for bills but certainly not as a main current account.

You only have to read the many horror stories about financial abuse on here to realise what a bad idea they are, especially for women.

A difficult choice can be a sacrifice.

Just because you find working full time easy OP doesn’t mean every woman will and that if they find it hard then they are so delighted to give it all up and stay at home. It’s never that black and white.

There are so many variables to full time work; your commute, whether there is decent childcare in the area, whether your partner is away or works long hours, whether the school had a breakfast club, whether your work is flexible with sickness, whether you have family nearby for emergencies. OP, I don’t pretend to know your circumstances so stop judging others when you know nothing about their lives and set up.

“I don’t care one way or the other what people choose to do”

Well you obviously do care , or you wouldn’t have thought to start this thread

We do this. Has been working for us for 10 years without drama.
My best friend has just split up from her husband after finding out he cheated. She is very glad she has her money in her own account now

I don’t get how joint accounts lead to financial abuse anymore than not having. Neither are going to stop a man being financially abusive if he wants to.
We have been very lucky in getting a balance that works for both of us. DH is back by 6 every night as well and we have made decisions for his career as well to get the family work life balance we want

I think it’s a fallacy to pretend you can have it all
Oh I do agree with this, only very few people manage both career and spending as much time with their kids as they wished. I only know a handful and they had their own business which turned very successful despite not requiring long hours dedicated to it once well established.

I think it's really the word 'sacrifice' that gets to me because it is always used in a victimised context. It's the statement such as 'If it wasn't for me giving up something that so precious to me my oh could never have succeeded as he did' when indeed, the decision was made because of a belief that children don't fare well ft childcare or because of a desire to spend more time with their children.

Using the word 'sacrifice' draws on empathy and an expectation of awe for being so selfless. I don't consider this to be the case where there is an element of choice that comes with benefits to the person.