Supporting a partner financially
 

This conversation came up with my boyfriend and I recently, and I've had this conversation with previous boyfriends. Most guys I've dated think it is appropriate to support their partner financially, with no expectations in return, if they can afford to do so.

I am extremely independent and the thought of a guy paying for things such as a car or school loans (for example) unless I am married to them just doesn't seem right.

This is not to say I pass this judgement on to others if they are in this situation, but for me personally, I don't ever want to feel like I *owe* a guy anything, or hear a line in a fight "I paid for your_____________________ (insert whatever here)" (even if they don't really mean it, but you get the picture).

I think about this kind of stuff because I am not in the type of field where I will probably make a great deal of $$$$$, and most guys unfortunately do make a great deal more than me.

What do you all think?

My SO makes a good $15K a year more than I do so he shoulders a couple more of our monthly bills. This is largely at his insistance, I think he likes to feel like the man of the house.
However, I would not feel comfortable being supported entirely for anything other than brief periods of time or for any reason other than having a baby. In fact, when I got laid off a couple of years ago I took some awful temp jobs just to stay working. Partly because I didn't feel good about myself when I wasn't part of working society and partly because I didn't want him to feel like he was pulling dead weight.

Sometimes it becomes necessary. Now paying school loans and such seems a little on the excessive side, but whatever works...

School loans are why I'm not engaged right now. I figure my next academic excercise will set me back a good 60-70K. If I were married, technically, she'd be responsible for half of that. I don't think that's really fair, so right now, at least, I'm not married. When school's done with, yeah, we'll probably make it legal.

I've heard people say that when they are married, they throw all their bills together in one pot and combine their paychecks in the bank. Then they take out the $$$$ and pay the necessary bills first, regardless of "who" they belong to. That is fine, again, I think if you are married (or with set plans for that). I think that if a guy is willing to pay your bills like that, that he should be thinking in the long-term-settle-down-marriage-thought.

Maybe he just feels like he needs to "take care" of someone? My advice to you is as long as he's not demanding anything in return that you don't want to give him, just ride that for as long as it goes.

And maybe he is thinking long-term, but is not yet in a position where it would be feasible for him? You don't give many specifics here..

For him, it's not the smartest thing financially, but really, that kind of decision is on him.

But the first time dude pulls something like "You're going to do this b/c I pay all of your bills", it's time to say good-bye.

I make more than my boyfriend, and so I take on a bit more financial responsibility. Most of our bills and stuff are split 50/50 (e.g. he pays electric, i pay gas and phone - which work out to about the same amount/month). But when it comes to groceries or going to see a movie, I'm more likely to have the funds to pay for all of or more of it. In nearly 6 years of living together, it's never been an issue.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if I was married. To be honest I would enjoy it. I would be able to work because I wanted too and I could do things I enjoyed. I would of course want to help out, so he wasn't stressed or pressured to feel like he was supporting someone who didn't appreciate it. I wouldn't agree to it if he was just a boyfriend. Thats different because you may break up and have no job/place to live/etc.

I see nothing wrong with a guy wanting to do that. I dated a guy who was like this and I know he liked paying for things because he felt like he was taking care of me. He was also uncomfortable with me paying for things. If your not comfortable with it just tell him, he'll learn to live with it.

ktsnake, Are you sure about that loan information? I think your student loans are yours and hers are hers. Even when you are married, you shouldn't combine the loans. In the worst case scenario if one of you passes away or becomes permanently disabled, I think that the loans are forgiven. If they are combined, they still need to be repaid.


I think that if you accept financial support from a significant other who is not a spouse, it makes you vulnerable and dependent. I think that it can cause problems in a relationship even if the person is being generous with no strings attached. It doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Having an S.O. who was not my husband supporting me financially would make me very, very uncomfortable. I wouldn't want to feel that I owed him anything, especially if we broke up. Even having an S.O. who is my husband supporting me 100% would make me uncomfortable - for a different reason - I would want to be self-sufficient with my own income should the need arise (e.g. his death or our divorce).

<slight hijack>
It's very dangerous to throw all your money into a joint account, because if one partner dies, the account is locked. This happened to someone I know. His wife died. A few days later he went to the bank to withdraw some money from their joint (and only) bank account. The teller conversationally remarked, "I haven't seen your wife in a while" to which he replied, "She passed away a few days ago." BAM! Suddenly he couldn't touch a dime of his own money until her will went through probate (I think... it was a good long time, in any case) even though she didn't actually earn any of it herself.
</slight hijack>

Well, sometimes things don't go as planned and people end up supporting each other, and it's really not always a big deal.

Before we left Chicago, Mr. valkyrie quit his job and I supported him for a bit. I also paid all of our moving expenses and supported us both for a few months after we moved. Now, I'm unemployed and he's supporting me. In the long term, I think that it's all going to balance out, so although I don't like being dependent on someone, I know that I haven't been in the past and won't always be. To me, it doesn't matter if we're married or not and I never feel as if I owe him anything. If he was an ass about money or had control issues, we wouldn't be together.

My husband has been the sole financial provider for me for the past 10 years... he even paid my student loans. We have a hefty life insurance policy in case of his death or disability.

In the unlikely case of divorce, alimony and child support would be enough to cover expenses until I found employment. Actually... we've agreed that I won't be employed while our children are still minors... even if it means that he pays more alimony that he would have to. It's just that important to us that I stay home with the children.

Happily, divorce is pretty much unthinkable to us. And we keep upping that life insurance policy.
;)

That's actually an Oklahoma thing. If divorce happens in the state, all assetts and debts are divided 50/50 regardless of who incurred them.

really, we didnt have any problem when my dad died in March. We were able to close out all accnt with out going thru any hoops. The only one we are having trouble with is the cell phone. No one is willing to work with us. But every one is did, the bank, SSA, his car, his insurance....

Yeah... I should probably clarify. :) When I say that I'm uncomfortable with the idea of my husband supporting me 100%, I mean in the long term.

When I was out of work a couple of years ago, my husband pretty much did support me for a few months until I found a consulting gig (I was collecting unemployment, but an unemployment check doesn't go very far!). But that was temporary and involuntary. It's also part of being married - you look out for each other when sh** happens.

But I'm uncomfortable with the idea of being a stay at home wife/mom for any length of time. There are many reasons for this, and I'm sure I've bored you all to tears with them :) but from the financial angle, I know that if something were to happen with my marriage, I wouldn't have to run out and get a job (possibly in a difficult economy) because I'd already have one. I wouldn't have to rely on life insurance or on alimony checks that might not materialize. Not only that, but one risk of being a SAHM and later re-entering the workforce is that you have a hole several years long in your resume. And in some fields (like mine - IT) if your knowledge is not current, you're sunk.

But that's me. Everyone has to make the decision that's right for them. I commend AXOjen and other SAHMs, but I could never be one myself.

I'm sorry about your father. :(

You are fortunate that you didn't have problems. Then again, the situation I described happened many years ago, and the bank in question had all kinds of weird policies.