Joint finances when you have children?

fierystormcloud

Guest101 wrote: »

Why did she not work for 20 years?!

I can understand until youngest is at school. But surely after that you'd go to work?

Your guess is as good as mine.

He was very controlling, so he probably didn't let her.

Also, a lot of women don't work for many years... I know a number actually who had a good 20-25 year break from the workplace after having kids. It's not that rare - even in this day and age for women to be SAHM's for two decades or more.... even when the younger kid(s) are mid to late teens...

AngelOfTheNorth

Guest101 wrote: »

Being a SAHM until the child(ren) enter full time education does bring in an income from the state.

Not necessarily.

BigAunty wrote: »

I would assume that pregnancy and motherhood makes the victim especially vulnerable as they are more likely to have to financially depend on their partner and are more likely to be out of the workforce then.

Yes indeed, pregnancy is a common trigger for abuse to begin or escalate.

LilElvis

Guest101 wrote: »

Being a SAHM until the child(ren) enter full time education does bring in an income from the state.

Total and utter rubbish!

I have a daughter in reception. I am a stay at home Mum. I receive ZERO, NADA, NOTHING ......... ZIP. Before she started school the only benefit that I received was 1 year of assistance with her nursery education. This amounted to 15 hours a week. She attended nursery for 21 hours a week, but because the funding doesn't include food or school holidays it actually meant that out of the £550 this cost per month we still had to pay £330. Woooo Hoooo!

I didn't have a child in order for the State to pay me to stay at home - and they certainly haven't.

Jagraf

What I don't understand is that people are happy to share their children, but not their money. Strange priorities.

maman

Goldiegirl wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with that at all, as long as both roles are seen to be equal in the relationship, and both parties are in agreement with where the relationship and family are heading.

Guest101 wrote: »

Why did she not work for 20 years?!

I can understand until youngest is at school. But surely after that you'd go to work?

I think it's acceptable to share one wage as a family 'pot' provided the couple have decided together what the plan is before they have children. Sometimes the parent staying at home can be the father if that makes more financial sense.


What I can't accept is when parents take advantage of a situation and stay at home long after it's necessary for childcare etc. I know too many SAHMs who do nothing much but a bit of housework and endless coffee/gossip/gym/shopping while children are at school while fathers are working their socks off. To me that's not fair that's just taking the proverbial. It's using the fact you have children to have an easy life.

LannieDuck

I think keeping your own money separate from your partner's and both contributing to shared bills works fine until you have children.

At that stage one half of the couple (and it doesn't always have to be the woman, although it often is), immediately looses a chunk of earning potential (even if maternity/paternity leave is kept as short as possible). The shared bills go up (childcare), and one person's income plummets.

If it was a joint decision to start a family, keeping finances separate is completely unfair on the partner taking the majority of childcare. I've always said that I expect to be treated as an equal in my relationship, regardless of whether I'm the one working full-time or the one at home with the kids (and I've done both). And that includes having equal access to the disposable income that we have left as a family after all bills are paid for.

System

My tip is to sort it at the beginning of the relationship because when kids and life comes along you wont have the time or the energy to change things later on.

catoutthebag

Opening things up a bit, how do people organise their finances during a live together relationship and how does this evolve?

When I was in a LTR we had a joint account for expenses. We worked out total outgoings and added it to the joint account monthly from our current accounts. Proportionally not 50/50 since I earned a little bit more. I think 50/50 would be unfair. We were renting.

My ex was weary and not trusting and wanted a full joint account which I refused. This was based on her past experience of being scrwed over by her ex when they had a mortgage. But when she realised I'm not her ex she settled in and accepted the idea and it worked well.

I think I'd have the same set up when married.

I don't know how the situation would change once children come along since I'd still like the autonomy of having a joint account but also current personal accounts.

System

What I can't accept is when parents take advantage of a situation and stay at home long after it's necessary for childcare etc. I know too many SAHMs who do nothing much but a bit of housework and endless coffee/gossip/gym/shopping while children are at school while fathers are working their socks off. To me that's not fair that's just taking the proverbial. It's using the fact you have children to have an easy life.

Who made you judge and jury?

Peter333

maman wrote: »

I think it's acceptable to share one wage as a family 'pot' provided the couple have decided together what the plan is before they have children. Sometimes the parent staying at home can be the father if that makes more financial sense.

What I can't accept is when parents take advantage of a situation and stay at home long after it's necessary for childcare etc. I know too many SAHMs who do nothing much but a bit of housework and endless coffee/gossip/gym/shopping while children are at school while fathers are working their socks off. To me that's not fair that's just taking the proverbial. It's using the fact you have children to have an easy life.

You may not be able to 'accept' that, but it's really none of your business - or anyone else's - if a woman is a SAHM, even when the children are much older. In fact, from your post, you sound a bit jealous of these women you refer to.

There is nothing wrong with the woman staying at home long term, even when the children are older; being there for the children, the family, the husband, and looking after house and home, whilst the husband goes to work, if that is what she wants, and if that is what the husband wants. As long as they are both happy with the situation, and there is enough income from his wage alone, it's nobody's business if the woman is still off work when the youngest is 20!

I know several woman who are in their 50s and 60s now, and have been homemakers since they were in their mid 20s, and their youngest child is at college or university, and in a couple of cases, the children have left home. One woman is in her early 50s, and has not done paid employment since she was in her mid 20s, but has raised 4 children, and now helps look after 2 grandchildren, and helps care for her parents who are in their 80s... She and her husband are perfectly happy with the situation, and there is no need for her to work. Yet she gets a barrage of catty comments from her peers, acquaintances, and so-called friends.

Women being homemakers, and being there for the husband, children, and maybe even extended family like elderly parents and grandchildren, is fine, if they can afford to do it, and both people in the couple are happy with it. Too many people are too quick to vilify women who stay at home; even when the children are school age, calling them lazy and free-loaders. Several of the women I know are constantly defending themselves when asked 'why don't you work?' The most popular retort is 'because I don't NEED to.'

I put it down to jealousy. The women I know who are homemakers (a few who have grown children,) have had some very catty remarks and put downs over the years, even when the children were younger, and it's always women making the remarks, and the more catty and spiteful the remark, the more I am convinced it's down to jealousy.

As I said, it's nothing to do with ANYONE if a woman wants to be a SAHM/homemaker, all her life, even when the children are grown, and even when they leave home; except for her and her husband. IMO, the people who vilify them for it and jealous and bitter.