Woman Asks Husband To Cover All Of Her Financial Loss When Caring For Their Baby, He’s Shocked And Lost
Interview
Expecting a baby is no easy task. There is a crazy amount of medical bills, changes to your body, as well as lifestyle and mental health. On top of that, caring for a whole new human being, however rewarding this experience may be for both parents, requires some sacrifices. And, of course, you want your partner to be there with you, taking on an equal share of the year-long burden.
When a possibly expecting woman decided to propose a fully-baked financial plan to her husband, getting down to the brass tacks of pregnancy costs, it naturally left him baffled. After all, celebrating this little miracle by negotiating finances isn’t the most romantic way of doing things. However, considering how taxing this whole period can be for soon-to-be mothers, taking extra precautions shouldn’t be all that surprising; on the contrary — it should be admired.
Not sure what should be an appropriate reaction to the wife’s extra-detailed proposition, the husband turned to the internet to seek the perspective of others.
Becoming a mother is no walk in the park — there are physical and emotional transformations, let alone the excessive amount of medical bills
Image credits: cottonbro (not the actual photo)
By now, it’s no secret that the second richest nation in the world, America, has one of the worst maternity leave deals — four paid weeks, while 185 countries provide new mothers with 29 paid weeks on average. So, besides having to worry about the medical bills, spending a big chunk of your savings on baby clothing, cribs, nappies and whatnot — there’s also the anxiety that comes with not knowing how to navigate the financial labyrinth that pregnancy presents.
This is the worry that more than 50% of soon-to-be mothers share. The worst part: financial anxiety can also cause indirect harm to the baby, as it increases the odds of bringing a child with a low birth-weight, which can cause some serious health issues in the long run.
To find out how parents can reduce financial anxiety before bringing their little bundle of joy into the world, Bored Panda has reached out to Dee Lee, the founder of Harvard Financial Educators. She says the most common mistake an expecting parent makes has an effect on their IRAs or 401k plans. “They stop saving for their retirement,” Lee told us. Although the recently established SECURE Act allows parents in the US to withdraw up to $5,000 out of their retirement funds following the birth of a child without there being any financial penalty, Dee thinks there are better ways to prepare for parenthood without sacrificing the financial stability of your future-self.
And it shouldn’t be surprising why some soon-to-be mothers expect to split the load equally with their partners
Image credits: husbandmaybefather
Image credits: husbandmaybefather
Being a mother herself, Dee knows very well how financially challenging being a parent of a newborn is. According to her, in order to navigate this sleepless and expensive chapter of your life without breaking into million little pieces, it’s important to change your spending habits. “Give up the [regular] stop to get coffee in the morning and take public transportation. Small things can make a difference,” Lee suggested.
Among her many recommendations, Dee highlights the importance of having a support system that lies on the shoulders of your friends and family. She then gave a perfect example of what she means by that: “[Once] I traded babysitting with a friend — she worked days and I worked 3 to 11 at a hospital. Childcare solved!” As we argued in our post about babysitting, nowadays it’s a very costly affair. Using your friend or a relative as a babysitter can save that extra money for your child’s college funds. Plus, you’ll know your little munchkin is in good hands.
Finally, there are the hand-me-downs. According to Dee, parents should start looking at second-hand shops and yard sales if they want to save some money. “Look for friends willing to give you their old stuff. A baby doesn’t know if their clothes are from a thrift shop,” she explained. After all, this is the way Dee helped her siblings when the time was right. “I had my children first, so the baby crib and [other] furniture I passed down to the families of my siblings.”
So before you start losing your hair over finances or drain your retirement funds, look around you first — there’ll be many sleep-deprived couples in the same situation. And if there’s one thing we know about stressful situations — there isn’t a better incentive to share and support one another.
People couldn’t believe how carefree and immature the author is
Image credits: TxPRGirl
Image credits: eponymous
Image credits: ksMetalArtist
Image credits: PoppyPersephone
Image credits: simply_rassy
Image credits: tressiemcphd
Image credits: AvDoesWhat
Image credits: NatDelCast
Image credits: tressiemcphd
Image credits: Fly_Sistah
Image credits: ProteanIntl
Image credits: DiannetheWriter
Image credits: cynthiasaysboo
Image credits: AnxiousPenman
Image credits: AnxiousPenman
Image credits: HelenHuntingdon
Image credits: EmmyLou117
Image credits: Snailchick
She's right! If they're splitting all expenses then they should split the cost of the pregnancy, including medical expenses, and whatever income is lost. If she loses 50% of her salary then he should turn over half of what she's losing, so the difference is shared, and if he loses income by taking paternity leave then that should be calculated into the differential. It's all very easy to calculate and it should be calculated, because if you're going to keep splitting finances... there's no reason in hell that she should be the only one to bear the pregnancy-related expenses. It's not "paying her to have a child", it's splitting the cost of having a child.
And you also have to factor in how pregnancy will impact her health, lost income from having her career stalled and diminished retirement/investments contributions. He's getting a good deal overall.
Load More Replies...
At first, her request sound ridiculous, but her "spiritual husband" agreed to have separate finances and a business-like relationship, so I say: pay up, buddy! On a personal note, having separate finances and keeping books on everything in a relationship seems such a strange, and unhealthy concept to me.
I agree about it being strange and unhealthy but then again I'm poor. LOL! I've been with my fiance for almost 15 years, engaged for 10. Our money is our money. There is no your money or my money. It's all of our money because we are a family.
Load More Replies...
Totally with the wife on this one. I don't know what the law is in the US for unmarried parents - presumably he'd have to pay some sort of upkeep for his children? But if they are not married then if they split, what would happen to the house? Other assets? This thread makes it quite clear what women have to sacrifice to have children. Laying it all out like that really makes you think - and his reaction is typical. If it was the man who had to sacrifice all this, how different it would be. There would be less kids in the world that's for sure! Huge thanks to the OP and his wife for opening people's eyes.
And what happens if her health is permanently damaged from the pregnancy? That happens.
Load More Replies...
This woman is a genius. All women need to do this. Women are expected to lose their income or not have children. This affects us in the long term as our state pensions are lower as we had to take time off to rear children and didn't pay as much taxes. Our bodies are also ruined and give life long medical issues from pregnancy. Majority of the time it's ALWAYS the woman sacrificing everything in her life for the kids and family, and the man sacrifices nothing - usually he actually complains about the minimal things he's asked to contribute. What she's proposing is a proper, equal, 50/50 approach to raising a child together - something women rarely do because we're socially and culturally conditioned to be a doormat for the propagation of the species. This woman deserves a fuc*ing medal and should be doing Brene Brown style TEDTalks for women. Men, sit up and pay attention, this is the fuc*ing future!
She's a genius. Having a baby is a massive strain for a woman, physically, emotionally and financially. If he wants to have kids with her, it's only right that he shares the burden in some way.
I kind of understand why it feels cold, however the OP is happy being unbouded from her. He's literally happy he can walk away from it all, without too much consequences. She's the one that has to carry the child, take the risks and suffer salary loss, and if he decides to bail she's stuck with childcare, most likely. I applaud her business stance in this, because he's clearly on the "everything will work out fine in the end"-cloud which only applies to him.
her independency is part of why he is attracted to her. But when she uses it, it's a bit of a turn off. Maybe you should look at what it would cost if you asked a 3rd party to carry your kid for you. Maybe she would do it for less than your wife and maybe your wife will prefer it too.
I SO wish men could physically get pregnant and have babies. Then we'd REALLY see some change!
Load More Replies...
If you both idolize being independent so much and define ypurselves so deeply by having a high paying job - please, please do not have children together! It will only make you unhappy. Enjoy this spiritual marriage for as long as it may hold, have fun, do some travelling together and have an easy split when the time comes. You cannot remain two absolutely fabulous unrestricted individuals if you bring a tiny helpless human being into this world together. And you cannot keep costs apart if you intend to become a family. "Let's go grap a pizza!" "Only if you pay for the boy!" "But I already paid his school lunch yesterday!" "Correct, but I bought him new winter shoes last week and they were more expensive!" Please. Just. Don't.
No s**t Sherlock, when you want a woman to have your child you should support her financially. What a douche. But both of them are so materialistic, this "marriage" is doomed to fail, or at the very least they will likely damage any child they might have.
I agree but I don't think it is fair to say they are materialistic, just financially conscious. It is basic financial planning on her part and I think more women should think about these sorts for things. There is a reason why so many women make significantly less than men and childbearing is one of the top reasons. Takes years to catch up professionally after having a child.
Load More Replies...
WTF is this? I feel like I have just read a financial report. What is the point of being together at all?
He says he doesn't want to pay her for having his child. But he wanted to keep the financials separate and she is the one taking the hit. So by not supporting her he is asking HER to pay for the child by losing out on 6 months of income and another 6 months at 50%. So basically she ends up being the one paying to have his child. But I guess women are expected to take the hit and smile about it. He's also gross talking about how he wants to cover himself if he wants to walk away. Like, here lady have my child, pay for it and when I get bored look after it while I go find someone else. He wants to have his cake and eat it.
So he's okay splitting the costs, until he is presented with the actual cost of pregnancy and childbirth, rather than just the cost of baby clothes and diapers?
Also it's very telling how cold this relationship is that they keep everything separate. This couple should not have kids. Period.
I don't think so. I keep everything separate with my husband and it works great. Never once in 14 years had an argument about money. Our parents did things the traditional way and my parents have 15 marriages when you combine them. My mother finally married someone who didn't add her to his account and she has never been happier or in a longer marriage. I don't think it is cold at all. They split things and she is going to take a hit for having a baby and she thought of a way to address that. You know what is cold? My dad returning from Iraq and finding out my mother had $175K in credit card debt, then leaving him to run off with a farrier she bankrupted. Or the endless amounts of women who can't afford housing and healthcare because they don't have social security after leaving the workforce to have kids and then their husband leave them once the kids are grown.
Load More Replies... This is a classic issue with the gender gap. Women take a huge financial hit and this dude is shocked because this woman took the time to calculate the minimum cost of that. She didn't even include the potential loss of wages from being out of the workforce for up to a year. That means she is risking being passed up for promotions. I would say this seems extreme, but not given their current division and how their relationship is. For instance, is she still expected to split the cost of everything when she is not working? I have been with my husband for 14 years and we don't have any shared accounts but I make more so I pay more bills, when he made more he paid more. When we have a kid I am assuming he will be the one to leave the workforce if needed, and I was actually thinking of writing something up for him over that. Me putting money in a savings account for him since he won't be paying into social security and if anything happens to me then he will have retirement.
Good on you Ivana. My husband and I have joint bank accounts but I have always maintained separate accounts as well - that I am very honest with my husband about. I am self employed so it's extremely important to me that I personally have money set aside for my retirement. In the event we separate I will be entitled to a small portion of his but it wont be enough. Women of retirement age are the largest growing category of homeless because they sacrifice themselves, their careers and their future for their children and their partners. If my husband and I are still together (and I fully expect to be) then its an investment in OUR future. If not, I wont be left high and dry. Always take care of your own best interests because, if everything goes according to plan then that is ALSO in the best interests of your family.
Load More Replies... The last thing these two need is a child. This spiritual marriage crap is ridiculous. If everything is about the money to these two, they don't need to bring a baby into the world.
I don't agree with the opinion that keeping money separate is unhealthy or unnatural in a marriage. My husband and I have successfully done it for years. What's unhealthy is when couples are petty or nitpicking about it. We have never once sat down and calculated 50% of anything. He pays the utilities, I pay the insurance. I pay for groceries, he pays for restaurants. Sometimes he has a rough month and I pay some of his bills, and vice versa. Truthfully, I don't love the idea of a woman formally billing 50% of the cost of her pregnancy to her partner like it's a business arrangement. But I also don't think it should have come to that. He should have come to her first and said something like, "Hey, while you're on half salary, I'll cover all the mortgage and utilities, and let's talk about any other expenses we might want to redistribute."
Your finances are kept separate, did you expect her to basically pay for everything? I would also like more info, like is she asking him for that money in cash or is she saying that because she is making much less then he can pay for the babysitting, crib, etc? The least he can do is combine their finances for a couple years, with the stipulation that afterwards they split child-related costs down the middle if they go back to separate finances.
Not saying right or wrong. MY Spouse is my partner. We are a team. I would have never thought of this.
I think of my husband and I as a team but I make a lot more than him and when we have a kid he will be a stay-at-home father for a bit. I was going to compensate him for the loss of his income by putting money into retirement account for him. He is losing all that money from social security for not working so I wanted to make sure I could help offset his loss of income for those years. Yes I will be paying all the bills during that time but if we ever break up then he isn't left less financially secure for raising our kid. I kind of see this as the same deal. It is weird to me that people don't actually do a lot of financial planning for their partners when they are going about family planning in general. Never want my husband's sacrifice to end up hurting him in the long run. You show you care by ensuring they are taken care of.
Load More Replies...
This is just so stupid. The idea that you can create a family and have everything completely separate is ridiculous. If you must have two accounts maybe throw in a third and decide who puts how much in it based on the situation at the time. You will drive yourselves completely crazy as you count every nickel but you will keep up the mirage of being completely independent from any other people.
You should have 4 accounts. Joint checking for bills, joint savings for retirement that require both signatures to be touched and two individual accounts for personal spending that neither spouse can say anything about.
Load More Replies...
If at all, he should pay 25 % since the company pays 50 % and the other 50 % should be split equally between both. But best thing would be no child for this couple.
No. I don't think a 50/50 split is fare. Her body's going to change, she's got all the pain of pregnancy and labour. Equity Edited typo
Load More Replies... The best thing for this couple to do is not have kids. It's most important to actually want to bring and raise a child in this world. Making it a business plan does really seem gross, she's not wrong, but it feels like a purchase.
Please tell me these two are Accountants. What a glorious, loving marriage... Jesus 🙄....
She is right, however this union is doomed. This is not what marriage is about. No "yours" and "mine", but only "ours". If you're not a team with your spouse, pulling in the same direction, then you are doomed to failure. It's difficult enough when you are on the same page.
Frankly, I think they should not have kids, neither one. What happens if one should get cancer, or lose their high paying job? Do they get evicted/dumped because they can no longer support their half of the finances? What if the kid gets injured playing a sport that one of them encouraged? So many ways to fight because there is no ours in their life. Just mine and yours. That being said, both are apples. Her for expecting him to shoulder 100% of the 6 month financial hit, him for wanting her to take all the hits to have kids. I can see a break up and the kid playing them against each other, and a very screwed up child/children in the future if they procreate.
These two people completely missed the point of being "married" and "starting a family". He doesn't want to commit and she doesn't feel secure enough in the relationship to have a child without a back up plan. This is not the environment to bring children into. Not if, but when they break up that child will bare the brunt of the trauma.
I get where she's coming from, and I have no qualms with her approach. However, if she's already pregnant and this had never been brought up over their previous talks of having a child, I feel like she's been very manipulative. Well, the guys screwed no matter what he does if she's actually already pregnant. That's his fault for allowing common law marriage in the first place. I don't know how you can pretend to be "spiritually married" when you're ACTUALLY married in the eyes of the state. Me, personally, would never agree to this agreement of hers but he's not really in any position to refuse. Lol, what a sucker.
They aren't married in the eyes of the state. They had a pretend wedding to spiritually wed but no government papers were signed because he wants a non divorce requiring out in case things go south.
Load More Replies...
This is why most couples actually get married and pool their money. It makes sense. This was never an issue for my parents because there was no line between their finances. My mother was able to stay home for eight years.
Sounds more like roommates with benefits. If your roommate is having your kid I guess you should pay them. If this was a true marriage than it'd be a non issue since your funds are each other's. But that's only 3 months of his income, and it's not like you'll be vacationing soon so I'm sure your savings has more than enough. Time to grow up. The only thing my wife and I do separate is our taxes because being an expat and her dual citizenship makes it slightly confusing.
My question is why wouldn't he want to support the family he is creating? She can't work for obvious reasons so he would continue to take care of everything as he always has. Until she goes back to work. I'm baffled at his mindset on this. It just doesn't make since for either one of them to think they shouldn't have to continue maintaining themselves with or without having a child.
I do not think that he has reached the "We will be a family!" realization yet - and I am not sure he ever will. This is not a good idea.
Load More Replies...
It's a bit... transactional, as he puts it, but the wife is right. With separate finances the burden would be on her alone. She also sounds smart enough not to need her sister to suggest what she proposed. There is no such thing as "spiritual marriage" BTW.
I am in my mid 20s and im doing well in my career and i know ill do better than 175 k in late 20s ...but i didnt think so much about marriage and idk if the person i marry would like to keep his finances separate.. but the point is it dosent matter , even if my husband made significantly less than me i think ill not care, but definitely i would like to marry a person who would make me feel taken care of even if i was without penny .or if im in wheel chair .. if the wife had no doubts that she would be taken care of ..she would never have drafted a 16 page file . Please try to love the future mother of the child unconditionally.... And make her feel that ... If he was ready for the child he would have said yes without blinking if the case is about money ... And if a person loves her career she will also love her children
Load More Replies... He lost me at ‘spiritual marriage’. Not wanting to take responsibility for your life and the woman you are sharing it with. Not wanting to take care of her, apparently. This man does not love her, he wants a f**k buddy who he can abandon whenever he wants. Lazy and easygoing.
Formal marriage has a lot of strings attached which make it not optimal for people. This read as a couple that is realizing that having kids isn't worth it, the wife informing the husband in this case
Load More Replies... The title is wrong, they are not actually married (as written at the beginning of the original text).
My first thought was perhaps the woman doesn't actually want to have a baby with him, so she's giving him the binder as a sort of indirect refusal or deterrent. The request forces him to see the potential negative consequences of having a baby.
Why would she have agre dto go off birth control then? Makes no sense.
Load More Replies...
I'm a dude and I don't see anything wrong with this deal. It's fair. She's just asking the husband to share half of the costs. I would prefer if everything is sorted out this way, logical and efficient.
Bwahahahahaha. She's totally correct. Her career will be stalled, you will continue on Scott free. I'm also going to assume you haven't through who picks up the little tyke and gets them to appointments, sports, music etc. Who stays home when the little tyke is ill. Who will be responsible for cooking, cleaning, making the appointments? Usually men rely on women for that type of unpaid drudge. The fact that you have a plan to leave without any being encumbered by anything says you should have children...ever.
Yes it's unpaid, but if you call it drudge it doesn't make it any easier to get men to take on a more balanced share of the domestic responsibilities. And it devalues these contributions and therefore devalues the women making them. Gender equality cannot be achieved without men as our allies, and fundamental shift in how we value traditional ideas of gendered division of work. We need to see being a stay at home dad or mom as just as good as anyone earning a wage, and that being a parent does not reduce the value of a wage earner, male or female. And gender expression, like sex, does not change what any of these individuals has to offer to family and society. And just as women should be treated as serious competent employees (or bosses!), Men should be presumed to be competent when taking on care giving and domestic responsibilities. (Everyone can change diapers, everyone can potentially be CEO)
Load More Replies... So first, did anyone catch that basically these two decided that having a baby would some how be the logical next best choice to fill their time and, I don't want to say entertainment needs but maybe personal enrichment life experience needs? I'm not trying to judge the merits of travel or making a family, but I don't think these things can be interchangeable. Travel is adventure, family is grounding (growing roots). Having a baby because travel isn't logistically possible could result in resentment towards each other or the child. Certainly they can travel as a family, but it is going to be a fundamentally different experience than the trips they take before a baby. Maybe his hesitant feelings about the financial planning and looking at hard numbers come from very normal feelings of anxiety about the future and getting older. And while clear eyed financial planning and straight forward discussion about money is great, a detailed binder with alternate scenarios screams
"I need to feel in control over something in my life", which also a normal and valid feeling. Especially so during a pandemic that has clearly messed with her, everyone's, autonomy. Feelings need accounting too. The OP doesn't make clear why talking to a sibling that she doesn't talk to often is suspicious. They have shared family, the world is crazy, and he isn't aware of more than one conversation happening. The OP doesn't say what kind of birth control they stopped using, or how long ago. If he wants to know if she's pregnant, ask. If she writes binders of future planning with alternate scenarios, she doesn't leave pregnancy test packaging in the trash that you could find before she's ready to tell you. Doesn't mean she's sneaky. She could have some cute or elaborate plan to tell you.
Load More Replies...
I'm not 100% sure the guys issue is totally with the money. I think he may have felt way caught off guard by a Bible sized binder being placed in front of him out of the blue. I think this should have been talk about way before hand. Not just dropped on him. That being said, as he describes their relationship and financial situations, I believe she is correct in what she is asking. (demanding?)
I'm a Muslim guy, and this is how Muslim will do this : All the Kids and wife daily needs i.e; food, home, clothing, medical is all under the responsibility of the father/husband. If the wife decides to chip in, it's at her own purview. The husband/father cannot ask the wife to chip in if doesn't want to, let alone do a 50-50. In modern times however, most wife's including mine do chip in, when she wants better stuff. Example, if my grocery budget is 500, she will add a bit to get brands that she likes. Which is seldom, since I do 70% of the cooking in the house. My wife mostly does desserts and weekend breakfast. Main point is its the father/husband to provide to the family. If the wife can't work because of having a child, husbands need to pay for her car, insurance etc. So I'm saying the guys is irresponsible for even asking the internet about this.
"Spiritually married bc I want the freedom to walk away without undue hassle" is not a husband or a good candidate for fatherhood. He's also sketch about her talking to her own sister.
I have a few questions .First what does it mean spiritual married? They had a wedding but they are spiritual married? How does it happen that they had a child and she aborted because it was too early? And he didn't knew? I do not believe it disgust you but you feel more like :she gets 50% from her work and 50% from you while you remain with 50% ,that is the problem. I would come with a different idea on the financial situation :To be fair in all add both income for 6 months and split in 2 after you paid rent,home ,gas etc etc what it needs to be paid for the living then split in 2 also the cost of a child would need to be split in 2 because both of you wish to have it . There is also the need to talk if she is pregnant or not ,go ask her? About her sister ,take your wife/spiritual wife to a discussion ,take action and start a discussion ,take initiative ,communication needs to go both ways ,from you and her. Also there needs to be a discussion about paternity leave if you wish it
Spiritually married is just not wanting to marry and then lying that you are married.
Load More Replies...
I think him covering half her lost wages would be fair. She's got a good point though. Why should she have to loose that much money?
Idk, i mean no where does it say that she specifically wants to get married. Maybe shes also good with their 50/50 arrangement, and wants to continue it. Although, by her reasoning i would venture to say that because they are not married, she is trying to make sure she doesn't get stuck with all the responsibility, and get screwed over, which i totally get. But on the same hand, no one is forcing her to have a kid, if she wants a child and has made that decision for herself then i dont necessarily agree that he should pay the full 50,000 - 100,000. I think what makes the most sense is to continue the 50/50 split so he would pay 25,000 - 50,000, but will also split taking care of the kid, like taking time off work so she can go back to work (if thats what she wants to do at the time). I do agree though, that whatever they agree to, they definitely should get it in writing and have it reviewed by a lawyer.
Well... duh... You wanted a partner who values money and career and have no strings attached and then try to attach a HUGE string to her and her alone. Obviously she wants compensation and security that she's not left with a kid, debt, tanked career and no home when you decide you don't like to play house anymore. Go get married, stop keeping your finances separate and I'm sure the contract will go away.
I also get the feeling that this post might be followed up with a different post afterwards if she really becomes a mother: "Oh no, she is no longer the person I fell in love with! I adored the strong, sexy, financially independent business woman! No she has gained weight, she has stretch marks and all she ever does is care for the baby! I once found her b00bies so hot and now I can only see her as a milk cow. I am so disgusted, she is no longer a hot chick but a mother - such a turnoff! She even tried to discuss the costs of daycare and the baby's nappy rash with me when all I ever wanted was to chill or maybe have some fun... " I do not think this guy is emotionally mature enough to become a father - and she fears the same.
Load More Replies...
If the 50k was her loss of income, then they should split it evenly. Why would he pay all the lost wages instead of half? I've been married 23 years and we have one child...I can't really imagine being in this situation because we've always had combined finances, but different strokes for different folks!
While I fully agree with him paying, I'm not immediately seeing why he should pay for the entire missing 50%, wouldn't it be more equal if he paid for half so they're both down to about 75% of their normal salary? I know we'd get that equality in the second half where they're living solely on his income, but I think other commenters are onto something saying she'll probably be back at work by then. However, I suppose this is addressed with the long-term financial cost on her, which raises the possibility of him taking leave to look after the children, or them both moving to part-time, both of which I gather they haven't discussed but probably should. I'm certainly fully behind her getting a lawyer to make sure he follows whatever agreement they end up with, particularly with him wanting to be able to leave after "significant changes", like having a child.
There's some historical precedent to it; it was not unheard of for marriage contracts of old to include details of bonus payments and gifted assets a wife would receive upon the birth of each child, in compensation and reward for the danger she'd be going through.
Fathers can, and do, take paternity leave so if he decides to stay home, will wife pay him?
beside him totally not getting how the pregnancy will affect his wife physically and financially they do not seem to be mature to have a child. it seems like oh we could not travel so lets have a baby...as if oh this course of pottery did not work out lets try some knitting instead... wtf is this that i have just read
I am blown the f**k away at how most people are ok with this. She is not a "genius" she is treating a child like a damn transaction. I'm sorry but even splitting 50/50 doesn't excuse this. My first husband and I split everything 50/50 and when I had OUR children I didn't work. He paid the bills I couldn't pay. (I had short term disability so I paid what I could) and we both bought things for OUR baby that's how life works. There was no "you're gonna pay me the 10k to be out of work (or whatever the breakdown was back in 2002 as I only made like 40k at the time). This is all frigging ridiculous. Both need to grow up, get REAL married if that's what they want - wtf is a spiritual marriage my God! Get a prenup to protect yourselves and raise your children. If all you want is a business deal, keep working and hire a surrogate. But best make sure you and the kid is protected. People these days are sickening.
Hmm... the basic idea behind this is right, but the way she went about it is off. Also: Why the whole 50.000? It''s her child, too, shouldn't it be 25.000? And does he have the option to be a stay at home Dad, if he wants to?? And if she loves her work so much and he loves her for being ambitious, maybe they should stay child-free.
These two greedy, self-centered, selfish individuals sound destined to diverge, and have no right bringing a child into this world with their toxic relationship.
Fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. I hope to never actually meet anyone like this in real life. You two have commitment issues and if you're both making that much per year and decided to have a child together then talk to a counselor about it since you buried yourselves in your own set of rules.
Now this may strike some viewers as harsh, but I believe everyone involved in this story should die. I love how you can just see the bias against him oozing out of every single response simply because he's a man. Disgusting. Also, gonna need a citation on the "pregnancy is more harmful than having a kidney removed" since your body is actually made to do one of those things. 10 bucks says they're making s**t up. Not surprising considering the posts around it.
In the US the maternal mortality rate is 32 per 100k live births, 158 per 100k globally as of 2021. The mortality rate for kidney donors is 7 per 100k live donation surgeries. RIP Norm Macdonald 🐐👑💔
Load More Replies...
She's only losing half. Why should hubby pay the whole half? Half of the half so they lose the same amount. Why should he be out 50 grand and her nothing? So he pays 25 grand and she loses 25 grand and they're equal. Plus they split all other expenses. Or, walk away from this monstrous Karen, which is what I would do.
I see it just a little bit differently. It takes two to make a baby and they both decided to go off birth control. If she's going to lose 50% of her income and they truly have separate expenses, the fair thing to do would be for him to give her 25 per-cent of her income that she's out on because she has 50% interest in the making of this child, and therefore 50% of the financial responsibility. On another note, I think splitting expenses down to every single nickel and dime is a very sad way to run a romantic relationship.
I think they both have put money before anything else. That is sad and to the people who think he can just walk away and leave her with nothing have forgotten about child support. If having children is reduced to a notarized agreement maybe they should reconsider their relationship. I believe if people want to have a family that should be their main focus not career or money. I also believe that being in a relationship means sacrificing individual goals for the common good. Neither of them want to do that
This may be an unpopular opinion, but while he wasn't being sensitive towards her true feelings (fear of abandonment if things got difficult due to a lack of legal, marital commitment) I have to say that they're both wrong, and possibly just a little bit more so her. The reason I say that is because instead of communicating her feelings and fears with her partner over relationship and family stability, she instead turned it into a business negotiation, telling him she needed a down payment before she'd allow him a child. This would make any man feel unloved, if his partner doesn't want to have a child "together", but instead tells him that he could buy a child off her, if he wants one Everyone knows children are expensive, but the way she presented this was way off. (Continued)
Her feelings are 100% valid, so it's her fault for not just telling him about them. Men aren't mind readers - if she made the conversation strictly about a finance plan for a baby, it isn't his fault for assuming her concerns were strictly financial. I highly doubt he would have reacted the same if she just told him that her real concern was that she was worried she'd be unsupported or that she didn't feel like he was fully invested in the relationship. So yeah - his bad for not reading her mind, but more bad that she didn't tell him what was really concerning her. Frankly, any couple this up their own asses about money that it's normal to only discuss a child in terms of dollars and financial contracts, and not address the emotional and relationship concerns at all... that couple probably shouldn't have children, regardless.
Load More Replies...
I am proud of this woman. I agree with her. Men are so emotional and irrational, why are you shocked? Nothing else about this spiritual marriage has shocked you, you said you're proud of her... Continue being proud of her. More women should make this 16 page agreement and ensure that it's legally binding.
Is she going to reimburse him for the time he takes to take care of her, the baby, working around the house?
It does seem too transactional.... Though I agree she shouldn't take hit but I wouldn't think pay me to have a baby. I'm thinking more along the lines of now ur paying all the bills because I'm temporary unemployed. Any unexpected cost will need help to be covered but not pay me to have ur baby. It's like she won't enjoy having the baby the baby is a part of a deal she is striking. I don't like it.
What a b****. Toxic relationship on both parts. Does he not care that she killed their baby with the abortion?
And "spiritual marriage", with a formal event proper jewelry, honeymoon? Mmm, no, that sounds like scam against both of your families, and something that could come back and bite you. Common law marriage is not recognized in the same way in every state. In there was a dispute between one of you and a family member when the other was incapacitated or deceased, like whether to continue life sustaining efforts, or in order to collect certain federal,, employer or insurance benefits, access to individual bank accounts, anything that comes up that is not specifically in a will, that marriage certificate can be the deciding factor. Insurers may even consider it fraud. You might not always live where you do now and have the same protections. There are so many circumstances that no other legal document could possibly cover. (especially when traveling out of the country, national disasters, within the criminal justice system)
I hope she's not pregnant and will manage to get rid of this piece of s**t before it's too late
She'll probably get an abortion if she is. Honestly we need to be less harsh, the guy is rightly uncomfortable with the cost of having a kid. And it's appearing to him for the first time because of her contact, which is why the two are paired here.
Load More Replies... 
imo "common law" marriage sounds like a stupid excuse someone gives to their partner so they dont have to get married even though the partner may want to
Usually surrogacy cost about 90000 to 120000,you both can work no health toll on any of you,then you can hire a nanny .It would be more expensive than paying 100000 dollars for her to stay home for a year,but since she could work then she could gain about 150000 during that year.I suppose you both split equally for surrogacy ,and day time nanny until the baby is weaned,it would be cheaper in a long run since there will not be a paused in work.Logically you both may want to write about baby cost of living incase you get divorced.I am not sure if you would work as a couple but surrogacy sounds wonderful.
It made logical sense despite the taste of "pay me to have our child". Honestly though, she lost me with the expectation to get "paid" additional money if she "decides" to take up to a year off. I'm sorry, but having children is a very serious decision and you wouldn't pay a babysitter the sum of $50k for 6 months while you go back to work. I also have a hard time believing any job here in the US would allow an employee to retain their job up to 6 months with any kind of pay beyond the statutory 6 weeks to begin with, much less 12 months. Everyone is replaceable even if you make $175k yourself. I'm also thinking her sister is in some kind of legal profession that he doesn't know about since the sisters "don't talk much" makes it sus. This has become overly complicated because they decided to keep their incomes fully separate since not bound in marriage. 50% of 175k NOT WORKING staying AT HOME for 6 MONTHS of bonding time. She should be lucky to not go back after 6 WEEKS.
Expecting health issues, expecting she may "feel she's not ready to return to work", throws unneeded stress into the situation. Pregnancies aren't inherently high risk unless there's something wrong with the woman that would be determined by a physician ahead of time nowadays. It's 2022 not 1975. I understand there's planning for certain things, but no woman worth her salt for equality should ever dream of "I'm taking a year off for a new baby etc etc". Nah that just doesn't happen. Even feminists want to go back to work to fight for and prove equal footing with men. Not sitting at home doing virtually nothing for 6 months because newborns sleep over 20 hours per day.
Load More Replies...
You, sir, are far too concerned with money. Family should be your priority, not money.
At first i thought wtf is this women ..then i understood the husband might never have had made her feel that he would be there for her ni matter what..... I dont know why ahe is with her anyway ..
Seems like it should be 25%. If 50% is her loss. So if they split it 50/50, split the 50% loss.
My advice to this dude is to RUN! She is a careerist psycho challenging to wear the pants in the family, concerned about what loss of income is going to do to the relationship power dynamic. The power couple thing is a long shot fantasy when you have children. One of the partners has to throttle career back and prioritize family. Usually well adjusted people make it work by defining roles. People in love do not bill each other for the roles they have in family. She's probably being passive aggressive trying to corner the dude to drag him over the marital finish line. A bit of advice to any person - make marriage a part of the plan to have children. Having the man provide while the wife takes time out to have children is what people usually do. Providing and family nuturing are demonstrations of love and devotion. If you have to arbitrate via contracts you're doing it wrong. You treat boardrooms and bedrooms differently, or at least you should.
If she's not already pregnant, cease future sexual encounters and divest yourself from this woman now. If she's already pregnant, or you truly want your offspring to contain half of her genetic makeup, offer to pay for the entire share as long as you get solid legal divestiture of her rights to the child. Then start extricating yourself of all shared assets of this person such that immediately after birth, you have a new domicile for you and your new son/daughter to start your lives together. Rest well that you will never have to deal with the womb-leaser attempting to nickel and dime you well into the future at every prospective opportunity. Nor will you have to worry about paying your share only to have her decide she wishes to, then, "alter the deal", and involve the courts in a "spiritual" divorce that destroys you financially including significant child support and whatever alimony your geography allows. Best option is she's not pregnant & gtfo while you still can.
Lol that isn't 50/50 split... If work is paying her 50% of her income, and then wants you to pay the other 50% then that's her getting 100% of her income for the first season 6 months while you take a hit. Then she wants you to continue to pay 50% for additional 6months, so you lose 50% for an entire year while she only "suffers"finical for six months.So automatically wouldn't do that right off the bat. This is how I'd do, first you don't give her any money... Second y'all pay bills 50/50 right? So she loses 50% of income, so half of her 50% bills should be cut in half to 25%, so she pays 25% of bills for those first 6 months...then for second six months you cover 100% of bills and expensives since she isn't being paid....but you do not...do not.. pay her...
He definitely should visit an attorney, a divorce attorney, f**k this b***h
This is another great example of why marriage, legal not just spiritual, should always come before children.
How is marriage going to fix the situation? She is still going to loose income, loose promotion and raise opportunities, loose retirement fund and incur costs of childbirth and he can still walk away after all of that. Marriage doesn't change anything.
Load More Replies...
So what I'm getting from this as a single-and-looking adult is: avoid having children with someone who is not willing to legally marry you. Bootlegging those protections for yourself sounds really difficult. 😅
I find it very interesting that EVERYONE here is assuming the man is responsible for the completely 50/50 finance split on everything. The entire time he said "we decided to split x and y" Maybe it actually was a joint decision. If so, everyone accusing him of "wanting his cake and eating it too" are wrong because making decisions together means equal responsibility for the consequences. If she wants to change the terms that's on her. However, considering that all we have to go on is her approaching a child like a business negotiation, I would be willing to wager that it was actually HER that wanted to keep finances separate to begin with - nothing indicates it was the guy's idea. But still, her feelings are completely valid. Had she actually TOLD him those feelings instead of writing up a business contract for how he could finance a child, then I might actually be on her side, but men aren't mind readers. At this point, they both screwed this interaction up.
This sounds like a very toxic relationship and these people should never have children together. They need to just part ways now because a child and the stress and financial and emotional costs daily are going to tear them apart and the child will suffer from parents like this. The lady is Nuts demanding him to pay her salary, I can understand half of the medical bills but not all of them. She should have a good amount of savings right now so she won't be broke. Normal woman don't even get paid for maternity leave and she's still getting half her pay. I understand being financial independence but there should also be "us" money that they both contribute to for things like this and extracurricular activities etc. What kind of lessons will this be teaching a child? Money is more important than love and It's better not to get married so you have an easy out? This is just wrong on all levels. I've been with my husband for 15 years and our money has always been both of ours to use
These people should not have a child. He can't trust whether she'll ab ort his child without telling him? She can't trust that he won't walk away at some point from their "spiritual marriage" and is obsessed with having everything absolutely even--because they still think of everything in terms of what's his and what's hers. Bringing a child into something so selfish and unstable will make everything infinitely worse.
Doesn't the guy realize that the expenses are going to increase after having a child? Even if he does end up leaving her child support isn't a joke.
Dude is missing the point. She feels insecure because having a baby is 100% her responsibility at the moment, as they're not married. If they're married, he would automatically have to pay all the bills and it would be much more difficult for him to leave her. Having a baby is a huge stress physically, emotionally, financially and for your career. At the moment she is taking all the hits and all the risks. She's just trying to equalise an unequal situation. If they had married, this would be less tilted to his benefit, albeit not totally equal either. If he fell in love with her because she is so driven and career oriented, this should not come as a shock. She is leaving behind all she knows and feels comfortable with to give you a child. She feels insecure, because this is new territory, she needs to rely on you. And it looks like you're not ready to commit to that 🤷🏾♀️
Yet another Reddit post proving that life partners maintaining completely separate finances isn't a good idea...this would never happen otherwise. But, I guess to him they aren't life partners, so it makes sense that he wouldn't combine finances. She's just his for now partner.
WTF, this is over everything the most sicked and twisted relationship ive ever known in my life, how people can be sooo disgusting to even consider a baby some sort of investment? both isdes are equally disturbing, inmature, selfish and disgusting, Period
Everyone is assuming that "he" is the reason they arent getting married and "he" is the reason they keep their finances separated. Same people who are complaining about how women get pigonholed are doing just that. He uses the phrase "we decided". "We are independent" Generally when a man decides something, he says "I decided" that we. She is simply trying to hold this arrangement as a business negociation, which I give her props for. If things dont work out though, I hope she continues to hold to this 50/50 arrangement. I know of so many who do not.
Well in his comment, he did say he was the one who didn't want a marriage on paper in case things go south and she agreed to it.
Load More Replies...
Why does everyone think a dude can just "walk away"? He can't. He'll owe child support no matter what, married or not. I don't get where people get the idea that he can just walk away. And on top of that, as he stated, they are common law married. That means the person earning more will pay alimony. Everyone's acting like this guy is a d**k when I'm reality he's the one who has no choices. Of she's already pregnant and he wants out, he'll be paying her child support and alimony while she takes her year off. Also, a little off topic, but, someone tweeted that having a child is more detrimental to your health than donating a kidney which is just absolutely lunacy. Having only one kidney is quite bad, and you have to watch what you eat very, very carefully for the rest.of your life. I'm not here to say the woman in this story is "good" or "bad". I'm just saying the tweets are extremely ignorant.
How is potential future child support going to make up for past lost income, promotion and raise opportunities, lost retirement pension and the costs of childbirth?
Load More Replies... You two are going to put a baby into this s**t show you call a relationship? No. Please please don't. A baby tests the most stable, committed & loving of relationships. Being parents is HARD. If he's looking to be able to walk away if things change, a baby changes EVERYTHING. Her body, sleep, sex, everything.
WTH - 6 months off to a YEAR??? I, and most of my working friends, got 6 weeks and were fine. Jesus. She just doesn't want to go back to work. I think it's fair to balance the cost for a month or two, but after that...tough sh!t. She doesn't want to work, she doesn't get paid. Period.
in other countries it is normal to stay 1-3 years on maternity leave or to switch from maternity to paternity leave during this time. kindergartens only take potty trained children and there are not many baby sitters, they are expensive and most of the people would not even let a stranger with their child. so if the child cannot go to a kindergarten, you do not have a granny to sit, then you stay on maternity/paternity leave and get some % of your salary, and maybe get some part time job you can do from home
Load More Replies... BEST birth control ever committed to paper. It is extreme but the idea should be adopted among those who are planning to add children.This is a pre-pregnancy agreement draft, similar to a prenup. It is not unusual for wealthy people to have this and many other domestic partnership contracts drafted by their lawyers to protect non-shared assets. Her approach may seem extremely callous, but warrants a brutally honest discussion; when a partner is going through a physical transformation what is that lose to benefit ratio look like. As my mother told me, "Love is wonderful but it won't diaper a child or put a roof over your heads". Children are real-time investments but also debts incurred by both partners. If one becomes absent, then the debt is either shared or shouldered by one parent. This is woman went a step further to provide valuations regarding their earned loses during maternity and leave. They both equally ended using birth control so it's fair-play.
If a guy said any of this to his wife, you would all be insane screaming at the abuse.
It would be equally stupid. Money money money. Don't marry when you only care about money.
Load More Replies...
She should include in the contract that she will continue to pay her half of household expenses and any other expenses incurred while she is on maternity leave, keep it 50/50 all the way.
This f$@ £<% guy wants the option to walk away scot free at any given moment. She put him to task and now he needs his diaper changed. POS.
The best advice, leave. Run away. If she willing to have an abortion and you pay for her losses ....what else is she willing to do? You are not married l, you have a self centered partner. You might want to check yourself too
Why on earth does he find it distasteful to support his child. Because that's basically what he would be doing. It's not like paying a hooker dude, you're helping cover the money lost by your girlfriend bringing your child into the world. Guess what after that 9 to 11 months you'll have to help pay for the child care too...
It sounds like they should have written out a financial agreement before she let him through Heaven's Gate.
WTF! You too clearly do not have emotional feelings for one another & thats"O"tay. Google, estimated child support for your situation and I bet you will find it's significantly cheaper in the long run. She will ask for additional financing for the next 18 years anyway so... make it legal and let the state dictate what she receives. Don't feel like you don't have a choice in this. Just because you didn't birth the child yourself doesn't mean you are insignificant. Naysayers E.A.D.!!!!
So he gets nothing out of this but a child? Leave her. Basically he takes a hit financially. He pays for the child & her.
He gets nothing out of this besides a child.... Wow say that out loud to yourself. You are dehumanizing the innocent party, the child! Also, read the post, she makes just as good money, she's just looking to keep the financial situation the same 50/50
Load More Replies...
This sounds so north americano that I can't even understand why women are so unprotected if they decide to have a child.
I lost interest after reading "we aren't married" and "we split the cost of our wedding." Yawn.
Wow. In that entire post he never mentions loving her once. Or that she's his soulmate. She should cut her losses and find someone that loves her unconditionally and wants to marry her.
So get married, because that is the value of her time and energy - and actually that should be more per year. This world, especially in the US, does NOT VALUE A WOMAN'S TIME, her energy or anything - besides underpaid from the get go we never recoup that lost monies from having children. Your gal is showing that she values reproduction a little less then money, which is fine, but she is also being clear you need to contribute appropriately. So be it, pitch in or combine finances (which is what actual marriage is, pitching in together to work together and share resources). Don't for a minute think it is okay for her to throw in with you and you don't give anything when she is contributing so much.
They way they have their relationship set up financially, and also that neither has the legal protections of being actually married, financial compensation for loss of earnings incurred by her bearing their joint venture seems reasonable.
She does not need 12 months off that's ridiculous. Shes gonna get pregnant be off 12 months then leave him to pay child support while the kid has 25 step dads. Get rid if her now
Tell me your a misogynist without saying it. Tell me your not a parent without saying you're not a parent. Tell me you didn't read the post without saying you didn't read the post.
Load More Replies...
If you insist on maintaining separate finances and not getting married then yeah, this is how it works. Why do men think they are exempt from responsibility when it comes to child rearing?
He already displayed lack of commitment when he was more in favor of a "spiritual" marriage than she was (per the comment with screenshot of one of his replies). No wonder she is trying to look out for herself and is also following precedent they set regarding finances. And there is no guarantee her company won't fire her after she has the baby. I have seen it happen, they create reasons to fire you after you return from maternity leave.
This is why regular marriage is a good thing and "spiritual marriage" deserves nothing more than an eye roll.
Marriage, spiritual or otherwise, does not change the financial situation. The woman is still going to loose income, promotion and raise opportunities, retirement pension and incur the costs of childbirth.
Load More Replies...
I wonder if he would find it weird if the roles were reversed. Wouldn't he want the same things she has prepared? Plus she didn't just make some weird ass contract and said that's that, she offered they make a third variant
I definitely think he should split the losses with her, although I'm wondering about taking all the losses for the first 6 months. A few things stuck out to me, though. Does she get to decide on her own what she does for the family and what he owes her for it? What if he wants to take paternal leave? Will they include a contact for rights and responsibilities to any child(ren) they might have when they see the lawyer?
Do you think rich people in other countries are less weird?
Load More Replies... Boy your first mistake was going through with a wedding and not the paperwork to make it legal when there's literally nothing preventing you from doing so. Your second was expecting her to take literally all the consequences of birthing the result of your sperm donation. And I bet you would've been happy to just shove all the dirty stuff off on her too.
Paper contracts don't make a marriage stronger than vow to god for the commitment.
Load More Replies...
They should not have reproduced to begin with. They both sound like they are so full of themselves, shallow, unloving/uncaring people. They share nothing together as devoted people to each other. They are roommates with benefits. The poor child!
And she should cover half of his. And decide this is stupid and walk away from it. She sees having a child as a burden and getting nothing in return and it's all for the man's benefit. If she only sees dollar signs when she sees a child, which is how she views children. Then she shouldn't have one.
A child is a burden in some ways and she’s asking him to cover 50% of the loss she’s takes because of the child they both want. Women should protect themselves. She’s a genius, I can’t believe I’ve never heard of this before!
Load More Replies...
I cannot agree with the comments in the post. Specially as a woman who is not married but lives in a serious relation. First a commited couple is as serious as a married one, so yes being 'spiritually married' is as valid as anything. Second, prefering to not go through a complicated divorce in case of breakup is a very nornal thing; it does not mean "he will abandon her", his kid will always be his and he needs to pay either way. Regarding OPs story I dont think that he is wrong. Yes, women sacrifice a lot to have a child. And yes, since she is not getting as much paid he needs to pay more of the expenses. But if she is getting 50% of her salary its unfair that he is paying her the other 50. Its also her child, she is not a nanny. I would agree on him paying 25% or to lower her expenses 25% until she is back to work.
She doesn't just loose the immediate income. She looses any raises for that financial year as well stalls on any promotions - usually for several years post first child because the company expects further children to follow. She will also not be getting any retirement/superannuation contributions while she is on maternity leave. Overall the long term career effect and financial disadvantage of childbirth are very significant. These are all costs SHE PERSONALLY has to bear, not to mention the stress on the body and long term (often unspoken) risks of childbirth. I absolutely agree that they are essentially married so that has not part in my consideration of the situation, but they have agreed on an arrangement where their finances are completely separate. If he doesn't make any contribution she is essentially expected to personally wear the costs of all of the above, as well as continue to contribute 50% of the costs of the living on half of her wage.
Load More Replies...
There's a contract you didn't read the whole post. He set the groundwork for the coldness.
Load More Replies...
Did you even read this post? They aren't married. She earns as much as he does. He doesn't want to be married.
Load More Replies...
"Career driven" women don't want to spend time and nurture their children? Wow.
Load More Replies... She's right! If they're splitting all expenses then they should split the cost of the pregnancy, including medical expenses, and whatever income is lost. If she loses 50% of her salary then he should turn over half of what she's losing, so the difference is shared, and if he loses income by taking paternity leave then that should be calculated into the differential. It's all very easy to calculate and it should be calculated, because if you're going to keep splitting finances... there's no reason in hell that she should be the only one to bear the pregnancy-related expenses. It's not "paying her to have a child", it's splitting the cost of having a child.
And you also have to factor in how pregnancy will impact her health, lost income from having her career stalled and diminished retirement/investments contributions. He's getting a good deal overall.
Load More Replies... At first, her request sound ridiculous, but her "spiritual husband" agreed to have separate finances and a business-like relationship, so I say: pay up, buddy! On a personal note, having separate finances and keeping books on everything in a relationship seems such a strange, and unhealthy concept to me.
I agree about it being strange and unhealthy but then again I'm poor. LOL! I've been with my fiance for almost 15 years, engaged for 10. Our money is our money. There is no your money or my money. It's all of our money because we are a family.
Load More Replies... Totally with the wife on this one. I don't know what the law is in the US for unmarried parents - presumably he'd have to pay some sort of upkeep for his children? But if they are not married then if they split, what would happen to the house? Other assets? This thread makes it quite clear what women have to sacrifice to have children. Laying it all out like that really makes you think - and his reaction is typical. If it was the man who had to sacrifice all this, how different it would be. There would be less kids in the world that's for sure! Huge thanks to the OP and his wife for opening people's eyes.
And what happens if her health is permanently damaged from the pregnancy? That happens.
Load More Replies... This woman is a genius. All women need to do this. Women are expected to lose their income or not have children. This affects us in the long term as our state pensions are lower as we had to take time off to rear children and didn't pay as much taxes. Our bodies are also ruined and give life long medical issues from pregnancy. Majority of the time it's ALWAYS the woman sacrificing everything in her life for the kids and family, and the man sacrifices nothing - usually he actually complains about the minimal things he's asked to contribute. What she's proposing is a proper, equal, 50/50 approach to raising a child together - something women rarely do because we're socially and culturally conditioned to be a doormat for the propagation of the species. This woman deserves a fuc*ing medal and should be doing Brene Brown style TEDTalks for women. Men, sit up and pay attention, this is the fuc*ing future!
She's a genius. Having a baby is a massive strain for a woman, physically, emotionally and financially. If he wants to have kids with her, it's only right that he shares the burden in some way.
I kind of understand why it feels cold, however the OP is happy being unbouded from her. He's literally happy he can walk away from it all, without too much consequences. She's the one that has to carry the child, take the risks and suffer salary loss, and if he decides to bail she's stuck with childcare, most likely. I applaud her business stance in this, because he's clearly on the "everything will work out fine in the end"-cloud which only applies to him.
her independency is part of why he is attracted to her. But when she uses it, it's a bit of a turn off. Maybe you should look at what it would cost if you asked a 3rd party to carry your kid for you. Maybe she would do it for less than your wife and maybe your wife will prefer it too.
I SO wish men could physically get pregnant and have babies. Then we'd REALLY see some change!
Load More Replies... If you both idolize being independent so much and define ypurselves so deeply by having a high paying job - please, please do not have children together! It will only make you unhappy. Enjoy this spiritual marriage for as long as it may hold, have fun, do some travelling together and have an easy split when the time comes. You cannot remain two absolutely fabulous unrestricted individuals if you bring a tiny helpless human being into this world together. And you cannot keep costs apart if you intend to become a family. "Let's go grap a pizza!" "Only if you pay for the boy!" "But I already paid his school lunch yesterday!" "Correct, but I bought him new winter shoes last week and they were more expensive!" Please. Just. Don't.
No s**t Sherlock, when you want a woman to have your child you should support her financially. What a douche. But both of them are so materialistic, this "marriage" is doomed to fail, or at the very least they will likely damage any child they might have.
I agree but I don't think it is fair to say they are materialistic, just financially conscious. It is basic financial planning on her part and I think more women should think about these sorts for things. There is a reason why so many women make significantly less than men and childbearing is one of the top reasons. Takes years to catch up professionally after having a child.
Load More Replies... WTF is this? I feel like I have just read a financial report. What is the point of being together at all?
He says he doesn't want to pay her for having his child. But he wanted to keep the financials separate and she is the one taking the hit. So by not supporting her he is asking HER to pay for the child by losing out on 6 months of income and another 6 months at 50%. So basically she ends up being the one paying to have his child. But I guess women are expected to take the hit and smile about it. He's also gross talking about how he wants to cover himself if he wants to walk away. Like, here lady have my child, pay for it and when I get bored look after it while I go find someone else. He wants to have his cake and eat it.
So he's okay splitting the costs, until he is presented with the actual cost of pregnancy and childbirth, rather than just the cost of baby clothes and diapers?
Also it's very telling how cold this relationship is that they keep everything separate. This couple should not have kids. Period.
I don't think so. I keep everything separate with my husband and it works great. Never once in 14 years had an argument about money. Our parents did things the traditional way and my parents have 15 marriages when you combine them. My mother finally married someone who didn't add her to his account and she has never been happier or in a longer marriage. I don't think it is cold at all. They split things and she is going to take a hit for having a baby and she thought of a way to address that. You know what is cold? My dad returning from Iraq and finding out my mother had $175K in credit card debt, then leaving him to run off with a farrier she bankrupted. Or the endless amounts of women who can't afford housing and healthcare because they don't have social security after leaving the workforce to have kids and then their husband leave them once the kids are grown.
Load More Replies... This is a classic issue with the gender gap. Women take a huge financial hit and this dude is shocked because this woman took the time to calculate the minimum cost of that. She didn't even include the potential loss of wages from being out of the workforce for up to a year. That means she is risking being passed up for promotions. I would say this seems extreme, but not given their current division and how their relationship is. For instance, is she still expected to split the cost of everything when she is not working? I have been with my husband for 14 years and we don't have any shared accounts but I make more so I pay more bills, when he made more he paid more. When we have a kid I am assuming he will be the one to leave the workforce if needed, and I was actually thinking of writing something up for him over that. Me putting money in a savings account for him since he won't be paying into social security and if anything happens to me then he will have retirement.
Good on you Ivana. My husband and I have joint bank accounts but I have always maintained separate accounts as well - that I am very honest with my husband about. I am self employed so it's extremely important to me that I personally have money set aside for my retirement. In the event we separate I will be entitled to a small portion of his but it wont be enough. Women of retirement age are the largest growing category of homeless because they sacrifice themselves, their careers and their future for their children and their partners. If my husband and I are still together (and I fully expect to be) then its an investment in OUR future. If not, I wont be left high and dry. Always take care of your own best interests because, if everything goes according to plan then that is ALSO in the best interests of your family.
Load More Replies... The last thing these two need is a child. This spiritual marriage crap is ridiculous. If everything is about the money to these two, they don't need to bring a baby into the world.
I don't agree with the opinion that keeping money separate is unhealthy or unnatural in a marriage. My husband and I have successfully done it for years. What's unhealthy is when couples are petty or nitpicking about it. We have never once sat down and calculated 50% of anything. He pays the utilities, I pay the insurance. I pay for groceries, he pays for restaurants. Sometimes he has a rough month and I pay some of his bills, and vice versa. Truthfully, I don't love the idea of a woman formally billing 50% of the cost of her pregnancy to her partner like it's a business arrangement. But I also don't think it should have come to that. He should have come to her first and said something like, "Hey, while you're on half salary, I'll cover all the mortgage and utilities, and let's talk about any other expenses we might want to redistribute."
Your finances are kept separate, did you expect her to basically pay for everything? I would also like more info, like is she asking him for that money in cash or is she saying that because she is making much less then he can pay for the babysitting, crib, etc? The least he can do is combine their finances for a couple years, with the stipulation that afterwards they split child-related costs down the middle if they go back to separate finances.
Not saying right or wrong. MY Spouse is my partner. We are a team. I would have never thought of this.
I think of my husband and I as a team but I make a lot more than him and when we have a kid he will be a stay-at-home father for a bit. I was going to compensate him for the loss of his income by putting money into retirement account for him. He is losing all that money from social security for not working so I wanted to make sure I could help offset his loss of income for those years. Yes I will be paying all the bills during that time but if we ever break up then he isn't left less financially secure for raising our kid. I kind of see this as the same deal. It is weird to me that people don't actually do a lot of financial planning for their partners when they are going about family planning in general. Never want my husband's sacrifice to end up hurting him in the long run. You show you care by ensuring they are taken care of.
Load More Replies... This is just so stupid. The idea that you can create a family and have everything completely separate is ridiculous. If you must have two accounts maybe throw in a third and decide who puts how much in it based on the situation at the time. You will drive yourselves completely crazy as you count every nickel but you will keep up the mirage of being completely independent from any other people.
You should have 4 accounts. Joint checking for bills, joint savings for retirement that require both signatures to be touched and two individual accounts for personal spending that neither spouse can say anything about.
Load More Replies... If at all, he should pay 25 % since the company pays 50 % and the other 50 % should be split equally between both. But best thing would be no child for this couple.
No. I don't think a 50/50 split is fare. Her body's going to change, she's got all the pain of pregnancy and labour. Equity Edited typo
Load More Replies... The best thing for this couple to do is not have kids. It's most important to actually want to bring and raise a child in this world. Making it a business plan does really seem gross, she's not wrong, but it feels like a purchase.
Please tell me these two are Accountants. What a glorious, loving marriage... Jesus 🙄....
She is right, however this union is doomed. This is not what marriage is about. No "yours" and "mine", but only "ours". If you're not a team with your spouse, pulling in the same direction, then you are doomed to failure. It's difficult enough when you are on the same page.
Frankly, I think they should not have kids, neither one. What happens if one should get cancer, or lose their high paying job? Do they get evicted/dumped because they can no longer support their half of the finances? What if the kid gets injured playing a sport that one of them encouraged? So many ways to fight because there is no ours in their life. Just mine and yours. That being said, both are apples. Her for expecting him to shoulder 100% of the 6 month financial hit, him for wanting her to take all the hits to have kids. I can see a break up and the kid playing them against each other, and a very screwed up child/children in the future if they procreate.
These two people completely missed the point of being "married" and "starting a family". He doesn't want to commit and she doesn't feel secure enough in the relationship to have a child without a back up plan. This is not the environment to bring children into. Not if, but when they break up that child will bare the brunt of the trauma.
I get where she's coming from, and I have no qualms with her approach. However, if she's already pregnant and this had never been brought up over their previous talks of having a child, I feel like she's been very manipulative. Well, the guys screwed no matter what he does if she's actually already pregnant. That's his fault for allowing common law marriage in the first place. I don't know how you can pretend to be "spiritually married" when you're ACTUALLY married in the eyes of the state. Me, personally, would never agree to this agreement of hers but he's not really in any position to refuse. Lol, what a sucker.
They aren't married in the eyes of the state. They had a pretend wedding to spiritually wed but no government papers were signed because he wants a non divorce requiring out in case things go south.
Load More Replies... This is why most couples actually get married and pool their money. It makes sense. This was never an issue for my parents because there was no line between their finances. My mother was able to stay home for eight years.
Sounds more like roommates with benefits. If your roommate is having your kid I guess you should pay them. If this was a true marriage than it'd be a non issue since your funds are each other's. But that's only 3 months of his income, and it's not like you'll be vacationing soon so I'm sure your savings has more than enough. Time to grow up. The only thing my wife and I do separate is our taxes because being an expat and her dual citizenship makes it slightly confusing.
My question is why wouldn't he want to support the family he is creating? She can't work for obvious reasons so he would continue to take care of everything as he always has. Until she goes back to work. I'm baffled at his mindset on this. It just doesn't make since for either one of them to think they shouldn't have to continue maintaining themselves with or without having a child.
I do not think that he has reached the "We will be a family!" realization yet - and I am not sure he ever will. This is not a good idea.
Load More Replies... It's a bit... transactional, as he puts it, but the wife is right. With separate finances the burden would be on her alone. She also sounds smart enough not to need her sister to suggest what she proposed. There is no such thing as "spiritual marriage" BTW.
I am in my mid 20s and im doing well in my career and i know ill do better than 175 k in late 20s ...but i didnt think so much about marriage and idk if the person i marry would like to keep his finances separate.. but the point is it dosent matter , even if my husband made significantly less than me i think ill not care, but definitely i would like to marry a person who would make me feel taken care of even if i was without penny .or if im in wheel chair .. if the wife had no doubts that she would be taken care of ..she would never have drafted a 16 page file . Please try to love the future mother of the child unconditionally.... And make her feel that ... If he was ready for the child he would have said yes without blinking if the case is about money ... And if a person loves her career she will also love her children
Load More Replies... He lost me at ‘spiritual marriage’. Not wanting to take responsibility for your life and the woman you are sharing it with. Not wanting to take care of her, apparently. This man does not love her, he wants a f**k buddy who he can abandon whenever he wants. Lazy and easygoing.
Formal marriage has a lot of strings attached which make it not optimal for people. This read as a couple that is realizing that having kids isn't worth it, the wife informing the husband in this case
Load More Replies... The title is wrong, they are not actually married (as written at the beginning of the original text).
My first thought was perhaps the woman doesn't actually want to have a baby with him, so she's giving him the binder as a sort of indirect refusal or deterrent. The request forces him to see the potential negative consequences of having a baby.
Why would she have agre dto go off birth control then? Makes no sense.
Load More Replies... I'm a dude and I don't see anything wrong with this deal. It's fair. She's just asking the husband to share half of the costs. I would prefer if everything is sorted out this way, logical and efficient.
Bwahahahahaha. She's totally correct. Her career will be stalled, you will continue on Scott free. I'm also going to assume you haven't through who picks up the little tyke and gets them to appointments, sports, music etc. Who stays home when the little tyke is ill. Who will be responsible for cooking, cleaning, making the appointments? Usually men rely on women for that type of unpaid drudge. The fact that you have a plan to leave without any being encumbered by anything says you should have children...ever.
Yes it's unpaid, but if you call it drudge it doesn't make it any easier to get men to take on a more balanced share of the domestic responsibilities. And it devalues these contributions and therefore devalues the women making them. Gender equality cannot be achieved without men as our allies, and fundamental shift in how we value traditional ideas of gendered division of work. We need to see being a stay at home dad or mom as just as good as anyone earning a wage, and that being a parent does not reduce the value of a wage earner, male or female. And gender expression, like sex, does not change what any of these individuals has to offer to family and society. And just as women should be treated as serious competent employees (or bosses!), Men should be presumed to be competent when taking on care giving and domestic responsibilities. (Everyone can change diapers, everyone can potentially be CEO)
Load More Replies... So first, did anyone catch that basically these two decided that having a baby would some how be the logical next best choice to fill their time and, I don't want to say entertainment needs but maybe personal enrichment life experience needs? I'm not trying to judge the merits of travel or making a family, but I don't think these things can be interchangeable. Travel is adventure, family is grounding (growing roots). Having a baby because travel isn't logistically possible could result in resentment towards each other or the child. Certainly they can travel as a family, but it is going to be a fundamentally different experience than the trips they take before a baby. Maybe his hesitant feelings about the financial planning and looking at hard numbers come from very normal feelings of anxiety about the future and getting older. And while clear eyed financial planning and straight forward discussion about money is great, a detailed binder with alternate scenarios screams
"I need to feel in control over something in my life", which also a normal and valid feeling. Especially so during a pandemic that has clearly messed with her, everyone's, autonomy. Feelings need accounting too. The OP doesn't make clear why talking to a sibling that she doesn't talk to often is suspicious. They have shared family, the world is crazy, and he isn't aware of more than one conversation happening. The OP doesn't say what kind of birth control they stopped using, or how long ago. If he wants to know if she's pregnant, ask. If she writes binders of future planning with alternate scenarios, she doesn't leave pregnancy test packaging in the trash that you could find before she's ready to tell you. Doesn't mean she's sneaky. She could have some cute or elaborate plan to tell you.
Load More Replies... I'm not 100% sure the guys issue is totally with the money. I think he may have felt way caught off guard by a Bible sized binder being placed in front of him out of the blue. I think this should have been talk about way before hand. Not just dropped on him. That being said, as he describes their relationship and financial situations, I believe she is correct in what she is asking. (demanding?)
I'm a Muslim guy, and this is how Muslim will do this : All the Kids and wife daily needs i.e; food, home, clothing, medical is all under the responsibility of the father/husband. If the wife decides to chip in, it's at her own purview. The husband/father cannot ask the wife to chip in if doesn't want to, let alone do a 50-50. In modern times however, most wife's including mine do chip in, when she wants better stuff. Example, if my grocery budget is 500, she will add a bit to get brands that she likes. Which is seldom, since I do 70% of the cooking in the house. My wife mostly does desserts and weekend breakfast. Main point is its the father/husband to provide to the family. If the wife can't work because of having a child, husbands need to pay for her car, insurance etc. So I'm saying the guys is irresponsible for even asking the internet about this.
"Spiritually married bc I want the freedom to walk away without undue hassle" is not a husband or a good candidate for fatherhood. He's also sketch about her talking to her own sister.
I have a few questions .First what does it mean spiritual married? They had a wedding but they are spiritual married? How does it happen that they had a child and she aborted because it was too early? And he didn't knew? I do not believe it disgust you but you feel more like :she gets 50% from her work and 50% from you while you remain with 50% ,that is the problem. I would come with a different idea on the financial situation :To be fair in all add both income for 6 months and split in 2 after you paid rent,home ,gas etc etc what it needs to be paid for the living then split in 2 also the cost of a child would need to be split in 2 because both of you wish to have it . There is also the need to talk if she is pregnant or not ,go ask her? About her sister ,take your wife/spiritual wife to a discussion ,take action and start a discussion ,take initiative ,communication needs to go both ways ,from you and her. Also there needs to be a discussion about paternity leave if you wish it
Spiritually married is just not wanting to marry and then lying that you are married.
Load More Replies... I think him covering half her lost wages would be fair. She's got a good point though. Why should she have to loose that much money?
Idk, i mean no where does it say that she specifically wants to get married. Maybe shes also good with their 50/50 arrangement, and wants to continue it. Although, by her reasoning i would venture to say that because they are not married, she is trying to make sure she doesn't get stuck with all the responsibility, and get screwed over, which i totally get. But on the same hand, no one is forcing her to have a kid, if she wants a child and has made that decision for herself then i dont necessarily agree that he should pay the full 50,000 - 100,000. I think what makes the most sense is to continue the 50/50 split so he would pay 25,000 - 50,000, but will also split taking care of the kid, like taking time off work so she can go back to work (if thats what she wants to do at the time). I do agree though, that whatever they agree to, they definitely should get it in writing and have it reviewed by a lawyer.
Well... duh... You wanted a partner who values money and career and have no strings attached and then try to attach a HUGE string to her and her alone. Obviously she wants compensation and security that she's not left with a kid, debt, tanked career and no home when you decide you don't like to play house anymore. Go get married, stop keeping your finances separate and I'm sure the contract will go away.
I also get the feeling that this post might be followed up with a different post afterwards if she really becomes a mother: "Oh no, she is no longer the person I fell in love with! I adored the strong, sexy, financially independent business woman! No she has gained weight, she has stretch marks and all she ever does is care for the baby! I once found her b00bies so hot and now I can only see her as a milk cow. I am so disgusted, she is no longer a hot chick but a mother - such a turnoff! She even tried to discuss the costs of daycare and the baby's nappy rash with me when all I ever wanted was to chill or maybe have some fun... " I do not think this guy is emotionally mature enough to become a father - and she fears the same.
Load More Replies... If the 50k was her loss of income, then they should split it evenly. Why would he pay all the lost wages instead of half? I've been married 23 years and we have one child...I can't really imagine being in this situation because we've always had combined finances, but different strokes for different folks!
While I fully agree with him paying, I'm not immediately seeing why he should pay for the entire missing 50%, wouldn't it be more equal if he paid for half so they're both down to about 75% of their normal salary? I know we'd get that equality in the second half where they're living solely on his income, but I think other commenters are onto something saying she'll probably be back at work by then. However, I suppose this is addressed with the long-term financial cost on her, which raises the possibility of him taking leave to look after the children, or them both moving to part-time, both of which I gather they haven't discussed but probably should. I'm certainly fully behind her getting a lawyer to make sure he follows whatever agreement they end up with, particularly with him wanting to be able to leave after "significant changes", like having a child.
There's some historical precedent to it; it was not unheard of for marriage contracts of old to include details of bonus payments and gifted assets a wife would receive upon the birth of each child, in compensation and reward for the danger she'd be going through.
Fathers can, and do, take paternity leave so if he decides to stay home, will wife pay him?
beside him totally not getting how the pregnancy will affect his wife physically and financially they do not seem to be mature to have a child. it seems like oh we could not travel so lets have a baby...as if oh this course of pottery did not work out lets try some knitting instead... wtf is this that i have just read
I am blown the f**k away at how most people are ok with this. She is not a "genius" she is treating a child like a damn transaction. I'm sorry but even splitting 50/50 doesn't excuse this. My first husband and I split everything 50/50 and when I had OUR children I didn't work. He paid the bills I couldn't pay. (I had short term disability so I paid what I could) and we both bought things for OUR baby that's how life works. There was no "you're gonna pay me the 10k to be out of work (or whatever the breakdown was back in 2002 as I only made like 40k at the time). This is all frigging ridiculous. Both need to grow up, get REAL married if that's what they want - wtf is a spiritual marriage my God! Get a prenup to protect yourselves and raise your children. If all you want is a business deal, keep working and hire a surrogate. But best make sure you and the kid is protected. People these days are sickening.
Hmm... the basic idea behind this is right, but the way she went about it is off. Also: Why the whole 50.000? It''s her child, too, shouldn't it be 25.000? And does he have the option to be a stay at home Dad, if he wants to?? And if she loves her work so much and he loves her for being ambitious, maybe they should stay child-free.
These two greedy, self-centered, selfish individuals sound destined to diverge, and have no right bringing a child into this world with their toxic relationship.
Fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. I hope to never actually meet anyone like this in real life. You two have commitment issues and if you're both making that much per year and decided to have a child together then talk to a counselor about it since you buried yourselves in your own set of rules.
Now this may strike some viewers as harsh, but I believe everyone involved in this story should die. I love how you can just see the bias against him oozing out of every single response simply because he's a man. Disgusting. Also, gonna need a citation on the "pregnancy is more harmful than having a kidney removed" since your body is actually made to do one of those things. 10 bucks says they're making s**t up. Not surprising considering the posts around it.
In the US the maternal mortality rate is 32 per 100k live births, 158 per 100k globally as of 2021. The mortality rate for kidney donors is 7 per 100k live donation surgeries. RIP Norm Macdonald 🐐👑💔
Load More Replies... She's only losing half. Why should hubby pay the whole half? Half of the half so they lose the same amount. Why should he be out 50 grand and her nothing? So he pays 25 grand and she loses 25 grand and they're equal. Plus they split all other expenses. Or, walk away from this monstrous Karen, which is what I would do.
I see it just a little bit differently. It takes two to make a baby and they both decided to go off birth control. If she's going to lose 50% of her income and they truly have separate expenses, the fair thing to do would be for him to give her 25 per-cent of her income that she's out on because she has 50% interest in the making of this child, and therefore 50% of the financial responsibility. On another note, I think splitting expenses down to every single nickel and dime is a very sad way to run a romantic relationship.
I think they both have put money before anything else. That is sad and to the people who think he can just walk away and leave her with nothing have forgotten about child support. If having children is reduced to a notarized agreement maybe they should reconsider their relationship. I believe if people want to have a family that should be their main focus not career or money. I also believe that being in a relationship means sacrificing individual goals for the common good. Neither of them want to do that
This may be an unpopular opinion, but while he wasn't being sensitive towards her true feelings (fear of abandonment if things got difficult due to a lack of legal, marital commitment) I have to say that they're both wrong, and possibly just a little bit more so her. The reason I say that is because instead of communicating her feelings and fears with her partner over relationship and family stability, she instead turned it into a business negotiation, telling him she needed a down payment before she'd allow him a child. This would make any man feel unloved, if his partner doesn't want to have a child "together", but instead tells him that he could buy a child off her, if he wants one Everyone knows children are expensive, but the way she presented this was way off. (Continued)
Her feelings are 100% valid, so it's her fault for not just telling him about them. Men aren't mind readers - if she made the conversation strictly about a finance plan for a baby, it isn't his fault for assuming her concerns were strictly financial. I highly doubt he would have reacted the same if she just told him that her real concern was that she was worried she'd be unsupported or that she didn't feel like he was fully invested in the relationship. So yeah - his bad for not reading her mind, but more bad that she didn't tell him what was really concerning her. Frankly, any couple this up their own asses about money that it's normal to only discuss a child in terms of dollars and financial contracts, and not address the emotional and relationship concerns at all... that couple probably shouldn't have children, regardless.
Load More Replies... I am proud of this woman. I agree with her. Men are so emotional and irrational, why are you shocked? Nothing else about this spiritual marriage has shocked you, you said you're proud of her... Continue being proud of her. More women should make this 16 page agreement and ensure that it's legally binding.
Is she going to reimburse him for the time he takes to take care of her, the baby, working around the house?
It does seem too transactional.... Though I agree she shouldn't take hit but I wouldn't think pay me to have a baby. I'm thinking more along the lines of now ur paying all the bills because I'm temporary unemployed. Any unexpected cost will need help to be covered but not pay me to have ur baby. It's like she won't enjoy having the baby the baby is a part of a deal she is striking. I don't like it.
What a b****. Toxic relationship on both parts. Does he not care that she killed their baby with the abortion?
And "spiritual marriage", with a formal event proper jewelry, honeymoon? Mmm, no, that sounds like scam against both of your families, and something that could come back and bite you. Common law marriage is not recognized in the same way in every state. In there was a dispute between one of you and a family member when the other was incapacitated or deceased, like whether to continue life sustaining efforts, or in order to collect certain federal,, employer or insurance benefits, access to individual bank accounts, anything that comes up that is not specifically in a will, that marriage certificate can be the deciding factor. Insurers may even consider it fraud. You might not always live where you do now and have the same protections. There are so many circumstances that no other legal document could possibly cover. (especially when traveling out of the country, national disasters, within the criminal justice system)
I hope she's not pregnant and will manage to get rid of this piece of s**t before it's too late
She'll probably get an abortion if she is. Honestly we need to be less harsh, the guy is rightly uncomfortable with the cost of having a kid. And it's appearing to him for the first time because of her contact, which is why the two are paired here.
Load More Replies... imo "common law" marriage sounds like a stupid excuse someone gives to their partner so they dont have to get married even though the partner may want to
Usually surrogacy cost about 90000 to 120000,you both can work no health toll on any of you,then you can hire a nanny .It would be more expensive than paying 100000 dollars for her to stay home for a year,but since she could work then she could gain about 150000 during that year.I suppose you both split equally for surrogacy ,and day time nanny until the baby is weaned,it would be cheaper in a long run since there will not be a paused in work.Logically you both may want to write about baby cost of living incase you get divorced.I am not sure if you would work as a couple but surrogacy sounds wonderful.
It made logical sense despite the taste of "pay me to have our child". Honestly though, she lost me with the expectation to get "paid" additional money if she "decides" to take up to a year off. I'm sorry, but having children is a very serious decision and you wouldn't pay a babysitter the sum of $50k for 6 months while you go back to work. I also have a hard time believing any job here in the US would allow an employee to retain their job up to 6 months with any kind of pay beyond the statutory 6 weeks to begin with, much less 12 months. Everyone is replaceable even if you make $175k yourself. I'm also thinking her sister is in some kind of legal profession that he doesn't know about since the sisters "don't talk much" makes it sus. This has become overly complicated because they decided to keep their incomes fully separate since not bound in marriage. 50% of 175k NOT WORKING staying AT HOME for 6 MONTHS of bonding time. She should be lucky to not go back after 6 WEEKS.
Expecting health issues, expecting she may "feel she's not ready to return to work", throws unneeded stress into the situation. Pregnancies aren't inherently high risk unless there's something wrong with the woman that would be determined by a physician ahead of time nowadays. It's 2022 not 1975. I understand there's planning for certain things, but no woman worth her salt for equality should ever dream of "I'm taking a year off for a new baby etc etc". Nah that just doesn't happen. Even feminists want to go back to work to fight for and prove equal footing with men. Not sitting at home doing virtually nothing for 6 months because newborns sleep over 20 hours per day.
Load More Replies... You, sir, are far too concerned with money. Family should be your priority, not money.
At first i thought wtf is this women ..then i understood the husband might never have had made her feel that he would be there for her ni matter what..... I dont know why ahe is with her anyway ..
Seems like it should be 25%. If 50% is her loss. So if they split it 50/50, split the 50% loss.
My advice to this dude is to RUN! She is a careerist psycho challenging to wear the pants in the family, concerned about what loss of income is going to do to the relationship power dynamic. The power couple thing is a long shot fantasy when you have children. One of the partners has to throttle career back and prioritize family. Usually well adjusted people make it work by defining roles. People in love do not bill each other for the roles they have in family. She's probably being passive aggressive trying to corner the dude to drag him over the marital finish line. A bit of advice to any person - make marriage a part of the plan to have children. Having the man provide while the wife takes time out to have children is what people usually do. Providing and family nuturing are demonstrations of love and devotion. If you have to arbitrate via contracts you're doing it wrong. You treat boardrooms and bedrooms differently, or at least you should.
If she's not already pregnant, cease future sexual encounters and divest yourself from this woman now. If she's already pregnant, or you truly want your offspring to contain half of her genetic makeup, offer to pay for the entire share as long as you get solid legal divestiture of her rights to the child. Then start extricating yourself of all shared assets of this person such that immediately after birth, you have a new domicile for you and your new son/daughter to start your lives together. Rest well that you will never have to deal with the womb-leaser attempting to nickel and dime you well into the future at every prospective opportunity. Nor will you have to worry about paying your share only to have her decide she wishes to, then, "alter the deal", and involve the courts in a "spiritual" divorce that destroys you financially including significant child support and whatever alimony your geography allows. Best option is she's not pregnant & gtfo while you still can.
Lol that isn't 50/50 split... If work is paying her 50% of her income, and then wants you to pay the other 50% then that's her getting 100% of her income for the first season 6 months while you take a hit. Then she wants you to continue to pay 50% for additional 6months, so you lose 50% for an entire year while she only "suffers"finical for six months.So automatically wouldn't do that right off the bat. This is how I'd do, first you don't give her any money... Second y'all pay bills 50/50 right? So she loses 50% of income, so half of her 50% bills should be cut in half to 25%, so she pays 25% of bills for those first 6 months...then for second six months you cover 100% of bills and expensives since she isn't being paid....but you do not...do not.. pay her...
He definitely should visit an attorney, a divorce attorney, f**k this b***h
This is another great example of why marriage, legal not just spiritual, should always come before children.
How is marriage going to fix the situation? She is still going to loose income, loose promotion and raise opportunities, loose retirement fund and incur costs of childbirth and he can still walk away after all of that. Marriage doesn't change anything.
Load More Replies... So what I'm getting from this as a single-and-looking adult is: avoid having children with someone who is not willing to legally marry you. Bootlegging those protections for yourself sounds really difficult. 😅
I find it very interesting that EVERYONE here is assuming the man is responsible for the completely 50/50 finance split on everything. The entire time he said "we decided to split x and y" Maybe it actually was a joint decision. If so, everyone accusing him of "wanting his cake and eating it too" are wrong because making decisions together means equal responsibility for the consequences. If she wants to change the terms that's on her. However, considering that all we have to go on is her approaching a child like a business negotiation, I would be willing to wager that it was actually HER that wanted to keep finances separate to begin with - nothing indicates it was the guy's idea. But still, her feelings are completely valid. Had she actually TOLD him those feelings instead of writing up a business contract for how he could finance a child, then I might actually be on her side, but men aren't mind readers. At this point, they both screwed this interaction up.
This sounds like a very toxic relationship and these people should never have children together. They need to just part ways now because a child and the stress and financial and emotional costs daily are going to tear them apart and the child will suffer from parents like this. The lady is Nuts demanding him to pay her salary, I can understand half of the medical bills but not all of them. She should have a good amount of savings right now so she won't be broke. Normal woman don't even get paid for maternity leave and she's still getting half her pay. I understand being financial independence but there should also be "us" money that they both contribute to for things like this and extracurricular activities etc. What kind of lessons will this be teaching a child? Money is more important than love and It's better not to get married so you have an easy out? This is just wrong on all levels. I've been with my husband for 15 years and our money has always been both of ours to use
These people should not have a child. He can't trust whether she'll ab ort his child without telling him? She can't trust that he won't walk away at some point from their "spiritual marriage" and is obsessed with having everything absolutely even--because they still think of everything in terms of what's his and what's hers. Bringing a child into something so selfish and unstable will make everything infinitely worse.
Doesn't the guy realize that the expenses are going to increase after having a child? Even if he does end up leaving her child support isn't a joke.
Dude is missing the point. She feels insecure because having a baby is 100% her responsibility at the moment, as they're not married. If they're married, he would automatically have to pay all the bills and it would be much more difficult for him to leave her. Having a baby is a huge stress physically, emotionally, financially and for your career. At the moment she is taking all the hits and all the risks. She's just trying to equalise an unequal situation. If they had married, this would be less tilted to his benefit, albeit not totally equal either. If he fell in love with her because she is so driven and career oriented, this should not come as a shock. She is leaving behind all she knows and feels comfortable with to give you a child. She feels insecure, because this is new territory, she needs to rely on you. And it looks like you're not ready to commit to that 🤷🏾♀️
Yet another Reddit post proving that life partners maintaining completely separate finances isn't a good idea...this would never happen otherwise. But, I guess to him they aren't life partners, so it makes sense that he wouldn't combine finances. She's just his for now partner.
WTF, this is over everything the most sicked and twisted relationship ive ever known in my life, how people can be sooo disgusting to even consider a baby some sort of investment? both isdes are equally disturbing, inmature, selfish and disgusting, Period
Everyone is assuming that "he" is the reason they arent getting married and "he" is the reason they keep their finances separated. Same people who are complaining about how women get pigonholed are doing just that. He uses the phrase "we decided". "We are independent" Generally when a man decides something, he says "I decided" that we. She is simply trying to hold this arrangement as a business negociation, which I give her props for. If things dont work out though, I hope she continues to hold to this 50/50 arrangement. I know of so many who do not.
Well in his comment, he did say he was the one who didn't want a marriage on paper in case things go south and she agreed to it.
Load More Replies... Why does everyone think a dude can just "walk away"? He can't. He'll owe child support no matter what, married or not. I don't get where people get the idea that he can just walk away. And on top of that, as he stated, they are common law married. That means the person earning more will pay alimony. Everyone's acting like this guy is a d**k when I'm reality he's the one who has no choices. Of she's already pregnant and he wants out, he'll be paying her child support and alimony while she takes her year off. Also, a little off topic, but, someone tweeted that having a child is more detrimental to your health than donating a kidney which is just absolutely lunacy. Having only one kidney is quite bad, and you have to watch what you eat very, very carefully for the rest.of your life. I'm not here to say the woman in this story is "good" or "bad". I'm just saying the tweets are extremely ignorant.
How is potential future child support going to make up for past lost income, promotion and raise opportunities, lost retirement pension and the costs of childbirth?
Load More Replies... You two are going to put a baby into this s**t show you call a relationship? No. Please please don't. A baby tests the most stable, committed & loving of relationships. Being parents is HARD. If he's looking to be able to walk away if things change, a baby changes EVERYTHING. Her body, sleep, sex, everything.
WTH - 6 months off to a YEAR??? I, and most of my working friends, got 6 weeks and were fine. Jesus. She just doesn't want to go back to work. I think it's fair to balance the cost for a month or two, but after that...tough sh!t. She doesn't want to work, she doesn't get paid. Period.
in other countries it is normal to stay 1-3 years on maternity leave or to switch from maternity to paternity leave during this time. kindergartens only take potty trained children and there are not many baby sitters, they are expensive and most of the people would not even let a stranger with their child. so if the child cannot go to a kindergarten, you do not have a granny to sit, then you stay on maternity/paternity leave and get some % of your salary, and maybe get some part time job you can do from home
Load More Replies... BEST birth control ever committed to paper. It is extreme but the idea should be adopted among those who are planning to add children.This is a pre-pregnancy agreement draft, similar to a prenup. It is not unusual for wealthy people to have this and many other domestic partnership contracts drafted by their lawyers to protect non-shared assets. Her approach may seem extremely callous, but warrants a brutally honest discussion; when a partner is going through a physical transformation what is that lose to benefit ratio look like. As my mother told me, "Love is wonderful but it won't diaper a child or put a roof over your heads". Children are real-time investments but also debts incurred by both partners. If one becomes absent, then the debt is either shared or shouldered by one parent. This is woman went a step further to provide valuations regarding their earned loses during maternity and leave. They both equally ended using birth control so it's fair-play.
If a guy said any of this to his wife, you would all be insane screaming at the abuse.
It would be equally stupid. Money money money. Don't marry when you only care about money.
Load More Replies... She should include in the contract that she will continue to pay her half of household expenses and any other expenses incurred while she is on maternity leave, keep it 50/50 all the way.
This f$@ £<% guy wants the option to walk away scot free at any given moment. She put him to task and now he needs his diaper changed. POS.
The best advice, leave. Run away. If she willing to have an abortion and you pay for her losses ....what else is she willing to do? You are not married l, you have a self centered partner. You might want to check yourself too
Why on earth does he find it distasteful to support his child. Because that's basically what he would be doing. It's not like paying a hooker dude, you're helping cover the money lost by your girlfriend bringing your child into the world. Guess what after that 9 to 11 months you'll have to help pay for the child care too...
It sounds like they should have written out a financial agreement before she let him through Heaven's Gate.
WTF! You too clearly do not have emotional feelings for one another & thats"O"tay. Google, estimated child support for your situation and I bet you will find it's significantly cheaper in the long run. She will ask for additional financing for the next 18 years anyway so... make it legal and let the state dictate what she receives. Don't feel like you don't have a choice in this. Just because you didn't birth the child yourself doesn't mean you are insignificant. Naysayers E.A.D.!!!!
So he gets nothing out of this but a child? Leave her. Basically he takes a hit financially. He pays for the child & her.
He gets nothing out of this besides a child.... Wow say that out loud to yourself. You are dehumanizing the innocent party, the child! Also, read the post, she makes just as good money, she's just looking to keep the financial situation the same 50/50
Load More Replies... This sounds so north americano that I can't even understand why women are so unprotected if they decide to have a child.
I lost interest after reading "we aren't married" and "we split the cost of our wedding." Yawn.
Wow. In that entire post he never mentions loving her once. Or that she's his soulmate. She should cut her losses and find someone that loves her unconditionally and wants to marry her.
So get married, because that is the value of her time and energy - and actually that should be more per year. This world, especially in the US, does NOT VALUE A WOMAN'S TIME, her energy or anything - besides underpaid from the get go we never recoup that lost monies from having children. Your gal is showing that she values reproduction a little less then money, which is fine, but she is also being clear you need to contribute appropriately. So be it, pitch in or combine finances (which is what actual marriage is, pitching in together to work together and share resources). Don't for a minute think it is okay for her to throw in with you and you don't give anything when she is contributing so much.
They way they have their relationship set up financially, and also that neither has the legal protections of being actually married, financial compensation for loss of earnings incurred by her bearing their joint venture seems reasonable.
She does not need 12 months off that's ridiculous. Shes gonna get pregnant be off 12 months then leave him to pay child support while the kid has 25 step dads. Get rid if her now
Tell me your a misogynist without saying it. Tell me your not a parent without saying you're not a parent. Tell me you didn't read the post without saying you didn't read the post.
Load More Replies... If you insist on maintaining separate finances and not getting married then yeah, this is how it works. Why do men think they are exempt from responsibility when it comes to child rearing?
He already displayed lack of commitment when he was more in favor of a "spiritual" marriage than she was (per the comment with screenshot of one of his replies). No wonder she is trying to look out for herself and is also following precedent they set regarding finances. And there is no guarantee her company won't fire her after she has the baby. I have seen it happen, they create reasons to fire you after you return from maternity leave.
This is why regular marriage is a good thing and "spiritual marriage" deserves nothing more than an eye roll.
Marriage, spiritual or otherwise, does not change the financial situation. The woman is still going to loose income, promotion and raise opportunities, retirement pension and incur the costs of childbirth.
Load More Replies... I wonder if he would find it weird if the roles were reversed. Wouldn't he want the same things she has prepared? Plus she didn't just make some weird ass contract and said that's that, she offered they make a third variant
I definitely think he should split the losses with her, although I'm wondering about taking all the losses for the first 6 months. A few things stuck out to me, though. Does she get to decide on her own what she does for the family and what he owes her for it? What if he wants to take paternal leave? Will they include a contact for rights and responsibilities to any child(ren) they might have when they see the lawyer?
Do you think rich people in other countries are less weird?
Load More Replies... Boy your first mistake was going through with a wedding and not the paperwork to make it legal when there's literally nothing preventing you from doing so. Your second was expecting her to take literally all the consequences of birthing the result of your sperm donation. And I bet you would've been happy to just shove all the dirty stuff off on her too.
Paper contracts don't make a marriage stronger than vow to god for the commitment.
Load More Replies... They should not have reproduced to begin with. They both sound like they are so full of themselves, shallow, unloving/uncaring people. They share nothing together as devoted people to each other. They are roommates with benefits. The poor child!
And she should cover half of his. And decide this is stupid and walk away from it. She sees having a child as a burden and getting nothing in return and it's all for the man's benefit. If she only sees dollar signs when she sees a child, which is how she views children. Then she shouldn't have one.
A child is a burden in some ways and she’s asking him to cover 50% of the loss she’s takes because of the child they both want. Women should protect themselves. She’s a genius, I can’t believe I’ve never heard of this before!
Load More Replies... I cannot agree with the comments in the post. Specially as a woman who is not married but lives in a serious relation. First a commited couple is as serious as a married one, so yes being 'spiritually married' is as valid as anything. Second, prefering to not go through a complicated divorce in case of breakup is a very nornal thing; it does not mean "he will abandon her", his kid will always be his and he needs to pay either way. Regarding OPs story I dont think that he is wrong. Yes, women sacrifice a lot to have a child. And yes, since she is not getting as much paid he needs to pay more of the expenses. But if she is getting 50% of her salary its unfair that he is paying her the other 50. Its also her child, she is not a nanny. I would agree on him paying 25% or to lower her expenses 25% until she is back to work.
She doesn't just loose the immediate income. She looses any raises for that financial year as well stalls on any promotions - usually for several years post first child because the company expects further children to follow. She will also not be getting any retirement/superannuation contributions while she is on maternity leave. Overall the long term career effect and financial disadvantage of childbirth are very significant. These are all costs SHE PERSONALLY has to bear, not to mention the stress on the body and long term (often unspoken) risks of childbirth. I absolutely agree that they are essentially married so that has not part in my consideration of the situation, but they have agreed on an arrangement where their finances are completely separate. If he doesn't make any contribution she is essentially expected to personally wear the costs of all of the above, as well as continue to contribute 50% of the costs of the living on half of her wage.
Load More Replies... There's a contract you didn't read the whole post. He set the groundwork for the coldness.
Load More Replies... Did you even read this post? They aren't married. She earns as much as he does. He doesn't want to be married.
Load More Replies... "Career driven" women don't want to spend time and nurture their children? Wow.
Load More Replies...
108
338