is my husband hiding money?

fierystormcloud

thorsoak wrote: »

Well, if you want him to continue to control your life, carry on as you are - if you were to look at Turn2us, I think you would be surprised.

But there again - if you want to continue in this way, be prepared for the control to get more and more, be prepared for him to start to undermine you with the children then carry on - you'll have to put up and shut up .....not the best way to spend your life.

I know I couldn't live that way. But each to her own.

This ^^^

It's like the OP is so conditioned to living this way now, that she feels trapped. She admits fully that she would leave if it was not for the kids.

Staying for the kids is the worst idea.

I wish she would 'get' that, but I fear she won't, and she will stay in this emotionally abusive relationship forever. Quite sad really. As I said, there is always a way out.

Guest101

fierystormcloud wrote: »

This ^^^

It's like the OP is so conditioned to living this way now, that she feels trapped. She admits fully that she would leave if it was not for the kids.

Staying for the kids is the worst idea.

I wish she would 'get' that, but I fear she won't, and she will stay in this emotionally abusive relationship forever. Quite sad really. As I said, there is always a way out.

So the OP is considering the health and well being of the children. And feels that as a family they are better together. - (oh it's not for you to decide, so you feel you need to put additional pressure on the OP to force her into the decision).

So the OP feels if it wasnt for the children, she would leave. Well yes, that's quite often the case. Because the bonds that tie are not as strong.

EQUALLY if they didnt have children, they would both be earning similar financially and this post wouldnt exist! - but we'll gloss over that, because that doesnt suit your agenda.

There is no evidence this is an abusive relationship.

thorsoak

Guest101 wrote: »

So the OP is considering the health and well being of the children. And feels that as a family they are better together. - (oh it's not for you to decide, so you feel you need to put additional pressure on the OP to force her into the decision).

So the OP feels if it wasnt for the children, she would leave. Well yes, that's quite often the case. Because the bonds that tie are not as strong.

EQUALLY if they didnt have children, they would both be earning similar financially and this post wouldnt exist! - but we'll gloss over that, because that doesnt suit your agenda.

There is no evidence this is an abusive relationship.

Years ago, I worked in a Womens Aid shelter, and in more cases than enough, the abuse would start in a subtle way: insisting that the wife/partner should stay home with the children, whilst the husband/parent would work, thereby controlling the finances of the family. When the wife/partner started working part time, the husband would object, cut back on the housekeeping given to the wife by whatever she earned, by not helping in any way with children/housework. When, in the late 1970s/early 80s, the child tax allowance was taken away from the father's income and family allowance was increased for the mother - there were many men who objected to this.

Financial control of a family's income is accepted that it can be the sign of abuse in a relationship.

thorsoak

Guest101 wrote: »

Have you tried to seduce him?

Not being funny, but there's two equal parties in the relationship. If your love life has gone sour, he may be thinking the worst.

Poor communication is the death of a relationship. But equally lack of intimacy can stifle communication.

Seriously?

Guest101

thorsoak wrote: »

Seriously?

Yes seriously.

Clearly the OP wants the relationship to work. So why not?

You see this as an abusive relationship. But other see it just a tired and slightly dysfunctional one.

fierystormcloud

thorsoak wrote: »

Years ago, I worked in a Womens Aid shelter, and in more cases than enough, the abuse would start in a subtle way: insisting that the wife/partner should stay home with the children, whilst the husband/parent would work, thereby controlling the finances of the family. When the wife/partner started working part time, the husband would object, cut back on the housekeeping given to the wife by whatever she earned, by not helping in any way with children/housework. When, in the late 1970s/early 80s, the child tax allowance was taken away from the father's income and family allowance was increased for the mother - there were many men who objected to this.

Financial control of a family's income is accepted that it can be the sign of abuse in a relationship.

:T Good post Thorsoak (as always.)


This is clearly not a good relationship, and for the sake of the OP AND her kiddies, she needs to do something about it now. She has made it clear that she would leave if it weren't for the kids. But staying FOR the kids is wrong. She needs to change things. But I fear she won't as she feels trapped. Not sure we can help her.

Guest101

thorsoak wrote: »

Years ago, I worked in a Womens Aid shelter, and in more cases than enough, the abuse would start in a subtle way: insisting that the wife/partner should stay home with the children, whilst the husband/parent would work, thereby controlling the finances of the family. When the wife/partner started working part time, the husband would object, cut back on the housekeeping given to the wife by whatever she earned, by not helping in any way with children/housework. When, in the late 1970s/early 80s, the child tax allowance was taken away from the father's income and family allowance was increased for the mother - there were many men who objected to this.

Financial control of a family's income is accepted that it can be the sign of abuse in a relationship.

I've underlined the operative word in your post.

Years of dealing with the worst cases can equally skew your judgment.

Being hyper aware of signs that might be something more than they actually are.

fierystormcloud

I have to go now OP, but hopefully you will take heed of the sensible advice that myself and Thorsoak and a few others have given, to try and leave this emotionally abusive and controlling relationship, and not the dangerous information that has been given to stay in your marriage because it's just a bit 'tired.'

Seriously, I have heard it all now.

thorsoak

Her post of 10.29 this morning -

"
No there is no passion. Hasnt been for years. Ive done everything possible to change that, but again he refuses to discuss it.
I am not happy but it is no unbearable. If I didn't have children of course I would leave but I have 4 lives that come before mine.
He doesn't beat me or physically hurt me."

Does it sound as if starting a pole-dancing strip-tease act would reconnect this couple? And if he buys all the groceries etc, she's hardly going to be able to create a romantic candle-lit dinner, is she?

And why would you attempt "seduction" with someone who has already indicated that he isn't interested? Or are you now going to suggest that she smartens herself up?

Is this what you suggest? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbusN-n8rE

David301

Look guys, all the musing aside about the OP and her husband and the abuse/non abuse that she suffers. You have missed that point, She wants more money to herself. That is totally fine and acceptable. They have a happy relationship, not swinging from the rafters any more, but who does when they have 4 kids??

OP please ignore the extremists and when you get chance go to the benefits office, as you now have your husbands pay slip and go and get what you are entitled to. I did a basic form online with the bits of info you have supplied and you are entitled to about £10,000 worth of help.So that + wages is £1200 to £1300 per month