"It's money, I earn it"

[GilbertMarkham]

This is apparently the way things are in my household/marriage.

I feel think I should know about and have input into the overall financial picture in our household.

Hid opinion is the above.

He thinks that he pays for everything, therefore that's enough/fair .. and that I have no right to know in detail or get involved in the overall finances.

He works full-time in a fairly well paid job. Part of the reason for the good pay is that he works on projects in London, which (before lockdown) required fortnightly stays overnight or two nights there while I obviously look after DD alone. He'll return to this when able.

I have been working two or three days a week for a while. My hours are limited by drop off and pick up times for nursery, as my work is an hour away. The money I made doing this (before lockdown) didn't really have an impact. By the time unpaid travel expenses etc. If was mainly to get me back into work after maternity. We have one DD. We moved from where we were living when our DD was about 4 months as we weren't cooing without support from family (and also it was difficult to get in the housing ladder where we were).

He pays for everything, including the low mortgage on a house I own from before we married if it's not rented out.

My view is that since we had a child, his salary is family/household money, not "his" money. I can't work full-time as I look after DD two/three days, do 90% of drop.offs and pickups on the days I was working. Stay off 100% of the time off for illness, do 99% of appointments, and do the overnights mentioned above.

I don't think most people in a marriage would feel happy or invested with his attitude. He thinks it's fine because he pays for everything he should - but it's still very much his money.

He also said he didn't want me/I didn't have s right UK make him give details and justify what he spends on what .. probably because I'm more frugal on average than he is and he knows I might be critical/frustrated.

*so I feel sorry for

Also - the more you right?

@GilbertMarkham this whole post somehow derailed into micro-facts of rental property profit, deposits and who payed what when.

it's really doesn't matter though.

The question is, is it ok that you are excluded from a major piece of information that impacts your family on every aspect.

if you are excluded, you are not an equal partner in this team. one member holds power over the other. it creates a hierarchy and a power struggle.

he either sees you and your contribution as less worth in a team that should be equal,
or
he knows your contribution is equal but he likes himself in the position of power.

The solution is difficult because it requires him to change his way of thinking.

Tiger thanks for your very insightful, to the core of the issues post.

I have wonder how many people (usually men) truly see their partner's childcare and house work as equal to their job and earning?

Also if I work full-time, I have the distinct feeling my contribution would still not be equal because he earns about three times more. (My salary would be about average for NI actually).

(seen as equal, I mean).

I have wonder how many people (usually men) truly see their partner's childcare and house work as equal to their job and earning?
^
its a good question and i fear the true answer will be not what i want to hear.

fact: the most corporate jobs (long hours) only can be done because that person has free labour at home, running the house, emotional labour child care, cleaning, cooking.
so in essence-
the corporate world is practically built on woman doing invisible free labour at home to enable their partners to work.

society has been brainwashed into accepting this as normal.

this model also denies fathers a chance to parent more, even if they wished to. paternity leave in the UK is a joke.

What jumps out to me is you keep referring to the other property as yours - however it is a marital asset now, so technically both of yours.

You refer to him covering the mortgage on it only on 3 separate occasions - but that could be misread that he has only paid the mortgage 3 times - but one of those occasions was for 6 months while it was vacant. So he has paid it more than 3 times, if you count each payment as one occasion.

You say the mail comes to the house & he wouldn’t care if you opened it - so it sounds like you do have access to how the money is spent, providing bank statements are mailed to the home.

When you need more money, he asks why, but you seem to resent him wanting access to the same information you do. It seems unclear if you are worried what he is spending his money on, or if you just want more control of the finances.

You seem to have expensive tastes, you want to decorate & only but food from certain grocery stores, yet insist you are frugal.

You have by your own admission mismanaged your property & allowed it to stay vacant because you are prejudiced against people in their 20s. It is madness to unison you are frugal, yet leave an investment property vacant for 6 months! Why didn’t you air b&b it? I challenge that you are as good with money as you say, while allowing that to happen.

I get the sense your money is yours & your husband’s is yours too. It doesn’t sound like you want to give him any credit for what he does & just take.

You admit you don’t want to work full time, but also use staying at home & providing childcare as an arguing point against your husband. You can’t have it both ways!

It seems like he is not financially controlling you. You just want him to say “yes dear my money is family money” - but earlier in the post you openly say you would resent him having any financial interest in your property. It just sounds like you want him to say something you don’t believe for yourself either!

@vikingwife

I literally cannot believe that someone could read a thread and get so many facts/statements completely wrong from it. I'm sorry but it's such a waste of my time to go through it all and point out what I've actually written. One quick example is that you've said;

"You seem to have expensive tastes, you want to decorate & only but food from certain grocery stores, yet insist you are frugal."

I said I had to buy stuff for the house Inc some decoration and he didn't seem to understand that stuff was needed for the house, or that it mounted up. I did not say any of it was expensive.

I am a skip trawling, car boot sale crawling, second hand shop crawling frugal, tree hugging person. Nothing I own is new unless I absolutely can't find it used.

He buys whatever he wants, new,band does not shop around.

I also said he only really wants good out of M&S and won't eat leftovers - not me.

This is just one example and I just can't make the time here to go through the rest of your post. You as a poster are a type that is a time waster and derailer and we've already had enough of that type represented here.

When you need more money, he asks why, but you seem to resent him wanting access to the same information you do.
Does she have a right to ask him what he's spending money on before he spends it? That would be equitable.

You admit you don’t want to work full time, but also use staying at home & providing childcare as an arguing point against your husband. You can’t have it both ways!

She doesn't want it both ways. She's working extremely hard to enable him to do his long-hours job. He couldn't have the lifestyle he does if she wasn't working part time and keeping the home running.

It just feels like you are cherry picking what you want to reply to & lashing out with condescending manner when people disagree with you. I apologise if have misunderstood you, but am not sure how my response is derailing your thread. It truly sounds to me like it is one rule for you & another for your husband. I don’t think you are being financially abused from what you have said here. it seems like you have access to the money & finances but want him to say the money is yours. It sounds like he has a different perspective, but not a 1950s attitude, otherwise you would be discouraged from working or having the clone credit card etc. if he wanted you to believe your property was also half his would you agree to that ? It doesn’t sound like you see it that way

Also there is nothing stopping OP from going back to FT work here. She is by admission not wanting FT work out of choice, because of not liking the child in daycare 5 days a week. It sounds like if she Wanted to work more she could & husband would be paying for the extra childcare days. Nothing in the thread suggested she was unable to work FT due to childcare issues. I’m genuinely confused as to what the OP is upset about...

@Tigersneeze - it’s just not true that high powered corporate Jobs can only be done by those (men) with someone at home. I am a single parent with a professional job who outearns ops dh. I know quite a few other women with children who do as well. The mumsnet trope that women with children can’t have high earning jobs isn’t true.

It’s hard and it’s not fair that so much of the burden of childcare falls on women. But equally a lot of women on mn overstate the economic value of caring for their own children. It’s not half the salary of a high earning partner. You don’t get to claim you earn half of a large salary when you are not doing that job. The economic value of childcare is restricted to the value of that work. And when they are your own children arguably it’s less than if they were a third parties.

I do agree op that it’s not nice to be treated like a child. But equally I can understand your dh pov that why do you get to spend all the money and quiz him on his spending when he is the one keeping the family afloat. Not everyone agrees that all income is “family money”. I didn’t with my ex. Couples need to do what works for them.

Maybe a middle ground might be a proper discussion as to sharing of resources in the marriage. But you should be prepared that an agreement might mean you have to work more hours or get less money.

Thanks for being so honest tho - it’s been an interesting discussion. I wish you all the best.

@CayrolBaaaskin
your example is anecdotal and doesn't line up with statistics - just because you are in a job like that and you know a few other woman doesn't mean that's the norm / 50% of upper management in corporate jobs are female.

I am a single parent with a professional job who outearns ops dh. I know quite a few other women with children who do as well.

I'm glad and i wish more women were in your situation.

In my male dominated line of work I'm one of the very few woman in a senior position. Most of the men at my level/earning power have kids and a wife that runs the house, ALL the woman at my level are child free.

@CayrolBaaaskin

Thank you out of interest;

how old are your kid (or kid)?
Have you always worked high payed job, from day one with them?
What do you use for childcare?
What times do you drop them off a d luck them up?
What do you do if you need to.work away?
What do you do if you need to work overtime?
Do you get family help?
What do you do if they have to stay off school/childcare sick?

*kids

• This high paid job

*pick them up

The economic value of childcare is restricted to the value of that work. And when they are your own children arguably it’s less than if they were a third parties.

That's a big part of the problem, is it not.

We degrade looking after children, especially our own children. Because it doesn't generate GDP.

Because it doesn't generate GDP.

exactly, and also because historically it has been done by woman, who are payed less

Ok, I admit I’ve not read the full thing but here is a different perspective from me as a woman.

I used to be married. I was the higher earner. My name was on my payslip and I worked damned hard for that money. I also juggled being a mother and made a lot of sacrifices by sometimes not seeing the kids when I’d like. I also wasn’t on my full salary because I reduced my hours for the sake of the kids. I still earned more than double my ex-husband’s salary.

Money from both our jobs went into a joint account to pay bills etc and he freely used that for shopping etc. What I mean is since separation our food bills have been a fraction of what they were when married because I don’t pile bottles of booze into the trolley or buy stuff without comparing the price and I plan what we will eat.

I hardly ever treated myself to anything- not personal stuff or clothes or outings. My earnings were for the family and the children. I also saved for our futures.

When we divorced he took 55% of joint assets. I had earned at least 70%. I have 100% custody of the children and related costs. He pays a very small amount of child support.

Personally I think my name was on my payslip and it WAS my money. I shared assets but as a married person I was entitled to have my own accounts - and did too - until the moment divorce proceedings begin when it suddenly becomes something joint!

I don’t think in this day and age that being in a relationship and signing the marriage contract should give someone the right to treat the other as a cashpoint. That’s why I will never marry again. It’s a horrendous set-up.

Yes, it suits you if you are the one benefitting off the other. And I agree there is a value to childcare. But if you don’t feel you have enough money then you should earn it yourself or possibly negotiate the housekeeping.

OP I know you asked these questions of someone else but I’ll answer some. I have a well paid job and so does my husband. We both work four days a week and look after the kids one day each. I drop kids off at nursery and he does pick up although we’re happy to swap for each other if the other one has a meeting or has to travel, we just make sure we give the other one warning and check it’s ok. We have a rule whereby neither of us travels out of our home city on the same day so if we get a call from nursery that a child is ill one of us can always get there. DH earns about 60k and I earn 40k so he put earns me by a good way but that doesn’t feature in our planning. My career is as valid as his and I wouldn’t tolerate it being treated otherwise. In the future I may out earn him but that would never happen if I stepped back now and put his job first. So basically it can be done but requires a genuinely equal partnership where the man is prepared to accept that having kids will impact upon his job. If you don’t have that to start with it will never work.

Oh and no family or anyone here so all is up to us, hence our rule about one of us always being around in case pick up needed.

Should also have said, I drop off at 8am and work 9-5:30. DH starts about 7:30 but is finished by about 4:30 so picks kids up around 5pm. Staggering our working hours a bit really helps.

It sounds very much like you're not a team, and that is at the root of this.

I also think it's possibly valuable for you to separate out the long term financial security of your household with how you deal with day to day spending.

For me, the idea you don't know what pension he has is mad. We had a v good financial advisor meeting as part of our mortgage process: they were mostly trying to get us to buy life assurance but they asked lots of questions and made us work our things we hadn't previously: so what position would we be in if one of us died, what position would we be in when we retired. Did we want our mortgage paid off early, what costs do we anticipate regarding childcare etc.

It sounds like that kind of high level process would be good for you both, and could lead to you setting some joint financial goals. Do you both want to keep your old house as a source of income long term? When are you planning to have your current mortgage paid off by?

I do think it's not quite on for you to unilaterally decide your daughter shouldn't be in full time childcare. I think that's something you need to be on the same page with. But the flip side of that is, he can't expect you both to work full time and for you still to pick up the slack. And again, ideally, it's something you should be having a sensible, medium-term discussion on: eg setting a plan that you will work X days a week until she is in school, during that time you will put most of your salary towards a pension for you so your joint financial position is better on retirement, when you start working full time your salary will go towards mortgage overpayments so it is paid off when you are both 60, etc etc.

In terms of day to day spending, I would not be happy without oversight of the big things, but I also would not be happy with someone nitpicking me buying magazines or a coffee out, even if it is frivolous. We have an entirely joint set up: we had talked once about having an equal amount of 'frivolous' money in separate accounts but now we just let it go. My husband does fritter money on little things that annoy me, and wouldn't think to compare the value of items. But we're on the same team and the same page and it's a minor annoyance set against everything else. So I guess the question is: could you start with getting him to engage with you in those bigger questions, and then hope that from there you can have a more sensible discussion about your day to day finances?

Because it sounds a bit like you both don't think you have a long term financial future together and that is feeding into thinking, also that he either doesn't think of you as a team or anticipates that any oversight he allows into his spending will result in him being criticised.

Or, alternatively, that he is a misogynistic arse. In which case, you still need to think about medium term financial goals for you, probably with more of an exit plan built in. If you think it's 50/50 you might split in five years time, what setup would you like as a single parent then? Would you need extra qualifications to get there? Can you get those now? Can you use what influence you do have on the family budget to build up equity in that time?

There is no perfect answer either in terms of your relationship or the future outside your relationship, but in five years time you'll either be with him or you won't, and there are steps you can take to ensure you're in a better position then than if you do nothing so it's orobably worth giving them serious thought now.

@rainycloudyday this is almost identical to our setup in every way.

@catspyjamas123 I think the problem is, relationships have to be partnerships and if they aren't at the time that needs to be addressed. Not after their over. I think there's a lot to be said for everyone at all stages in a relationship thinking about how things would be structured if the relationship ends, and would it be fair, as well as what would happen if either person died. In the OPs case, and in many cases, I don't think it would: the child support payments she would get would not reflect the limitations being the resident parent would put on her earning abilities. In your case, it wasn't fair because it sounds like your husband got a greater split to reflect caring responsibilities he didn't truly have.

In my relationship, we do an even split on childcare and caring responsibilities and so my career is still at a point where I'd be in an ok position but it's very hard to protect that, and it's very hard to know what to do when one person becomes a bit useless but maybe not useless enough to justify ending a relationship.

I I agree with what @mummmy2017 is saying.

Not every woman wants to stick her kid into.chikdcare every day, some are uncomfortable about it

OP, near enough no woman wants to, unfortunately most of us don't have the choice that you have, your partner is able to make enough to keep you both going, which is great that you are able to do that, but maybe you should give your DH some credit for that and realise why it's possible for you to do that, rather than criticise him for not wanting to share every single thing he buys with you.

I also agree with a PP about you picking and choosing what you want to reply and getting angry and defensive when someone makes a (valid) point that you don't agree with. You also started off making your husband sound great in all aspects other than referring to his money as his, then when people started to agree with him you drip feed things about how he's actually not great and keep finding new things to throw in. You've said that he is very hands on with being a father outside of his work hours, that he gives you money with questioning it, pays for everything, is very nice then with every reply agreeing with him saying you are unreasonable suddenly there's all these new things contradicting eachother. Sorry but that's the way it's coming across