Ask Dr. Helen: When Wife Out-Earns Hubby
My PJM column is up. In this column, a wife out-earns her husband and asks for advice on how to help him cope with her extra income. Do you have experience with this situation? If so, go drop a line in the comments there or here if you like.
Labels: PJM column
posted by Helen at 5:56 AM
49 Comments:
He should get up early like me.
Simple. Buy him a table saw.
Usually, in reality, a wife that permanently (not short-term) earns much more than her husband has little or no respect for him.
Sometimes the wife eventually leaves the husband (for a guy she respects), but more likely the marriage just drifts on and on, with the man getting used to his position as the dolt.
These situations always talk about the "wounded male ego", but men in that situation get it from all sides. I personally think they are idiots for getting into that situation / being leeches.
Also: This doesn't occur in a black box. You have to wonder what the dating process was like that led up to the marriage of a higher-earning woman and a man who either doesn't work or earns far less.
He was probably humiliated by her very early on in the process and didn't care. Maybe because he saw the money there, who knows. Or maybe a mommy to take care of things for him. And it's hard to know what she was thinking - maybe a desire to have a pliant boy. Ahh, the trials and tribulations of real love.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think the danger is also in status of a job as well as money. My wife has always had a job with higher social status, though her income was only slightly higher than mine at times. When business is good, I earn more.
But status, it counts also. College enrollment is mostly female and getting more so every year. Yet skilled trades are still mostly male and not likely to change soon.
I warned my students that regardless of the degree, they would return home and suddenly be expected to serve on a committee at church. 3 years on that committee and they will be asked to serve on the new building campaign. No one wil care that they had a degree in Pottery with a minor in Psychology. They have a DEGREE from a university.
Now, their husband might also have a degree. But as society crunches the large numbers, he might also be an electrician, plumber, wielder, builder, contractor, home inspector, ASC certified mechanic, or any other well-paid trade. When have you ever heard the comment "You know, we need more mechanics on this committee."
Who earns more - a social worker or an electrician? A teacher or a plumber? An MS/MA in psychology or a mechanic?
Yet, look at status in social terms.
BR549 - I would suggest the DeWalt job site saw. Lightweight to be portable, yet enough power to handle even the largest jobs.
My husband stopped working for a few years in order to go to graduate school. He was not able to finish because our youngest child was diagnosed with a severe developmental handicap. Since then I have always been the main wage earner.
I think the most important thing that we do is that we have divided responsibility for household bills in such a way that we both have about the same left over for discretionary spending, so for instance, with my higher income I pay the mortgage, grociers and insurance.
We both have different approaches to money - he is a saver and I am a spender - so it works out much better if I pay the bulk of the recurring bills and he saves for things like college and braces.
It's a relief when the big-ticket or unexpected expenses come up and he has the money socked away to deal with it.
We've been working together this way for fifteen years, and we have been married for twenty-five. Neither one of us is "in charge." We function pretty well as a partnership. We decided a long time ago that we would not let things fester and so we talk until we are both satisfied with the decision we make. Sometimes we talk for an awfully long time - days or weeks - but eventually we come to an agreement. I think that without this approach we would have split up long ago. You just can't function as a couple if one person feels like he or she has no power.
My wife and I will soon celebrate our 25th wedding anniversary. During those years, she has earned more than I on several occassions. However, since we see our marriage as a partnership instead of a competition, there has never been a problem. We've always combined our incomes into joint accounts and we discuss everything before making major financial decisions.
I'm very fortunate that she's very frugal (the outcome of being very poor during childhood). This has allowed us to build a 7 figure net worth over the years with our only debt being the mortgage on a rental property. Life is good because we worked hard to make it so.
My wife is getting back into the job market, and I would LOVE for her to make more money than I! We could send all our kids to a wonderful private school very near our house, pay off some lingering debt, and go to Disney World!
My self worth comes from making good choices, being kind, and having good morals more than it comes from making good money.
Trey
Well, my father only went to one semester of college after he got out of the Navy, decided it wasn't for him and took a six-week course in computer programming. That was in 1959. He became a systems analyst, got married and had four kids. In 1968, he was offered a position in the Rio Grande Valley, so he packed up his family and moved south. Back then computers were just coming onto the scene, and he installed the entire network on which the economy runs. Every bank, savings and loan, credit union, hospital, law office, any business that used a computer in the 70s and 80s, ran their system on a program written by my father. He worked his way up to president of the company and made good money.
My mother never went to college an hour in her life. She raised four children, and as soon as we were all in school, she went back to work. She started out as a secretary and apartment manager for a real estate company, got her agent's license, then her broker's license, and worked her way up to vice-president of the company. By the early 80s, she was making so much money she bought the company!
There was a time in the late 80s that my father's entire salary couldn't even cover the taxes on his wife's salary. People where he worked used to kid him about it. "How does it feel to know that your wife makes more money than you?"
To which he would respond, "How does it feel to know that my wife makes more money than you?"
It never was a source of contention betweeen them, because, after all, it was all community funds to them. But finally, after working for 30 years, my father semi-retired and started a part-time consulting business, while my mother continued selling real estate and running her company. She was elected president of the local board five years in a row and today is one of the most respected brokers in the state.
My father lived out the last years of his life relaxing and reading. He was a good man, content with his life and proud of his family. But cancer took him too early, about six years ago.
My mother still works. In fact, that's all she does. She's one of those "I have to have something to do" girls, and she's not going to stop. I quit teaching to help her run the company right before my father passed away, and I promised him on his death bed that I would look after her. Although, I will admit, that at the time I didn't realize I was committing myself to slavery.
My parents loved each other. They remained faithful to each other and raised their children together. Money was never an issue with them. Everything was always all about the partnership.
My mother didn't care that her husband made more money than she did when she was young. And my father didn't care that his wife made more money than he did when he was old. They just helped each other. In fact, I would say that he was most proud of her accomplishments, as she was of his. Isn't that the way it's supposed to be?
But my parents came from a different time and culture, one that valued marriage, commitment and sacrifice. How different things are today.
Dr. Helen:
Throughout my marriage, my wife has earned more money than I have, because she is further alone the academic ladder than yours truly.
It has never, and I mean never, been a problem. Not even when I was unemployed. And I am not surprised. I wouldn't blink if I needed to support my wife completely. But I wouldn't---she has always worked. Me, too.
When we first were married, we kept separate accounts. My wife let me "grow up" enough to trust her.
Nothing is perfect, of course. But it all has to do with the sensitivities and strengths of a given couple.
I'm not putting anyone down who has problems with a spouse earning more cash. I can see where that might happen. I am just very, very lucky it has never happened to me.
My wife is darned unique, and I know it.
My previous marriage? Not so much. That didn't work out so well, over money. So again, I understand from where folks are coming.
Great post.
Sure do my partner is 20 years my junior and earns 3 times as much as me. Naturally I claim 'Svengali' rights as she implements all of the brilliant ideas I have for her job...that way I can justify picking up some house-keeping money.
I see this statement:
"Not even when I was unemployed."
and then just a few sentences later I see this:
"But I wouldn't---she has always worked. Me, too."
--
So I guess we can conclude that you even worked while you weren't working.
Tmink:
I agree that people shouldn't base their self-worth on how much money they have (ESPECIALLY if they didn't earn the money themselves), but sorry, this sentence is kind of silly in my book:
"My self worth comes from making good choices, being kind, and having good morals more than it comes from making good money."
It would have fit in during a consciousness-raising seminar at Big Sur in the early 1970s, though.
gawainsghost:
Tell us that story again about how you single-handedly killed a tiger with your bare hands during the Great Boer war.
I never get tired of hearing that one.
a few years ago my wife worked in the mortgage business and was making more than I was. Since we have a good relationship, it was never a problem with us, the money is "family" money, not his or hers. Now that she is laid off and probably will never be able to find another job in the mortgage business I am the sole bread-winner and that isn't a problem for either of us.
People that are so hung up on how much one person earns over another need to look at their relationship. The family needs money and who earns it is not important, as a couple, it should be the two of you looking out for each other and facing the world together, a "I'm the breadwinner and he is a freeloader" relationship is destructive.
Tether, fair assessment. What was silly about it?
Also, I have to plead guilty in that I work as a psychologist and the lingo has corrupted my everyday speech. So, guilty as charged! But please, improve upon what I said so I don't sound so behind the times.
Trey (or Stewart Smalley if you prefer)
tmink:
Maybe I shouldn't have put it that way. The basic difference here is that you would view me as an overly cynical person and I view you as an overly naive person. The "truth", or reality, is probably somewhere in between that. Or maybe reality is over on your side, I have no idea.
How's THAT for an answer? lol
By the way, in general, I don't think my distaste for reading some of the stories here comes from a completely unreal la-la land.
I have seen some pretty disgusting (and to some: unexpected) behavior when roles reverse.
Partner supports the other partner for 10 years. Day in and day out, under the illusion that the other partner would certainly do the same. The first partner loses the job, is out of work, and the other partner doesn't even hesitate in leaving. And finding a different supporter.
If you look around in the world, you can see examples of people laboring under illusions.
"... and the other partner doesn't even hesitate in leaving."
---
That's when the job loss involves a long-term thing due to structural reasons and not simply short-term unemployment.
It's often said that money problems are the leading cause of divorce and that may well be true. Most people are either spenders or savers. If both partners in a marriage are savers, there probably won't be any financial issues. If one is a spender and the other a saver, there will be some conflict. If both are spenders then they're probably heading for a financial meltdown.
I have two stepsons. My youngest stepson married a lawyer while he was an E-5 in the Navy. She has always earned a larger salary even now when he's an officer. They have a true partnership in their marriage so who brings home the bigger paycheck has never been an issue with them. He was a spender and she a saver. Over the years, she has influenced him in so many positive ways that he's a saver, too. We went so far as to tell him that if they ever split up, we're keeping her!
My oldest stepson has made one financial mistake after another. He recently split up with his long-term girlfriend/short term wife. They were both spenders who have disasterous credit ratings. "Living for the moment" may sound like a nice line from a Visa commerical but it really isn't a good way to manage your finances.
Dear Tether:
I see you haven't worked much in academia, on or off the tenure track. My point still holds.
I think if a spouse doesn't try to earn cash, that is a problem. Differentials in earning power can cause problems, but as I said, I was lucky.
But as you write, different people have different experiences.
Tether, if that is your real name, do the letters F O mean anything to you?
My 30 year marriage is a lot like Larry's. For the early years of our marriage, my income was greater than my husband's. For the past 20 years, I've had virtually no income except the occasional part time job since I've devoted myself to being a mother and supporting his career.
It is, indeed, a partnership. Salary doesn't define worth or value of the contribution. I am blessed in that my husband recognizes this. It isn't "his" money, and when he was in college and I was the primary wage earner, it wasn't "my" money. I was investing our "our" future together.
Frankly, the problems sound to me more like selfishness and immaturity. If it wasn't money for these couples, it would be something else.
Anyone have any stats on what happens with alimony and child support when the woman makes more or if the man is the primary caretaker? I can't find good stats, although I doubt the courts are as generous to ex-husbands as they are to ex-wives.
JG,
It depends on the situation. Work experience and education can play into it a lot. My wife has a lot more work experience on her resume than I do.
I think you'd be better of JG, targetting the men who quite obviously are going after a woman because she can provide them with the lifestyle they want.
All I want is a new table saw. Even if I have to buy it myself.
tether --
"overly cynical" wasn't what came to mind reading your remarks.
Been a partnership all along. Relative income has never come up as far as I know (I am the male in the pair).
I'm unemployed (or "retired"), shee works part of the year.
I figure I pulled my share, now it is her turn.
Helens article with quotes from Cosmo and Redbook, and the comments gave excellent advice to "Lily".
All married men should read a couple of issues of Cosmo.
My wife and I married when we were both older (non-traditional) college students. She dropped her classes and worked to help me finish my degree. She also earned more while I was a teacher for a year.
I changed jobs and earned a lot more money. She went back to school and became a nurse. A few years later, I went to school full time to finish another master's degree. She was the sole breadwinner for those months.
Afterwards, my income increased to greater than hers over the years. A few years ago, she earned a higher salary as a surgery center nurse manager. The money was great but the job was killing her (I honestly believe that if she worked there much longer, she would be dead now). I convinced her to change to a lower stress job. She did, taking a huge pay cut in the process. However, I'd rather have her alive than have the extra money.
Arguing about money is poison to a marriage. For marriage to work, it has to be a partnership. I've never been keep on the separate accounts idea but if it works for others, then it's all for the best.
Tether wrote: "How's THAT for an answer?"
Well, disappointing! I was looking forward to the chance for self improvement. Now I do have a bit of trouble with thinking of myself as naive. I have been working with abused people since 1991, and it tends to take off some of the naivete.
But perhaps you mean to say that I am overly earnest! I have heard that before and am willing to take a deep breath, find my center, and say that I am at times overly earnest.
OK, that last bit was intentional, but I wonder if that was what you were saying, that I came across as a boy scout? Never wore the uniform, but that would be an accurate criticism.
I still would appreciate a way to say the same thing without sounding so damn nerdy though! Little help?
Trey
tmink:
I think people can be reality-based or even cynical in one area and be naive in another.
A good example is the (supposedly) hard-nosed businessman Lee Iococca. Few would describe him as naive in business, but in the area of family law and women, he was extremely naive.
After his wife of many years died, he got plucked like a Christmas goose by a stewardess. She even refused to move in with him - he paid for he condo in New York - and the marriage was over after 9 months. She got $3 million. Plucked like Christmas goose.
Other than that little nugget, I'm not sure I can help you further on your path to self-enlightenment.
Marriage, n. A community consisting of a master, a mistress, and two slaves, making in all two. ~Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, 1911
Tether, that makes you a complete tease then, you make a criticism, refuse to follow up with details, then offer non-sequitar comments.
Maybe you are just snarky!
Trey
Trust,
I can't find exact stats on how many women pay alimony but I believe I have read that it is around 5%. I have also read that judges are reluctant to give child support or alimony to men but frankly, these chivalrous judges are dying out and I think we will see more women having to foot the bill.
In addition, 44% of attorneys surveyed said that they are getting more requests for pre-nups from women in the past five years--it used to be all men. Here is a Forbes article on more women paying alimony:
http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/13/women-paying-alimony-lead_cx_pink_0313alimony_print.html
In addition, 44% of attorneys surveyed said that they are getting more requests for pre-nups from women in the past five years--it used to be all men.
This may be a tie in with previous articles about how more women are graduating college than men. If they're earning higher incomes then their prospective husbands or if they bring substancial assets to a marriage - either because they married later or as a result of divorce/widowhood - then it isn't necessarily a bad thing that more women are choosing to get a pre-nup. Sounds like a smart move even though it sends a mixed message to their future spouse.
I used to be against prenupts, but now I think they are wise (even though I didn't have one when I got married in 2004). Not because I want to foster mistrust amongst newlyweds, but because I want to take the (so-called) family courts out of play.
Helen, Interesting article. Thank you.
I'm every bit as opposed to women getting shafted by the courts as I am to men geting shafted ($6000 a month, i barely make that working 50 hours a week). I do find it amusing how some people are only concerned with equality when it gets them or theirs goodies, the minute they are expected to reciprocate, they are suddenly coming to their senses (ie., the closing line of "that's equality for you).
I would like to see someone do a study of how much money is redistributed from men to women, as well as from women to men, to see what the final totals are. I think we know which way it will go, but I think it would be interesting to see how it contradicts some conditional wisdom.
Trust.
Trust,
Yes, I was thinking about a study like that the other day when I read about a dating club? or show where women who had 4 million dollars were being hooked up with younger men. I wondered how many of those women with 4 million got the money in a divorce settlement and how many earned it on their own? It would be interesting to know.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trust wrote:I used to be against prenupts, but now I think they are wise. Not because I want to foster mistrust amongst newlyweds, but because I want to take the (so-called) family courts out of play.
__________
I wish to revise my statement somewhat.
Rather than the phrase "take the (so-called) family courts out of play", I'll revise to say I'd rather see people go into a written marriage agreement with a partner, where both have an understanding and "rules of disengagement" (so to speak) prior to marriage, than an unwritten, unpredictable marriage to the State largely dependent on the whims, biases, and moods of judicial activists (dare I say "despots").
Helen is such a blessing. Time to spend here has been one of the few good things about medical leave.
unfortunatly, some pre nups can be cancelled in certain states, if its "unfair", or if its over 10 years, or if the judge says, nah.. i am not having that, it must be like this.
i can find the data if you want..
http://uk.askmen.com/dating/curtsmith_100/133_dating_advice.html/posts/909466/10
Also, in the US states tend to consider most prenups invalid after 10 years of marriage, apparently with the presumption that a woman married that long intended to stay married and not simply turn around and divorce right after marriage. Also, contesting prenups during divorce is common in the US, and often judges do overturn them, even in cases of brief marriages. Anecdotal evidence on one forum I frequent says that marriages with a prenup seldom last more than a few years, so it's almost as if the prenup does poison the relationship. In sum: prenups are no panacea.
http://www.ncfamilylaw.com/download/prenup48.html
Don't count on escaping alimony payments. In New York and a few other states (including North Carolina), a spouse-to-be can waive the right to alimony. But Eleanor Alter (Patricia Duff's lawyer) points out that, if the judge thinks the deal's unfair, he or she can order you to pay anyway, no matter what the agreement might say. And in North Carolina there's a further restriction: if the terms of a "pre-nupt" eliminate spousal support and this causes one party to the agreement to be eligible for public assistance, the judge can --notwithstanding the terms of the agreement -- require the wealthier party to provide support
http://www.bauerfamilylaw.com/prenuptialagreement.html
In a few states, such as Maine, the agreement will automatically lapse after the birth of a child, unless the parties renew the agreement. In other states, a certain number of years of marriage will cause a prenuptial agreement to lapse. In states that have adopted the UPAA (Uniform Prenuptial Agreement Act), no sunset provision is provided by statute, but one could be privately contracted for.
Here's the deal with marriage and prenuptial agreements:
The legislature can pull the rug out any time it wants. If you enter into a marriage, the legislature can decide the terms of a divorce down the road. And major changes HAVE been introduced.
Some men married in the 1960s thinking that it was OK, because if they led a clean life, divorce wasn't going to be a problem ("fault-based divorce").
The state legislatures in the 1970s simply changed the terms of divorce. "No-fault" divorce was enacted. Now you were still married, but under completely different rules. If Cupcake decides she wants your money, but not you, and just because you are boring, not guilty of any bad behavior, Cupcake gets her way.
Prenuptial agreements aren't iron-clad to start with, although they can be reasonable if they don't have stipulations about third parties (i.e. children), if the spouse had legal representation and understood the document, and if the terms aren't considered to be lopsided or unfair.
But everything can change at the drop of a dime. I will personally never marry.
sid;
Go to Delta's web site and look at the X-5. Hoowah! Now, THAT is a table saw.
What's all the discussion about? Women wanted more opportunity? They got it. They wanted to make more money? No problem. So why all the b______t? If you make more money than the other person in a relationship, you should pay more of the bills. Doesn't matter what gender you are. This is NOT A GENDER ISSUE. This is a simple FAIRNESS ISSUE.
All of these complex, nonsensical conversations revolve around a few basic truths that no one really wants to acknolwegde: 1) Today's average career woman has NO intention of being the primary bill payer. 2) Most women want to make money but have a man pay all of their bills. 3) Women RARELY stay with men who make less money than them. 4) Women use all kinds of rationalizations and excuses, but the REAL reasons they don't want to be with men who make less money than them is because they don't want to pay for things.
Here's my experience with American urban professional women. They sit there and regale you with stories of their grrrlll power and 'independence,' and then when the bill comes, they head for the hills. So let's see; you're a liberated woman when it's convenient for you, and a traditional woman when it's convenient for you. Gee, sounds like a nice con-game you have going!
When a successful career woman asks ME to a nice steakhouse and buys ME dinner for once, I'll believe there's such a thing as 'strong and independent' women. Until then, I'll know it's all a big racket.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home