Finances causing issues in Relationship

trailingspouse wrote: »

I wonder if there's some resentment from her that she's paying for all of the essentials (and having to struggle to do so), whereas you pay for the fun stuff? And by extension, you could stop paying for the fun stuff if you chose - but she would still have to pay for the essentials because, well, they're essential.


A full and frank discussion is the only way forward. I have to confess I don't really understand the 'I contribute enough' line - your woman and her kids aren't some sort of charity. You're either in it together, or you're not in it at all.

I wonder if this advice would be shared if the OP was female. The MSE modus operandi appears to be that when a female (in a relationship) is in control of her finances and retaining financial independence, it's seen as some sort of empowered feminist statement but when a man is in control of his finances, it appears to be at the expense of their female partner, as you're alluding to here.

I think what the OP is saying, is that he is financially supporting her two children while her former partner is contributing zero. I totally understand his position on this. They might not be a charity case, but they are also partly someone else's responsibility and yet, they are not financially supporting those two children. I totally agree that a partner is not a charity, but at the same time, there is nothing wrong with retaining some financial independence of your own and I think the OP should endeavour to do this.

scubadrummer wrote: »

Stoke you are correct in your second paragraph. Thing is I am paying for the essentials and the fun stuff also. As i say i really don't have an issue and I dont see them as a charity, far from it. If it is needed then i will sort it, i just get the feeling everyone thinks i have unlimited cash which is far from it. I have always been careful with my money while my partner lives for the day. I know there should be a balance which I feel i have about right. I do put some money away each month but i have been doing that for the last 20 years. I am not sitting on a big pile of cash at the end of the month watching while she struggles, i am usually down to the last few pounds myself.

Nobody has unlimited cash, and that is perhaps something you should put forward when you sit down and talk about it.

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

I suppose this depends on how you view the relationship.

Are you two people who share a home, are you partners or are you a family?
If you are a true partnership or a family unit, then I don't think its right that one person earns 3 times as much as the other and is comfortable while the other struggles and lives in an overdraft to make ends meet. That doesn't meet any definition of partnership I can think of!

If you're a family, then you have a responsibility to the children even though you didn't father them. By moving in together you've reduced the amount of help she can get from the state, you are expected to step up.
So which is it?

This sums up my feeling. My wife has barely worked throughout our married life, thus 98% of income into the house has come from me but she has brought up our 3 children. Everything we have is regarded as joint and I wouldn't want it any different.
Of course, if you don't regard your partner as an equal or don't regard yourself as a father to the children then you effectively don't meet the family unit criteria in quoted post and only you can decide how much you contribute to the arrangement but if you feel you are a family then I would suggest a monetary negotiation is not the way to go. That wouldn't rule out discussing the family income, expenditure and savings.