Trick or treat: do spouses need common money
Disagreements over money issues can turn family life into a nightmare. Psychologists and economists believe that the stability of a relationship largely depends on how the spouses allocate finances. There are two main approaches to running a joint household: combining budgets and separate wallets. Izvestia figured out in which scenario the couple risks breaking up over time, and which option is a guarantee of a happy life and material well—being.
How to reduce the likelihood of conflicts
Joint decision-making regarding expenses contributes to strengthening family well-being, but requires a high level of trust and coordination of actions, which does not happen in every cell of society. Separate finances also make it possible to maintain the financial independence of the partners. This reduces the likelihood of conflicts about the importance of shopping, but, in the opinion of society, introduces a certain coldness into the relationship. Psychologist Yuri Kudryavtsev believes that a separate budget can really lead to thoughts of mutual distrust.
"It's like sleeping in different beds, separate from each other," Kudryavtsev says. — And the common budget is about joint farming, trust and dialogue, which is great for relationships.
Lack of trust violates the so-called basic security in a relationship, which can eventually lead to a breakup. Yuri Kudryavtsev advises discussing upcoming expenses and agreeing on what the money will be spent on. Over the years, many families, especially if the husband and wife receive about the same amount, come to compromise options. For example, someone takes on the responsibility of paying for children's clubs and sections, another finances utilities, and the husband and wife spend money on groceries from a common wallet, paying with the same family card. At the same time, the spouses save something together and each have their own "free" funds, sometimes helping each other out. From the point of view of family psychology, this is a good relationship scenario, which assumes that everyone can have their own needs and expenses, the expert emphasizes.
— The financial reality has changed a lot, — says Alina Koroleva, Candidate of Psychological Sciences. — Previously, there was only cash, which was usually put in one box at home — that's the joint budget. And now, most of the time, the money is on the card (accounts) of each partner.
According to Alina Koroleva, usually before a significant change in circumstances — the birth of a child or the financial problems of one of the partners — couples do not come to discuss issues of a joint budget. But in such cases, separate spending does not indicate a lack of love, but indicates a prolonged period of "entry" into a relationship. The mature stage begins when the spouses begin to discuss spending. Thanks to banking applications, you can create accounts with shared access. Most often, the partners continue to use separate accounts along with such a common "wallet", and the family council determines priority expenses, agrees on who will actually pay for what.
Muscovite Natalia Minaeva has been married for 25 years. She does not consider her family budget to be systemic, but the spouses adhere to certain rules.
— Our husband buys the groceries mostly, and he spends a lot of money on them. He also pays for our utilities and utilities in his daughter's apartment," says Minaeva. — And I'm trying to save up enough for some kind of cultural life — trips, theater, exhibitions. I often buy new clothes for children. In general, everything is spontaneous, and we don't have a common wallet, but we have enough for everything and everyone is happy.
Yuri Kudryavtsev believes that separate wallets are quite acceptable.: This allows each partner to manage their finances more freely. It is good when a husband and wife make a purchase plan in advance and tell each other about what they have already purchased, it strengthens trust.
IT specialist Dmitry, the father of two children, advocates strict planning, clearly writes everything down in a tablet and monitors, as they say, the targeted spending of funds. The man believes that it was only thanks to this that he managed to buy two apartments on a family mortgage. They rent out one living space, and the whole family lives in the other. His wife supports Dmitry — they have a common wallet, which receives her husband's salary and the income of her part-time spouse.
From Kudryavtsev's point of view, saving money in a common piggy bank is also a wonderful decision. "In fact, a normal family presupposes partnerships that are the opposite of codependents," he emphasizes.
In any case, the basis for building the foundation of relationships and the proper use of family funds will be dialogue and the opportunity to speak the "same" language, understandable to both, and to hear each other. That's what both psychologists think. This also applies to the financial sector, which, in essence, refers to basic security, and other areas of living together.
Henpecked or the head of the family
If there is no mutual understanding, then it is very easy to turn family life into an absurdity. This applies to all areas of life, but in terms of money it is especially significant. In the last century, henpecked men were ridiculed, to whom their economic wives gave a ruble for lunch, strictly controlling expenses. At the same time, there was such a thing as a stash — money hidden from a vigilant spouse. In some families, it is still accepted that women "manage" the budget, accumulating funds for themselves and controlling their husband's expenses. For men accustomed to maternal care, this option seems quite comfortable. However, according to psychologists, such a scenario is often considered unacceptable in society.
— This, in principle, indicates a toxic relationship, when a woman is the dominant figure, and a man chooses the role of victim, warns Yuri Kudryavtsev.
In his opinion, this option is fraught with personal problems. A woman will constantly control her husband in everything, and even more so in expenses, because, in her opinion, he is clumsy and good for nothing.
— In this case, there is no question of trust in principle: the husband does not have any authority (in the normal sense). For his wife, he is an empty place," continues Yuri Kudryavtsev.
Alina Koroleva calls financial violence a relationship in which a man is deprived of the freedom to manage a significant family resource — money. It doesn't lead to anything good, she warns.
The option when the husband is the main earner and fully provides for all expenses, leaving his wife her salary "on the pins", is considered the most desirable, from the point of view of society. "Our men have a well—developed responsibility for the safety of their family, so they take on the basic security," explains Kudryavtsev.
— But when the financial situation changes for the worse, the normal behavior of a woman is to take it for granted, support her man and adjust expenses depending on the situation. Then they will get through the crisis and return to financial abundance again," says Yuri Kudryavtsev.
If a woman continues to live as before, on a grand scale, not noticing her husband's problems, then the prospects for the family are sad. You can't envy such a man: he will be accused of financial insolvency, humiliated, and eventually such a family will fall apart.
— If a man is a breadwinner, and his wife does not pay attention to the reduction in income, then their family is a soap bubble that will inevitably burst. Such a life will lead to an increase in debts and loans or to the breakdown of relationships. This is a powerful signal about the lack of mutual understanding in the field of finance between the partners," says Alina Koroleva.
Tyrant and despot
But Kudryavtsev calls the situation when a man holds the budget in his own hands and takes most of her salary from his wife extreme. This behavior indicates a lack of trust in the family. A man in such a relationship demonstrates controlling behavior: he clearly seeks to maintain his power over a woman and, most likely, can be a hidden or overt tyrant.
According to Alina Koroleva, if a man takes the budget into his own hands, then this is also a variant of the norm, but in the event that the wife does not want and is not able to monitor the rational use of family funds, is used to being a spender, etc. Then she transfers responsibility for family expenses to her husband so that there is enough for all needs. But in this case, the husband must make decisions about expenses, taking into account the needs of his wife. If the spouse does not have personal funds, because she does not work and is engaged in the family, then she must have a conditional amount per month, which she spends completely at her discretion.
— There are cases when men deliberately make a woman financially dependent in order to gain power over her. This is financial violence," the psychologist warns. — It is difficult to get out of such dependence if a woman does not have her own funds and work. Therefore, in the event of a divorce, she finds herself in a very vulnerable financial condition.
Kudryavtsev agrees with his colleague: there will be no happiness in a family in which the wife does not work, and the husband provides for everyone, but at the same time skimps on expenses for his wife, discussing and tracking her every personal purchase.
— It's not about finances, but about the attitude towards a woman, which can be called a sign of her depreciation, — explains Yuri Kudryavtsev. — Such depreciation may not be openly expressed in words, but may be manifested by actions, such as stinginess in spending on a wife. Like, "you don't deserve it," "you already have it," "unnecessary spending on your pointless trinkets," etc.
So family well-being is impossible in families where both domineering women and tyrant men reign. Such a relationship cannot be happy and harmonious a priori, although it can last a lifetime.
Money in the morning, chairs in the evening
Since money is one of the important resources of a family, experts recommend discussing the issues related to it at the very beginning of a relationship. Then there will be no disagreements about the budget in family life.
— Moreover, the sooner the topic of finance arises when meeting, the better, — says Alina Koroleva. — People often get embarrassed and refrain from discussing money topics. However, it is precisely on this basis that similarities or differences between potential partners can quickly appear.
Problems will inevitably make themselves felt in a home where spouses cannot or do not want to negotiate family expenses. In fact, the spouses are stuck in the initial stage of the relationship. This indicates uncertainty about the future together or too different financial priorities, says Alina Koroleva. This inability to negotiate plays a fatal role.
The expert, summarizing the above, emphasizes that in modern realities, any option for storing and using funds can be considered a joint budget — it is important when the partners agree on the structure of their family expenses. The psychologist considers it an absolutely normal option to keep part of the finances — such personal funds make the position of partners more free and stable. Everyone individually decides how to spend them. This is good, because there is no absolute agreement of opinion on all issues. This means that you can spend your personal funds on something that your partner considers inappropriate. And then you can avoid some conflicts. And if there are still stumbling blocks, it is better not to remain silent: it is better to relieve tension at the "negotiating table" in time.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
