To literally BEG women to set themselves up, financially?

[CallieRedux]

Typed out a long post full of personal details, then deleted, but, honestly, the specifics don't matter. What DOES matter is that you save every tiny bit you can, because having FUCK YOU money is - by far - the most important thing you can do for yourself.

It's saved me from everything from wrong relationships, shit jobs, from natural disasters... I have both made lots of money, and not, but having savings, and the ability to walk away is having POWER, and the best "self care" a woman can have.

Shit happens. Things change. Even to you. Yes, you can save - even a little - when you are poor.

Do it. Please.

Yes given these secret assets are all marital assets if accrued during the marriage then the fund isn't much use. Maybe the split is a bit fairer but women would be better off working to achieve independence before marriage and any children

Don't rely on a partner financially as this can be withdrawn at any time. Surprising the number of women who do this. Funny how you dont get as many men doing it.

They are literally factored in during financial settlements.

@Usernamen

I wish there were reliable stats on this. I’m genuinely curious to find out if women are really jacking in their careers after kids to facilitate their husband’s career in large numbers? Are lawyers, accountants, surgeons, lecturers, management consultants etc. really abandoning their careers and looking after babies full time?

I don't claim to have any hard evidence at all but if I were to guess I would say very few of these women are jacking in their careers. A few maybe.

I would guess the vast majority of them are women who are not the higher earners and are a bit "meh" about their careers but feel they have to do them until they meet "the one". After marriage and kids the DH powers on without giving much thought to the woman's career needs and it becomes increasingly hard for her to do her job because he won't do pick-ups or drop-offs or support much in the home and will complain if asked to help. He is earning more and being promoted and he "needs" to stay late in the office and do all the networking drinks and all that so she will pick up that slack too.

It then becomes a kind of vicious circle whereby she is running to stand still at a not particularly remunerative job which she isn't that fussed about, he won't pay for childcare and won't do any drop offs or pick-ups so she's not advancing in her job and he will say in a casual way one day "why don't you stop this rat race and just look after the kids".

And she will be so exhausted by trying to keep all the wheels on she will gratefully collapse into a heap then spend the next seven years having and looking after small children. And then wake up one day after all her kids are at school and realise she would like her career back now thank you but it's much much harder because she doesn't have any recent work credentials and her former colleagues have all moved on and DH (who by now is senior vice president or whatever and is working 14 hour days) doesn't see the point in her doing PT work or volunteering when she has kids to look after so he won't help pick up any of the slack at home.

And then come the inevitable "It works for our family" and "I have facilitated his career" justifications. Because by then that's the best retrospective narrative for what's happened, which is that he's essentially bigfooted her career into obsolesence.

When I split from exH, I had about 2k of my own savings and then we had the shared account. When I wanted to leave exH, I had emergency money to tide me over for hotel rooms, upfront money for rental agreement, food etc. ExH took all the money from the shared account because in his eyes, he was the higher earner and I went part-time to look after DC so it was mostly his. Now I was very very lucky that I have parents with enough money to support with legal costs, because that 2k wouldn't have touched the legal fees for child access arrangements (custody), the financial settlement, and then the actual divorce. If my parents hadn't been in that position, exH would have had all the money to pay for lawyers and I'd have had nothing. When my 50% actually came through, it had taken about 2 years. That is why having your pot is important, even if it will get divied up at the end.

It isn’t just about divorce though, right? Death sadly is also a risk. Life insurance policies will only take you so far if you don’t have a solid income and long term earning potential.

It isn’t just about money, it’s about work and children. Far too many women are so desperate to be mothers that they ignore every single red flag on the way and turn a blind eye to their partner’s selfishness and indifference, because they believe it’s the only way to get the baby. I don’t know how many men want to be fathers so badly they’ll give up their financial independence and their earning potential to do it, but I’m going to guess not many. Of course, they don’t have to.

And how long do you think it takes from split to financial settlement. What do you think people live from in that time? Or pay their legal expenses? Their income, savings etc

That's still illogical because the only reason one does the other's share is because the other pays the bills etc. If you want 50% of the "childcare" and "housekeeping" you should pay 50% of the bills then (or proportionate amount to wages)?

They are 'paying' 50% of the bills - the childcare bill - the one that's being saved by them staying home (and housekeeping - but just assume I mean both)

So if by staying home, the SAHP is saving the couple a £1200/month bill, they are in positive credit to the family accounts at £600/month.

If the WOHP is earning 2400/month, they are 600 up because of that parent staying at home - that money should go to the SAHP - it's not free money - out of that, yes, bills should be shared (although if WOHP is earning 2400 and SAHP is 'earning' 600, then that's a 4:1 split or more, depending on how they organise spending money).

That's how my accounting brain sees it - yes, it's all the same money in a one-income household, but if you don't have 'family money' shared accounts, it's one way to ensure that the SAHP is fairly treated.

Sorry @JenWillsiam not sure what happened there - I was supposed to be quoting @6weekcountdown

Mine just took 3 years. And that's because I gave up, realising that he has 10x the money I have, and can keep this up indefinitely, whereas I'm just burning money and effort and I'd hit breaking point.

My friend's been going for 6 years - her ex is maliciously abusive though, whereas mine chucks money at barristers.

@Frazzledmum123

I find it bizarre that people go into marriage planning on having an escape, if I had any doubts about him at all, we would not have got married or had children.

No one plans to get divorced. Most people, when they marry, say they have "no doubts about him". But still just under half of marriages fail.

I'm sure your DH is lovely etc but if it were as simple as just always picking the right man divorce wouldn't happen.

I could not agree more. My ex-husband would have destroyed me if I had not had a job and savings. Women can make all kinds of choices in life, but should never allow themselves to be totally dependent.

This is why I got married at 22. Yes we love each other, but we had a cheap wedding as I wasn't moving in and having kids without marriage. He can trade me in all he wants (we're 30 years down the line) but he doesn't get to just walk away with his nice salary and big pension (and to be fair, neither do I).

And you think the first thing wealthy partners do isn’t get those assets frozen? 1 of 2 things have happened. It’s amicable and unnecessary. It’s not and assets are frozen very fast and you are required to declare the lot. At that point if you don’t you’ve got a problem.

I can’t help but wonder how many who’ve done thing have actually not had an issue using them during an acrimonious divorce.

My mum was telling me this back in the 80s, OP. She was happily married but she made sure my sister and I knew to get a job/career that would pay decently, to keep that job, and to have our own savings. She and dad got on fine but she had friends who had no control over the family money and it was horrible.

I also don't get the "well childcare barely covers my salary". For one year, childcare didn't cover my salary (and would have put a terrible dent in dh's too for that matter) - I had 3 in daycare. I made a net loss of 10 dollars every month after I paid the daycare. But I did have pension contributions, benefits - including health insurance, life insurance, disability benefits, my career progressed during that year, I enjoyed the work and dh's salary was also there to cover childcare.

100% agree. Also incredibly important for women that have toxic family/limited support network ... I wish I saw this post a few years ago.

I went to a girls' school. There were quite a few women who had no interest in a career and were going to university to mark time and (hopefully) find a rich husband. They were therefore quite happy to give up their careers once a suitable opportunity arose.

I was at a University Open Day a few weeks' ago and overheard a young woman saying that she wasn't going to worry about paying back her student loan as she fully intended to get married, have children and stop working as soon as possible after leaving university. I found it utterly depressing that a (presumably) intelligent teenager in this day and age is still thinking that their main aim in life is to get married and have children (not to mention that it's reasonable to financially depend on a man). Where are young women (still) getting these messages from?

You need to go to courts to get the order/injunction. No sane judge will freeze living expenses money. Renting/paying mortgage and living is not going to be under extravagant disposal of assets for judge to actually impose the order.

I suspect we are talking about different income brackets.

I don't know why you suddenly moved from general savings to just talking about wealthy people.

Maybe I don't know enough people but in my circle, people tend to marry their equals (career wise).. so both partners work if they are equally matched in career (including highly paid ones) if they have two or less children. A lot of unpaid childcare by grandparents as well as nursery use, but that's cos I am in London and a lot of the people I know are second generation Londoners or who live slightly further out in the home counties (from ethnic minority backgrounds)...

The sahm I know do so cos they can't afford childcare or feel it's a waste of money

But do you know how “fair settlement” works in divorce
the courts are required by law to ensure “fair settlement “ is met- even if your spouse and you do an “amicable” consent order. Courts can , and do (head across to divorce board for examples) reject consent orders if fair settlement is not met
might want to take a look , and everyone else here, who has personal funds and married
it is a criminal offence, 2 actually, to hide money during your legal financial declaration- contempt of court and fraud. Courts don’t like it. In theory both have custodial sentences

Any assets you do have, including your pension and money in single name accounts is a joint matrimonial asset and is in the “pot” for division. This is NOT necessarily a bad thing, it is one of ways marriage, particularly where there are children, is vital for women.

having access to a small pot of secret money is a good thing if there is abuse - it allows you to plan and get away without the abusive spouse or partner knowing, provided you spend it prior to divorce proceedings. But running off with £10s of thousands at escape would be seen potentially as depravation of assets. And if you don’t use that emergency money prior to asking for divorce, it’s in the matrimonial asset pot whether you like it or not - and hiding it is contempt of court.

just saying

please note , the best thing you can do is ensure your financial security if it goes fits up or not, is to protect your career and career progression (eg don’t give up work at any point - reduce your hours instead but always keep your toe in), pay as much as you can into your pension, know exactly where all your assets and joint assets are, never live with someone with no rights to the house (eg always joint tenant or tenant in common, rented or mortgage or whatever ) . But most critically , if you are married or have children , be with someone who is open about their own earnings, savings, accounts and who shares a joint account with you, pays for expenses jointly, and takes their share of all the other domestic shit. Someone who sees their money as “our money”. If not, big red flag, do not be with this person and don’t have kids with them.

If, as a SAHM your DH/DP pays you for the childcare/housekeeper services you provide then a) you can pay your share of the rent/bills (as the presumably lower earner, that is probably not half) b) your partner demonstrates that he values your work c) if there is any money left after bills, then you decide how to spend this d) it gives you the option of saving towards your personal security. I get that the money is ‘matrimonial’ if you’re married, but it still means it’s accessible for you to use if you need it. I don’t see why this only applies in high income households

I read so many posts about how do’s don’t value work done in the home, but if both partners go out to work, presumably both the dc’s parents are responsible for childcare costs

How on earth have you done this?!?