(Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents: Marriage
Posted by Lynnae on May 12, 2008
If you're new here, you may want to find out more about me. Also, please consider subscribing via RSS or email. Thanks for visiting!
Has marriage been reduced to an economic decision?
There’s a lot to cover from the 5th chapter of (Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents by Nan Mooney. So much, in fact, that I’m going to break this chapter into two posts. This super-long chapter covers both marriage and children. I’ll cover marriage today and children next week.
Mooney brings up a lot of issues facing couples (and singles) today. She says most of these issues are caused by the squeeze on the middle class. I honestly don’t think these issues have as much to do with the financial squeeze as they do with the changing value system in America. Here are a few of the issues Mooney brings up.
The Financial Need to Couple Up
Mooney asserts that there is a pressure in today’s society to couple up for financial reasons. Because it’s hard to survive on one income these days, Mooney suggests that single people feel the pressure to get married for financial security.
I can’t really speak to this issue, as I was 23 when I got married, and I definitely didn’t marry for financial security. That thought never crossed my mind. Perhaps some readers could elaborate on this subject in the comments. Do people feel pressure to marry for financial security today?
Reluctance to Combine Finances
According to Mooney, most couples today, especially those living together, but not married (but also some married couples), are reluctant to combine finances.
I can only speak to marriage, but I don’t like the idea of separate finances for married couples. The whole point of a marriage is union…becoming one. How united can you be, if you insist on keeping your finances completely separate? I’m not talking about separate accounts for “fun money,” but a “we both pay for half the mortgage, half the utilities, etc” approach.
Arguments about money happen in the best of marriages. My guess is that they’re easier to resolve if you know you have to compromise. It seems that if a couple’s finances were kept completely separate, it would be easy to hold your half of the money hostage in the heat of the moment, causing a further rift in the marriage.
Mooney also says that since divorce is so high, couples are keeping finances separate “just in case.” I also don’t like that approach. I know I’ll probably take some flack for this, but I don’t like assuming failure.
Power Imbalanced Couples
These days there’s a lot of talk about fairness in marriage. Men and women split household chores 50/50. Each is supposed to take equal time off work to care for sick children.
In reality, marriage is never a 50/50 split. Since when was life fair? Don’t we tell our children to get used to the fact that life isn’t fair? When I was newly married, someone gave me the best marriage advice I’ve ever heard. She said,
Marriage isn’t a 50/50 partnership. It’s a 100/100 partnership. There will be times your spouse doesn’t give anything, and you have to be willing to give 100%. There will also be times when you don’t feel like giving anything, and your spouse will have to give 100%.
And it’s true. Marriage can’t be reduced to a set of rules and standards. Marriage isn’t about “me & you” or “my rights & your rights.” Marriage is about “us.” What’s best for us. The commitment to us. One quote from this chapter really bothered me.
“I hate, hate, hate that, even if I’m working, I can barely contribute,” says Vickie, and adjunct college professor and freelance writer who makes $20,000 a year and whose husband supports them both on his $90,000 salary as a software engineer. “He could get by if I wasn’t there, but I’m entirely dependent on him. Even though I’ve worked just as hard to build a career. It’s very difficult to accept that I can’t get by without him. It’s not how I was raised or, I like to think, who I am.”
That saddens me. I can’t imagine feeling that way in marriage. My husband, up until recently, has made 100% of our income. I think this chapter is more telling about the state of marriage today than about economics of the middle class. And it’s a sad statement. Marriage isn’t a competition as to who can contribute more financially.
This chapter depressed me, not because the middle class can’t afford to live anymore, but because marriage, according to this book, has become less of a sacred union between two people and more of an economic convenience.
Stay tuned next Monday when I cover the second half of the chapter, which focuses on raising children.
What do you think about these issues? Is Mooney spot on? Is she way off? What does this say about the state of marriage in today’s society?
To read previous posts in this series, see
- (Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents
- The Rise and Fall of the Middle Class
- The Cost of a College Education
- Career Struggles
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
You Might Also Like
- (Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents: The Decision to Have Children
- (Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents: Health Care
- (Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents: Credit Card Debt
Comments
40 Responses to “(Not) Keeping Up With Our Parents: Marriage”
Trackbacks
Leave a Reply
Subscribe! It's Free!
Categories
Blogrolls
Resources
Being Frugal's Policies
I am not a financial expert. I'm just a wife and mom doing the best I can to live a frugal life and get out of debt. Like any human, I make mistakes. I write this blog out of my own experiences, and nothing I write should be taken as expert advice. If you need financial advice, please consult a professional.
Disclosure, Comment, Link Exchange, and Privacy PoliciesLinks
The Best of Being Frugal
What I'm Reading
More Links
Hmm.
I saw a TV clip of Suze Orman answering questions from a studio audience. One engaged couple asked, “How should we handle our two incomes to pay our bills?”
Before Suze said anything else, she said, “You have a pre-nup, right? Always get a pre-nup!”
Then, she said a couple splits their expenses as a percentage of their income. For example, if husband earns $50k and wife earns $40k, they make $90k altogether. Husband pays 5/9ths of the bills, and wife pays 4/9ths.
I don’t know much about Suze Orman, but it was this response that made me think, “Wow. I definitely don’t want to read your books now.”
I just completely disagree with everything she said, that’s all.
I can totally understand everything that was said, especially the quote from the book. Every once in a while I get into a funky mood where I feel like I’ve given up so much of myself to be in my marriage that I wonder how much he’s compromised for it, but it always passes. What’s important to me is my husband, marriage is more of a formality. (Neither of us is highly religious, but we both dislike divorce. We got married with the full understanding of the lifetime commitment.) I guess my issue is just one that stems from getting married young and not having my own “independent phase.” That’s something different from this, I think.
When we first got married, my husband paid for EVERYTHING. He even paid the gas I put on my credit card, as well as a couple student loan payments. The only thing separate about our finances is where his money is deposited and where mine is deposited and what’s done to it. Marriage is definitely 100/100, I think the couples who don’t realize that don’t make it in the end.
Those who get married thinking about divorce seem to be setting themselves up for failure. You can create your own future, whether it’s pleasant or not is up to you.
One last thing is that I have found my marriage to be rather economical. While I have to take on a lot of student loan debt, I’m counting on my husband to continue paying the bills so I can eliminate that as quickly as possible. I can do more financially as a couple than either of us could on our own; we combined my financial management with his salary and it works for us. I surely didn’t marry for money, but I also feel financially secure in my marriage. (Though one of the arguments my Mom and hubby had for getting married right away was the health insurance. Honestly, I’m really glad we did it too, I’ve used that insurance quite a bit in the past year and some!)
Great review.. I fully agree with your point of view. Bravo!
My fiancee and I are getting married this week… so this really hit home. We already live together and have combined finances so that’s not an issue for us. I make about 80% of our income… and sometimes she thinks because she doesn’t make very much money that she doesn’t contribute as much to the relationship. I remind her that it’s no longer you and I contributing… it’s what WE contribute.
Great post!
I agree with your post,too, Lynnae. I believe nowadays it’s all about the values of the society that are determining how a lot of marriages or “non-marriages” are. You’re right, marriage is a union. It should be all about what’s best for us as a couple and a family, not about “me, me, me”. It’s so sad to me to see so many marriages break up and so many couples with a lack of commitment. What kind of marriage is it when each person is more concerned with keeping their independence? Separate finances are a recipe for disaster, because then each one will be more concerned with what’s “mine” and maybe bring resentment when things are sometimes uneven. Together, the finances and the marriage can have common goals and a united path.
To me, the greatest security for me is that my husband loves me and will sacrifice for me, and it doesn’t matter to him whether I contribute financially or not, because I love him and I contribute in my own way, making a home for him, and taking care of the children. And we share in responsibility in all of it, with him helping with the house and kids sometimes and with me taking care of the day-to-day financial bookkeeping.
It’s a shame more couples today don’t see the beauty and the contentment of walking the road of life together.
This was a very interesting post. I’m getting married in a few months. We’re both in our 30s, and I definitely did not feel pressured to get married because of finances. However, we did move in together after we got engaged because it made things much easier financially. By having only one rent payment, one set of utilities, etc. we are able to put more money in savings for the wedding, a home, etc.
We opened up a joint account to save for our future goals and have kept our individual bank accounts for everything else. We will be combining everything after the wedding. I agree that keeping separate finances in a marriage is sort of like assuming failure. If you have good communication and trust, there shouldn’t be an issue.
I think you’re absolutely dead on here. When you get married, you combine homes, finances, families, good, bad, and indifferent. If you hold pieces back… you’re setting up for failure.
I think society does push us into marriage. If you ever want a house, you have to have a few incomes contributing to it. I think our society should be structured so people can live off one income in a modest house with a modest lifestyle.
My husband and I use separate bank accounts for bill paying. However, they are both JOINT accounts. But he chooses to use our BoA account while I prefer to keep my NFCU account active. However, we both write checks out of each others checkbooks and divide bill paying simply according to who has more money at whatever time. Sometimes the mortgage is paid from BoA, sometimes from NFCU. Sometimes his Visa is paid from NFCU, sometimes from BoA - it just depends on who is writing the checks that particular day. This system has worked successfully for us for the 12 years we’ve been married.
I’m with you all the way, Lynnae! (hey, that rhymes
I give you a lot of credit for continuing with this book through your many disagreements with the author. I would have gotten mad and thrown it in the trash long ago (ok, I would have recycled it, but you get the picture).
I just got married last year, and though our finances are much better together, it had nothing to do with our decision to marry. We also have combined finances. I think the author is way off here
I also find that woman’s quote to be really sad. I am in a very similar boat (my husband is even a software engineer), but I’m GLAD that my husband makes so much more than me. It makes it a lot easier to become a stay-at-home mom knowing that we don’t need my income, anyway!
My husband and I have been married almost 19 years and we counsel engaged couples from our church who are planning to get married. The topic we addressed yesterday with our young couple was finances and we explored many of your points. Our first point is always, like you, marriage is 100%/100%. That’s key to prevent many problems down the road. We sit down with couples and show them how to budget and keep track of the their income and expenses on paper. Not many parents I’ve ever met actually sit down with their kids and truly give a lesson on how to manage finances, so it’s sort of a relief when we do this with our couples.
Like you, we also stress having joint finances regardless of paycheck differences, but with equal amounts of discretionary funds for each person for their hobbies. The most difficult part of point for me personally is that I only worked for a few years bringing home a paycheck (which we used to pay off every loan we had including our mortgage and becoming debt free by age 25) before I become a stay at home mother. My dad was and still is very controlling of my mom’s discretionary spending as she also did not bring home a paycheck for most of their marriage. Even though my husband is quite encouraging of me, I have an extraordinarily difficult time spending money on something that is not for the children or the household. Your family of origin makes quite a deep impression on you and your way of viewing the world.
I love reading your blog, and have referred several other people to it–keep up the great posts!!
The thing is, there are many ways besides finances to contribute to a marriage. Even though I don’t bring much money into our household, I love that I can take care of the household chores, take care of the checking account, and run all the errands, so my husband and I can both have a true weekend, rather than filling our weekend with housework. I love that my kids know if they have a special thing during the school day that at least one of their parents will be there. My husband has never questioned my contribution to our marriage. Neither have I, for that matter.
@JB & @Kristen - Congratulations on your upcoming marriages!
I’m glad you counsel couples of financial management. My husband and I didn’t have a clue when we got married! LOL
And I have a hard time spending money on myself, too. I’m not sure whether that’s a parental influence thing or a woman as nurturer thing. I always see everyone else’s needs, and tend to try to fill them before thinking about what I need.
Though the points in this post are well taken, I do want to point out that the origins of the institute of marriage were financial and political, not romantic.
Here’s an ‘older’ divorced perspective - I think whether the finances are together or divided has to do a lot with your ages and whether this is a first or later marriage. In a later marriage - my kids are all grown and I have grandkids - you want to still protect your kids’ inheiritance (their father has already passed on). My boyfriend also has kids/grandkids and the same situation. Therefore, we would probably keep some things separate for that reason, but would have a joint account with contributions for the bills, etc.
Financial considerations are not entering into this at all - I have my own house while making under $20,000 (parttime, by choice) and live very comfortably, tho frugally. It is possible to have a decent home on a single income!
What is more of a consideration is TIME… right now we are maintaining two homes, all the upkeep that goes into that, mowing two lawns, weeding two gardens, maintaining two cars and two pickup trucks, all the travel between places, fixing separate meals (sometimes) when one would suffice… all those things timewise that we do double when we could do them singly and be done with it.
So, marriage for financial reasons doesn’t enter into my thoughts - but marriage for TIME reasons would! I guess the older one gets the more precious TIME is to us
I enjoy these forums! Thanks for the opportunity for us all to see and ponder over other viewpoints!
However sad or irrational, feelings of inadequacy due to non-contribution to the family finances are very real to the person having them. As primary wage-earner before the kids, I was happy and proud to carry the load while my husband built his career. Since leaving the workforce, I am now subservient and powerless, and totally bewildered by those friends who advise me to “treat” myself and “take credit” for the work I do at home. I homeschool the kids, keep the house (hubby does 0% housework), and track the bills, yet feel terrible about asking for gas money. He smokes $30 worth of cigarettes a week, yet I wear clothing from high school and holey underwear. None of this makes sense on paper; I must seem like a college-educated chambermaid. NOW HEAR THIS: I chose my path - and my husband - and I am faithful to both. Walk a mile in my moccasins, friends - I get to play with and teach the two most wonderful people in the world, all day long. I make my own hours, commute downstairs, work in my pajamas if I want to. I get free room and board, and sometimes a movie date. The reality is that someday, this will all change - nothing stays the same for long, you know. My husband might lose his job, or crack under the pressure (why do you think he smokes so much?) or I might resume my career, or start a new one, or die unexpectedly with a big smile on my face. Newlyweds, make a plan that works for you now, stick to it, revise it when you need to, and have faith. That and patience will carry you over many rough waters (and baby, it’s rough out here). Nobody survives for long without the ability to adapt.
Good post. I think everyone has their own way of managing $ in their marriage so I can’t really say what way is better.
But it’s sad to say that sometimes I do think if my bf and I would get married, how much money I would save by having someone else pay for 1/2 of the bills.
Sad to say that marriage traditionally was more of an economic arrangement than one from the heart. Look around at the 3rd World - or even the Muslim world to see how the “old” system operates/d! Marriage as a partnership was a revolutionary, mostly Western phenomenon - with which I heartily agree - despte the fact that I live in L.A. - land of “trophy wives” & pre-nups galore! (When I revealed to a colleague that I hadn’t made up one - he thought I was foolish & I thought I was bringing what I had into the marriage to share with my husband, whom I loved and trusted.)
That said, I did once marry a live-in boyfriend who should have remained such for the health ins. coverage for him as a spouse!! (Big mistake - he never was a husband, just a boyfriend - ugh. Oh, & for a long time I supported the BOTH of us with 3 jobs!)It’s always been harder for single people, unless one is very affluent. That hasn’t changed much - altho we seem to expect the affluence & its privileges as a given.
I came froma family where everyone married for love - and was frankly shocked to go out into the bigger world & see how many crass financial calculations went into marriages. My aunt used to say that “it was just as easy to marry a rich man as a poor man,” whether or not that was true! Whereas in my nuclear family we were looking for soul mates with whom we could buid something. Took me years, but that’s what I have now. And yes, it’s the best way. Good marriages are wonderful & bad ones are hell.
Very interesting, I’d love to know more about how 1 income couples manage the finances. In my, admitly very small sample, most housewives I talk to leave it all to the husband, most are clueless the money and the finances. I asked a friend a few basic money questions and it quickly became very clear she was totally out of the loop. In this day and age that is a dangerous position to be in. Not only from a divorce point of view but even from a money management point of view. Women are not only better drivers, they are also better investors.
Jill I hope you have loads of life insurance! In your situation one income should your husband die you’ll quickly find yourself in a situation where you need to work 3 jobs just to stay at poverty level while your kids get raised by the TV. This isn’t a SAHM vs Working Mom but PF 101. Having enough life insurance to cover his wage should he die. Else keep your skills current that you could re-enter the work force to replace his wage.
It’s an unfortunately reality that Christians divorce just as fast as non Christians, divorce has total lost its stigma in the church today.
In our situation, totally uplanned as it was, my wife is the main wage earner and I am the one who handles the finaces, I always make the point of keeping her upto date. We’re very fortunatly that we’ve always been on the same page money wise.
There can be real value in having separate financial identities (his and hers).
What if something should happen to one’s spouse and you needed to divorce them so that they could get Medicaid? You wouldn’t want to have just one bank account (Jim divorced Debbie Shank when her vehicle was hit by a truck leaving her unable to care for herself. He had to, it was the only way she could be eligible for Medicaid, other than him bankrupting himself, which would have left him unable to care for their children).
The reality is that in today’s world, anything can happen, and because of the complications of an overly financially engineered world, a spouse could be left without a way to access needed credit to care for their children, while grieving, and trying to put their life back together.
Building in financial contingency plans need not be about planing for divorce (I don’t know if the author of the book, is giving that as his only reason).
Interesting post. I’ve always viewed marriage as a partnership as well but when it comes to money, I honestly believe you work as a team, so you share the pot. If one makes more than another, it shouldn’t really matter! I thought a marriage was to be with that person the rest of your life.
Funny, for many folks I’ve known, I’ve seen marriage put a strain on finances, not secure them. But I really don’t think, at least I HOPE, people are not getting married solely to be financially secure! That’s a shaky foundation!
I’m glad you put in the bit about marriage being 100/100. Should even be 110/110%! I’ve heard people voice marriage being 50/50, and that just doesn’t sit right with me. Marriage is a union (that’s why it’s called marriage)! Two are one now. There shouldn’t be a competition of who’s making the most money or the mindset of “This is my money in this pot. Yours goes over there in that pot.”
As I always remind my husband, “My money is my money, and your money is my money…” Echem…
Wait! I mean…
I think if I married in my early twenties, I would have similar views as you do. To be honest, I think you have a very myopic view of marriage. Perhaps you just don’t understand why a couple would keep their money separate and that it could actually work well.
My husband and I married in our 30s and we do split almost everything 50/50. It works fabulously for us. We get along great and have been together 9 years. We have separate bank accounts and a joint one for shared expenses. Each month we both contribute to the collective expenses account and the rest is that person’s money. I don’t care what he spends it on, as long as we’ve covered our bills and savings.
We came to an agreement on our budget and savings strategy together, and it works great. We do not do it to assume failure or just in case. We do it because it’s easier to manage and then we know exactly how much is coming in and going out each month, and also that each of us is contributing half to the household expenses. This way of doing things is really about true partnership and commitment.
I don’t care if you agree with this philosophy, but I wanted to say that there are people out there who employ it, who are happy and have great marriages. It may not work for you, but there are many of us for whom it could never be any other way.
Just as you say: “Marriage is about ‘us.’ What’s best for us. The commitment to us.” We agree with you, but we just execute “commitment” differently than you do. For “us” this works great!
I agree with Allison, my partner and I met age 24 and 25 and had been living very independent lives. We are very happy with our current system which is entirely separate accounts.
I don’t see us getting a joint account unless we buy a house or have children. We try and split things as evenly as we can; he works longer hours and earns more so pays a little more than 50% of the bills and I do a little more than 50% of the housework.
I understand things would be very different if one was a SAHP.
I also don’t really understand why the quote saddens you- I take it to mean that the person wishes they were able to contribute more. If you are a very independent person, used to standing on your own, it can be hard to realise that that is no longer the case, I don’t think it is about turning marriage into a competition.
thought I’d re-word my comment (negative to commenting is you can’t preview it)
One of the most forgotten subjects in PF is life insurance. In a one income household the lose of the primary income can be devastating, even more so when the wife (more commonly) has chosen to give up a carrier for motherhood. In Jill’s case with a husband who is a smoker and under alot of stress it’s even more essential. I understand that no one likes to think about this bu it’s an important part of any financial plan.
I love the quote about marriage being 100 100, perhaps more common is75 and 150 and I won’t say who gives more
Thanks for worrying about me, Rob (I’ll bet you know a lot about insurance!) and, yes, we are covered. Remember, I was the primary wage earner before kids, and I’ve had to become just about the best financial-planner I know! I have not one but several back-up plans, should anything happen to our income. I may not be at the top of my game anymore, but I’m certainly employable - and I think that next time, I’ll be the boss (heck, I’ve been running this “company” for ten years). I suppose I’ve given too much personal info and gotten way off-subject: I wanted to emphasize that marriage cannot be static and inflexible. Allison’s arrangement works perfectly for them, ours works for us, and both will surely change many times in our lives. Young marrieds should be counseled that the ride is bumpy, so keep your knees bent - remain flexible, and steadfast. Too many marriages crash and burn when hit with adversity.
I absolutely agree with the person who commented that said how you are raised and what you saw growing up influences how you feel about this. Growing up in the 70s I watched my mom…a stay at home mom who raised 5 kids. She was totally dependent on my father. That was fine until he started cheating on her in a long time affair. They never split up, even though the affair was well-known. I watched my mom be miserable for years until she died, simply because she had no idea how to support herself at that point and felt she didn’t “deserve” the house and money since she had never contributed financially. That made a HUGE impact on me. I knew, even at a very early age, that I NEVER wanted to be forced to stay in a bad situation because of financial reasons. My husband and I have now been married for 27 years and have a really good marriage, but I’ve always tried to keep some sense of independence. And I stress over and over again to my 20 year old daughter how important it is to be able to take care of herself. I never want her to be totally dependent on someone else. This isn’t to say that I would be opposed to her being a SAHM while her husband works, I just want to make sure she protects herself should disaster happen down the road. I don’t quite understand why you take such offense to the author’s point of view. To me, this isn’t “unromantic” advice. This is practical financial advice.
in response to “Do people feel pressure to marry for financial security today?”
anymore if you want to buy a house, you pretty much have to have dual incomes to make the payment. and i’m not talking subprime loans, i’m talking even for a basic 15 or 30 year fixed loan.
Dual income is NOT a prerequisite for buying a house. I’m living proof of it. I have bought two homes in the past 12 years - both on my own single income, of UNDER $20,000/year.
Granted, you are not going to get the fanciest home on the block - but the first was brand new, an over 1000 sq ft. 3 bedroom, 2 bath, garage,on two wooded lots. I paid it off in under 10 years. I used a first time home buyer, low down payment, and low income type loan to buy it.
The second one was a major fixer upper -and as an over 50 single woman, I have learned to sheet rock, trim, paint, and put down wood laminate flooring, and even tile. A lot of the remodeling supplies have come from garage sales. Altho it’s NOT fun to live in a construction zone! It’s been remodeled, cash as I went along, and has expanded from 560 to 1035 sq ft. I’m 2 1/2 years into it and expect to have it paid off, including the remodeling, within 5 years of buying it.
It CAN be done on one income. Don’t give up hope! Work with a good realtor, give her your realalistic budget, and look for owner contracts, estate sales, or foreclosures. Be willing to put a lot of elbow grease into the formula,be willing to check out books and videos from the library to learn the new skills you need, remember to ask friends and family if you need construction advice, accept ALL free labor
and you CAN do it!
If I, an over 50 woman on a low income can do it, you can do it! Just keep a positive attitude!
Hey, Marci - where do you live? It depends a lot upon the area…Can do that in the L.A. areaa, that’s for sure!
Answering the question
…..
Everyone has a choice about where they choose to live, and the right to live where they please.
That’s why I wouldn’t live in LA
So, I live in “Moo-Town” - aka Tillamook, Oregon - Rural north coastal Oregon….
It’s a matter of living where I get the most bang for the buck - my money goes a lot further here.
I could have done it in the Portland, OR area, but I didn’t like big city living. That’s why I didn’t stay there long, even tho the jobs paid more, and I moved back to the coast
Wages are less here, I dropped $4.50 per hour by moving here, but the money goes a lot further.
(of course it may go further because there’s no place to spend it….)
And my garden grows a lot better here also.
The ratio of my housing expenses to income dropped, but it’s probably offset by groceries and gas and everything else being higher as it’s trucked in 80 miles from Portland.
Back to the basics
by necessity - but also because I hate wasting my money 
This little house and all the elbow grease is in the $200,000 to $225,000 range. Just for reference. I’m just saying it CAN be done on one little income - but it’s NOT easy! There’s a lot of what other people would consider doing without - like no TV/Cable - but I don’t feel like I’m missing that at all. I’ve enjoyed learning the construction stuff this past year and a half
Hope you find something in your neck of the woods that you can do the same with
I totally agree with your post. It has long made me cringe to hear about couples who have separate bank accounts. It does say “I’m planning for the divorce”. It plans for the failure of the marriage and that really bugs me.
I do follow Suze Orman, and think that most of what she says makes a lot of sense. But when she talks about how you should keep your finances separate, it really bothers me.
I agree with all of your marriage comments. It is 100/100.
I totally agree with your post. It has long made me cringe to hear about couples who have separate bank accounts. It does say “I’m planning for the divorce”. It plans for the failure of the marriage and that really bugs me.
I do follow Suze Orman, and think that most of what she says makes a lot of sense. But when she talks about how you should keep your finances separate, it really bothers me.
I agree with all of your marriage comments. It is 100/100.
I’m a stay at home Mom with 2 kids and I’m saying that it may be hard to do it on one income, but it is so worth it. It also helps to be married to the most wonderful, giving, and supportive man out there.
JD over at GRS posted an interesting article which typifies the what the book is exactly talking about
to quote: Rising heating oil and gas prices this winter may make life especially tough for workers in low-paying service and retail positions, which now dominate a local economy that has lost many of its higher-paying manufacturing jobs.
It goes on to say, and I’ve read this else where, that many people are relying on credit to make ends meet.
My sister in law felt like the lady you quoted about relying on her husband, she went back to work because she hated being dependent on Jon for everything, But that had to do more with the fact they had a miserable marriage than anything.
I agree that marriage should be 100/100 and the decision should never be influenced by money. However I personally always want to contribute something financially and maintain some financial independence from my spouse - not to “plan for divorce” because we believe that marriage is forever, but to do it for me. Some might think this is selfish but I always want to earn and keep something for myself, not necessarily to spend, but to decide for myself what to do with it. I want my husband to have the same choice. Like Allison said, this works for us and in no way do I agree that separate accounts is a “plan for divorce”, that idea makes me sad and depressed.
For most of human history, marriage has been more of a civil contract than a “sacred union” or “two people becoming one”–the latter are more modern ideas about marriage in an age when it is easier than ever for an adult to make a paycheck, particularly if she is a woman. For that matter, the ideal of marriage as being a sacred union where two become one seems to be mostly limited to some strains of Christianity. It also spills over into some secular marriages, but they’re taking their cues from the Christians. I’m not saying it’s right or it’s wrong, just that it *is.*
And, well, in any situation where you are entering a contractual kind of arrangement with another person, you really should protect yourself. This is true in business, for instance, even though the *ideal* is that a businessman should never cheat a customer–they do it anyway, so buyer beware. Likewise in marriage, the *ideal* is that no one should betray their spouse–but this happens. Also, spouses die. In either case the affected spouse should be prepared to deal with the outcome.
I don’t see it as courting failure. I see it as being smart.
Now, as for people being pressured into marriage for financial reasons, it happens. I feel the pressure myself. If I got married I would have more legal rights where my little girl’s father is concerned, including the right to healthcare coverage (I could get it through the state, I think, but let’s not get into substandard state care or what the public thinks of me “freeloading” in that way). I’m resisting mightily, though, because he hasn’t been the best partner in the past–we would still be together if he had. I need more than just the financial security. If things took a turn for the worse, though… I might feel differently.
I can’t be the only one out there facing this, either. It’s pretty sad when going to the state with your hand out or marrying someone who wouldn’t make a good spouse are your best options.
It’s weird but maybe we did marry for sort of financial reasons.
We’d been together for nearly a decade and friends longer. We didn’t feel the need to marry at all as we were quite content in personal commitment rather than ceremonial/legal contracts. But when we looked seriously at starting a family we realized that it made the most sense to marry. It was an issue of consistent insurance coverage, surnames, lots of legal and financial matters. While we could have maintained independence it was just easier and made more sense to tie our fortunes (so to speak) together.
Although we’re very happy and have no intention or desire at all to ever dissolve our marriage, we’ve agreed it isn’t even an option until the kids are independent.
It’s strange, I suppose, but romance, commitment and love are separate from this entirely. We have all of that. Money is just a matter of sensibility.
I’ve never heard of anyone getting married for financial reasons before. I agree that going into a marriage with the “just in case” idea, instead of being more optimistic is a bad idea. However being young and unmarried myself I understand where the anxiety comes from. I grew up in a small town in CA and my parents were married (and still are) and all of my friends had parents in the same situation, but when I left and went to college almost all of the new friends I made had parents who were divorced (and they tried to convince me that all of the married couples that I knew must be unhappy). I don’t understand what makes a marriage ultimately successful or unsuccessful but I will say that the statistic of over 50% of marriages failing is VERY SCARY.
I have heard of people to change status from boyfriend/girlfriend to married couple also for financial reasons, because living and paying taxes together does save money. Before tying the knot, however, the couple should speak extensively about money and children: their mutual expectations of work, shared time and expenses, as well as about if they want children and how they would want raise them. To prenups: If you don’t have one, you still have a marriage contract, and it contains exactly what the state law says at the time of any divorce or death. You might want to inform you if you like what the state law says, and, if not, modify it with a prenup. For example, I wouldn’t like to live in a community property state like California without a prenup.