Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i expect us to get married at some stage but we will never ever have joint bank accounts , there is no way i would jepradise my sons future by allowing my other half to have access to my money , that is simply being responsible , my mother never had access to my fathers money either , not until he died , were we to split , i would let her have our home however , the courts are so biased against men , i would not waste a red cent fighting this , i have assets worth over a million independent of my house and the house is worth about 200 k
my other half is not financially responsible enough to have access to so much , i really dont care how un PC that sounds , you can love your wife or partner while at the same time understanding they are not fiscally mature
its down to her upbringing and the values she had instilled , i was reared by parents who respected money , she was reared by people who believe you spend every penny you have , the funny thing is they had their own house , were not any worse than lower middle class but all i ever hear about is how money was so tight , this despite her dad never having been out of work and her mother working as a nanny in her spare time
Wait, what? You're not married? Wow, it really pays to read the whole thread before posting!
If she's not financially responsible, why would you get married? Why would you have kids with her? Why choose her for a partner at all? Oh well, too late now. Clearly, you see redeeming qualities in her.
This sounds like it's never going to be a true partnership. You're always going to be calling the shots, except for the second-child issue; she can have another child if she wants, without telling you, unless you get yourself snipped, or insist on using condoms from now on, which probably wouldn't go over well with her, because it would communicate that you don't trust her.
This doesn't bode well at all.
BTW, I don't know what the laws are where you live, but in the US, in most states, the spouse is entitled to half of all assets acquired after the wedding. So if you were to marry, anything you earn or inherit after the rings are exchanged is rightfully hers. While you may insist on separate bank accounts, if she were to file for divorce at some point, she could take you for half of your assets acquired after the wedding date. She could demand more, for support of the child/ren, and so forth, as well. If you haven't already, you should look into your local laws, and consider never getting married.
This is why it's not advisable for people with conflicting money management styles to get married, or to have kids together.
Wait, what? You're not married? Wow, it really pays to read the whole thread before posting!
If she's not financially responsible, why would you get married? Why would you have kids with her? Why choose her for a partner at all? Oh well, too late now. Clearly, you see redeeming qualities in her.
This sounds like it's never going to be a true partnership. You're always going to be calling the shots, except for the second-child issue; she can have another child if she wants, without telling you, unless you get yourself snipped, or insist on using condoms from now on, which probably wouldn't go over well with her, because it would communicate that you don't trust her.
This doesn't bode well at all.
BTW, I don't know what the laws are where you live, but in the US, in most states, the spouse is entitled to half of all assets acquired after the wedding. So if you were to marry, anything you earn or inherit after the rings are exchanged is rightfully hers. While you may insist on separate bank accounts, if she were to file for divorce at some point, she could take you for half of your assets acquired after the wedding date. She could demand more, for support of the child/ren, and so forth, as well. If you haven't already, you should look into your local laws, and consider never getting married.
This is why it's not advisable for people with conflicting money management styles to get married, or to have kids together.
Inheritance is not considered joint assets in a divorce unless purchases are made with the inheritance and those purchanses (car, house etc) are titled in both names. Assets solely owned prior to marriage are also easily protected in a pre-marital agreement.
Inheritance is not considered joint assets in a divorce unless purchases are made with the inheritance and those purchanses (car, house etc) are titled in both names. Assets solely owned prior to marriage are also easily protected in a pre-marital agreement.
Thank you. OP--do you hear this? If you inherit, at least that money will be safe! There's some good news in all this, after all.
I am a 56yr old only child. Never missed having a sibling till recently...my mom is 83 and in declining health...it's all on me to deal with and I wish I had a brother or sister to at least to discuss what decisions should be made in the short and long term for mom...I never felt "alone" like this before as an only...just my perspective...
I am a 56yr old only child. Never missed having a sibling till recently...my mom is 83 and in declining health...it's all on me to deal with and I wish I had a brother or sister to at least to discuss what decisions should be made in the short and long term for mom...I never felt "alone" like this before as an only...just my perspective...
I can so relate to that! I'm an only and it never bothered me too since I grew up with a cousin 10 months apart, and had plenty of playdates and sleepovers as a kid growing up. It's finally hitting me with a mother who's 74 but lots of serious health issues and a fairly big issue with clutter/hoarding. No one else to shoulder the burden with me in trying to figure it all out with mom.
Wait, what? You're not married? Wow, it really pays to read the whole thread before posting!
If she's not financially responsible, why would you get married? Why would you have kids with her? Why choose her for a partner at all? Oh well, too late now. Clearly, you see redeeming qualities in her.
This sounds like it's never going to be a true partnership. You're always going to be calling the shots, except for the second-child issue; she can have another child if she wants, without telling you, unless you get yourself snipped, or insist on using condoms from now on, which probably wouldn't go over well with her, because it would communicate that you don't trust her.
This doesn't bode well at all.
BTW, I don't know what the laws are where you live, but in the US, in most states, the spouse is entitled to half of all assets acquired after the wedding. So if you were to marry, anything you earn or inherit after the rings are exchanged is rightfully hers. While you may insist on separate bank accounts, if she were to file for divorce at some point, she could take you for half of your assets acquired after the wedding date. She could demand more, for support of the child/ren, and so forth, as well. If you haven't already, you should look into your local laws, and consider never getting married.
This is why it's not advisable for people with conflicting money management styles to get married, or to have kids together.
Some states consider living together as common law marriages if they've been together a while and set up a home. If they do that in his state.. ending the relationship would require him to split some of those assets just like they would for dissolution of a formal marriage.
Inheritance is not considered joint assets in a divorce unless purchases are made with the inheritance and those purchanses (car, house etc) are titled in both names. Assets solely owned prior to marriage are also easily protected in a pre-marital agreement.
I'm an only child, 63 years old. I'm fine, happily married with two grown children. However, I would have preferred to have siblings.
The only real downside as an adult is that I was the only blood relative available to care for my parents when they got old and infirm. My wonderful wife pitched in, but it was not a great time in my life.
You do not owe it to your son to give him a sibling.
I think it puts a burden on the child. The child could be lonely.
I think it is "better" for children to grow up in a dynamic household - not lead lonely, isolated existences.
But then again, lots of people loathe their siblings. So there's that.
I couldn't agree more. Not to mention, a sibling helps "dilute" a parenting style that feels overly stifling (read: strict) to the child. Without a sibling, a child has unadulterated exposure to his parents' eccentricities. In fact, if i weren't an only child, I'm pretty sure I'd have much fewer fears about settling down or living with a woman; because then, I'd have an experience of living with someone who's NOT an authority figure. (While today, I view a wife or even a live-in girlfriend as being a powerful authority figure, rather than a partner.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh well, too late now. Clearly, you see redeeming qualities in her.
