Would you expect your spouse to share their wealth with you

[JollyQuail]

Just wondering, if your partner was considerably wealthier than you, would you expect him to share all his wealth with your after you’re married?

Name added to houses; joint bank accounts, name added to BTL properties.

I would feel very uneasy doing this.

I wouldn't get married again because the answer would be no and I wouldn't want to live with someone either.
I've been a single parent for years and built up what I have, to make a safe stable home for my children. I have also worked really hard at my career. I mainly find lots of single men my age don't have their shit together, giving away wealth that I have had to work for feels unfair.

Yes of course.
My partner works very hard for his wages but we split it so it's equal.
There should be no "my money his money" in a marriage. It's both your money.

@JollyQuail so don't get married, or find someone with equal wealth, if you don't want to share with the person you are supposed to love and want to marry.

They don't mean much in the uk

Yes I would. I've just had an inheritance - didn't occur to me not to share it with dh. He earns more than me as I sacrificed full time work to raise our children. Everything shared

Yes and he did

I wouldn’t get married. Sharing whilst married, absolutely. Losing half in a divorce ( when nearly half of marriages do end in divorce), no. So don’t marry.

"I, take you, to be my wife/husband, to have and to hold from this day forward; for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part

So yes I would expect money and assets to be shared/owned jointly, because thats marriage you become a couple, a partnership and everything is shared.

If you are really worried then you can do a prenup, but to me it kinda states just before marriage , I dont really trust you and want to protect myself, this may not be a lifetime commitment....possibly sensible but then not really the point of marriage

Doesn’t have to. I never got a penny from mine because there were no children. I didn’t ask and he didn’t offer . So it depends who you marry and divorce

Oh and I didn’t get any from the frst who wasn’t particularly wealthy but what he had, I had built from nothing with him. And there were children. Nothing for them, either

Sounds like neither of you went to court though.

I was in the High court with the first one. Cost me a fortune I didn’t have and I would not recommend it ..5 figure sum in costs. His was free, because he put everything in a n others name an claimed poverty

And btw court is always involved even for quickie divorces. If they don’t like what you’ve agreed out of court, they can change it

My ex husband was really stingy with his money during marriage but he had to give it to me when we divorced, so. Don't marry if you're not into splitting assets. It's coming for you eventually.

Years ago my Physics teacher used to say that the motto of wives is What's yours is mine and what's mine's my own! It was a forerunner of the MN approach!

I guess if you are planning a family together yes I would expect them to to protect our children

Older and no children together no and would not be having joint accounts/their name added to my mortgage etc or be supporting them in a better lifestyle I want someone who is at least equal

The house we lived in and ongoing income, yes.

Things he owned outright pre marriage: no.

Nor inheritance from his family.

And I would feel the same if I was wealthier.

But in the case of divorce I would fight to get enough to house and raise the children without hardship, so probably a greater share of the marital home, as he would have his own nest eggs to fall back on.

And I would fight for a share of his pension built during the marriage if my own pension and savings had taken a knock due to family responsibilities.

If MN is anything to go by, it seems most men don't want children anyway, given how so many are willing to just abandon them and not support them. It seems many just go along with children for the woman.

I get the impression many/most men would be perfectly happy having someone 'keeping things in order' for them, the sex that usually comes with a relationship... and that's it. All the rest it seems many would be perfectly fine without. No dating, ring, 'event days' (Valentines Day, anniversaries, etc), marriage, in-laws, kids, financial responsibilities..., basically a long-term girlfriend. I really think there'd be a significant number of men who would choose casual relationships (if sex was more readily available, rather than being a 'perk' of a relationship), than actual relationships, as these invariably come with the aforementioned 'consequences' for them.

Luckily for me I come from a tradiotional community where long term.girlfriends are frowned upon.
I used to hate that, but increasingly I love it.