Wife gets inheiritance

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

When it all comes down to....it is HER money and she can do whatever she wants to with it. In many ways, it is not your business.
Maybe you should look at why you feel that she needs to spend that money on enhancing you life. She has already used some of the money to eradicate the debt and replace a car for the family. If she wants to let it sit in the bank for the kids, that is her choice!
I am more concerned with your resentment rather than her not parting with the wealth.

By that logic, isn't the money that he earned all those decades "his" and not "hers?" That whole presumption -- in either direction -- seems destructive to me.

I do agree this feels like a marriage-threatening circumstance if the resentment mounts on either side. Rather than argue over whether the money is his or hers, I'd try to figure out why they both don't look at it as "theirs" and go from there. These waters run deep and I suspect it's about more than the money and its ownership.

If the OP's desire is to save the marriage, it sounds like a good time to get into counselling.

 

[haha]

IMO counseling is overrated. Why would OP pay any attention to what his wife might say in counseling? She has already spoken volumes. He has the best information that he will ever have about where his wife's head is. For Heaven's sake, she entertains herself all day with "their car", yet suggests that he take a bus. Would it be too much to ask that she peel off $20,000 or so from a very nice inheritance to get another car? He does not appear to be asking for co-ownership, only that her new wealth be used in some small part to enhance the lives of all family members.

He thought he had an "all for one, and one for all" relationship. He has discovered that he does not.

Meanwhile, he expects a good inheritance himself. A lot easier to be sure he hangs on to this if it comes to him as 'Joe Blow, a single man".

If it were me, I would get out of Dodge now. But it isn't me, so he should do whatever he wants to do. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a knot in his stomach.

Ha

 

[DangerMouse]

Just wondering who did the $20k of debt belong to that she so generously paid for ... was it his, hers or joint?

For those who think the wife is ok to keep it all to herself, what if Mr Jambo buys a lottery ticket and wins the mega millions jackpot of $50 million - should he consider that his money?

 

[FIREd]

For those who think the wife is ok to keep it all to herself, what if Mr Jambo buys a lottery ticket and wins the mega millions jackpot of $50 million - should he consider that his money?

If they keep their finances joint, then he bought the ticket with joint money and the winnings are theirs IMO. If they keep their finances separate, then you could argue that the winnings are his. BUT, since the winnings would probably be split 50/50 in case of a divorce, then I say keep the peace and share the winnings from day 1.

 

[Moemg]

.

He thought he had an "all for one, and one for all" relationship. He has discovered that he does not.

/quote]
ing

I have to agree with Ha . if I was with someone for a lot less than 32 years and they were hoarding money for their future nursing home I'd question were is the We in this equation .

 

[WhoDaresWins]

Inheritance

So sorry that this cash infusion is causing such turmoil in a 32 year marriage. As Jambo indicates that the relationship was previously amicable, it seems that Mrs. Jambo has some inner turmoil over sharing. Insecurity maybe? Guilt over spending resources that her hardworking parents scrimped to accumulate? Possibly she feels better looking at this money as a legacy for the children or as asset to be deployed in case of emergency only? Jambo, if you have been happy for 32 years, pretend this money doesn't exist. Don't let it eat away at your marriage. Over time, your wife's comfort level with using this resource to enhance your lives might change. I am not unsympathetic to your feelings on this matter. My LH and I married young. He had nothing. I had a small inheritance from my Mom, and I worked to support him through med school. Everything we had was in one pot and remained that way throughout our marriage. BTW, I can certainly understand why older, established people who marry would want a pre-nup and separation of assets. I can also understand why you might want to keep anything you might inherit in the future in your name alone.

 

[Nords]

This is why we're disclaiming any parental inheritances... assuming we don't end up financially supporting them in the first place.

If we really wanted to be cruel, mean, and vengeful we'd take them and gift them to our kid. But hopefully it all ends up at the right charity.

Jambo, you seem to feel that you've contributed to the marriage out of proportion to your "returns". One could even wonder if you feel that your spouse owes a certain dollar contribution to the partnership to rebalance the books. Yet from her perspective she may see herself as the fiscal defender of funding the years of long-term care that she's actuarially going to have to spend on your behalf. If she sees herself spending the money to pay for your care and then her care in the years to come, then perhaps she'd be a bit hesitant to spend it on an extra car now.

Perhaps a marital-diplomacy error was the presumption that the inheritance was "ours" instead of hers, or at least that you'd have some input into how it'd be used. It might be worth starting over, acknowledging that it's hers to spend or save or give away as she wishes, and seeing where the two of you go from there.

Maybe the focus should be on how you and your daughter fund your transportation options without spouse's assistance. Because that certainly seems to be the reality.

 

[citrine]

Financedude....I never said that the OP should shut up and take it.
Inheritances are personal and I think that the wife should be able to do whatever she wants to with it because her parents were the ones who scrimped and saved it for her. I also think it is smart that she is saving it for her later years.....we all know that on average men die before women. This way she will not be destitute once the OP passes on and become a burden to their children. It makes perfect sense to me.

I also think that when the OP gets his inheritance that he should be able to do whatever he wants with it. I am sure that the DD can get a decent car for under 10K.

 

[tuixiu]

In my marriage everything is our money, be it when I was the only bread-winner while she was still in law school or when she passed me in income because of said law school. I believe it's a fundamental aspect of marriage all the rewards belong to both and reasonable discussion should drive how it's handled. I couldn't imagine receiving any type of windfall and not engaging her in what our ideas are with compromise on both sides on how to handle it. I don't get it, really honestly don't understand how that's possible to say no it's mine you have no say since it's mine mine all mine.

Craziness.

 

[tuixiu]

I also think it is smart that she is saving it for her later years.....we all know that on average men die before women. This way she will not be destitute once the OP passes on and become a burden to their children. It makes perfect sense to me.

I don't think the point is whether any one of us agrees with the wisdom of it since we really don't know much about their financial situation.

To me it's not the wisdom of one or the other, it's the willingness to compromise and the spouse who's got equal share in the relationship's opinion.

By the "her parents worked so it's her say" logic we could also say that a housewife has absolutely no say in personal finance matters since the husband is earning the money. If she believes he's not saving enough for retirement or is stupid for investing in Uncle Will's new restaurant does she have a say since he's the one who's name is on the pay check?

 

[citrine]

I think people are not getting what I am saying.....maybe this will clarify things:

For me, I would have his, mine, and ours. The ours would consist of the money we create together regardless of who stayed home with the kids.

As for the inheritance which is only in her name, I don't think that she has to share if she does not want to....it is in her name.

In the reality of today when divorce rates are 60% and mates are trading in their spouses for a younger version....how can one not be realistic and have a pre-nup where both parties are protected in case of divorce?

 

[tuixiu]

Thanks for the clarification I think it's an interesting discussion and I hope nobody takes it past just a simple difference of opinions, I certainly respect yours.

Isn't all the money you earn done together? What if he wins the lottery having bought the ticket on his time with his extra cash? Or more interesting what if they were very poor and she decided they weren't fixing the hole in the roof or broken heater because some inheritance was just hers and she wanted to spend it on a trip to Tahiti with her friends?

Sure that last one is a ridiculous toy example but it's basically the same thing in that one person in the relationship's opinion having no say since a check was written with one name on it.

It's not about the money, or what it's being spent on... it's about the respect to your spouse of their say in it. Same way with misfortune, if she got sued by someone and lost a million dollar judgement in just her name does her let her suffer alone financially?

 

[REWahoo]

Interesting to see how each poster addresses this issue based on their own personal matrimonial/relationship experiences.

Too bad we have heard only one side of the story. Not that I doubt for a second anything jambo has told us, but this is a situation where we need input from both perspectives to really understand what's going on.

 

[Khan]

My opinion as a 58 year old long divorced no children female:

You need to talk.

If she thinks that hers is hers and yours is both of yours, there is a serious disconnect.

Perhaps you could come to an agreement to spend the inheritance income for both of you.

What is she saving it for?

 

[Zathras]

This may go deeper, it may be that the foundation of the issue is that they see spending differently and have different priorities.
Previously though, she may have said little or even nothing thinking she had no right to interject he thoughts on finances if she was not contributing as much.

I do think that people's own experiences influence heavily their opinions on this. My wife and I have a joint account and sole accounts. It just seems much easier on both of us, and keeps both of us involved in taking care of our joint and individual finances.

But without additional information, everyone posting here is going to make assumptions about what is happening. So I still think the best advice is for the OP and DW to talk it out, and if that doesn't work, talk it out with a third party (counselor, friend, bartender, whatever).

 

[Zathras]

...
Sure that last one is a ridiculous toy example but it's basically the same thing in that one person in the relationship's opinion having no say since a check was written with one name on it.

I definately agree that they should discuss it and spend/save it as decided by them together. However, while he should have a 'say' in how that is done, shouldn't she also have a 'say' in the matter?
If they can't agree, then what?

It's not about the money, or what it's being spent on... it's about the respect to your spouse of their say in it.

Very good point and one that is easy to miss. Again though, doesn't that respect go both ways?

 

[chris2008]

You should calmly talk with her, maybe with the help of marriage counselling, about your feelings and your both financial contributions to the family in the past.
IMO a fair deal could be that DW keeps the principal intact, but at least 50% of the income from it goes to the family budget and helps to cover expenses that add joy to life or make life easier.
You should not have to buy a 2nd car from your 401k, but maybe she has other concerns against a 2nd car?

 

[jambo101]

Jambo, you seem to feel that you've contributed to the marriage out of proportion to your "returns". One could even wonder if you feel that your spouse owes a certain dollar contribution to the partnership to rebalance the books. Yet from her perspective she may see herself as the fiscal defender of funding the years of long-term care that she's actuarially going to have to spend on your behalf. If she sees herself spending the money to pay for your care and then her care in the years to come, then perhaps she'd be a bit hesitant to spend it on an extra car now.

Perhaps a marital-diplomacy error was the presumption that the inheritance was "ours" instead of hers, or at least that you'd have some input into how it'd be used. It might be worth starting over, acknowledging that it's hers to spend or save or give away as she wishes, and seeing where the two of you go from there.

Thats it in a nutshell..Never gave much thought to any financial balance i just thought we were contributing to the best of our abilities for the betterment of the whole union. Very disappointing to be with your spouse for so long thinking that we are going through life as a team only to discover that all along it wasnt a mutual concept.The issue is over between us and i will accept her position on the matter but new seeds have been sewn into the relationship and i hope they arent the seeds of destruction.
Time will tell.
Thanks for all the great responses.

 

[saluki9]

In the reality of today when divorce rates are 60% and mates are trading in their spouses for a younger version....how can one not be realistic and have a pre-nup where both parties are protected in case of divorce?

Because some of us believe that it poisons the marriage from the start.

Can I guess that you're not married?

 

[freebird5825]

Thats it in a nutshell..Never gave much thought to any financial balance i just thought we were contributing to the best of our abilities for the betterment of the whole union. Very disappointing to be with your spouse for so long thinking that we are going through life as a team only to discover that all along it wasnt a mutual concept.The issue is over between us and i will accept her position on the matter but new seeds have been sewn into the relationship and i hope they arent the seeds of destruction.
Time will tell.
Thanks for all the great responses.

I sincerely hope this gets w*rked out for both of your sakes. I certainly learned a lot from the various viewpoints set forth here.
I filled dh2b in on the basic premise of this thread. I asked dh2b what he honestly thought about our "his, hers, ours" $ system. He said he was very happy with it because he could buy all the technotoys he could afford after satisfying the "ours" part. It gives him a sense of independence he really likes.
I recognize that we have a totally different situation and nowhere near the longevity that a lot of you all have. We are just starting out, life #2 for both of us.
I guess what I'm trying to say is your post had an unintended side benefit, in that he and I had a very good discussion about "so what would we do if this was us?".
We concluded that "ours" come first, and "his" and "hers" is secondary to that.

 

[citrine]

Because some of us believe that it poisons the marriage from the start.

Can I guess that you're not married?

Having expectations poison any relationship be it a marriage or a friendship.
I am not married and am 34.....I have had time to observe, think, and learn from other people.

 

[canadianteddy]

Interesting to see how each poster addresses this issue based on their own personal matrimonial/relationship experiences.

Too bad we have heard only one side of the story. Not that I doubt for a second anything jambo has told us, but this is a situation where we need input from both perspectives to really understand what's going on.

My sentiments also.

Wow, an emotionally charged thread that started me thinking. Not exactly sure I liked my own thoughts.

Jambo: How emotionally supportive were you during DW's dealings with the passing of her parents? Was their passing prolonged and did she witness the cost of long term care? Was she the main caregiver for her parents? Does she feel she "earned" this inheritance because of these issues? It's not so much the money as the emotions behind it IMO.

 

[Kronk]

Citrine, that certainly works fine for a new relationship, but you can't change the rules of the game after 30 years.

The way this situation is playing out for Jambo is: what is mine is ours; what is hers is hers.

I suppose Jambo's future inheritance will be his and his alone. Still seems like an unhappy resolution.

 

[ChrisC]

Interesting thread in which I can see both sides because I've been on both sides, well almost. At bottom, it comes down to how a couple makes decisions about handling the couple's assets when there's a special attachment to the source of a particular asset or fund. My wife of 32 years, the former divorce lawyer who suffers from an occupational hazard of tracing funds, likes to tell me that it was her separate CD account (funded from her separate earnings before she met me) that was tapped as the downpayment for our first home purchase and that it was the income from her law practice that, in one fell swoop, killed the mortgage on the residence where we raised our kids. And when there was a modest piece of property she inherited, the proceeds from the sale went initially into a separate CD account -- I wasn't even listed as a beneficiary. This rubbed me the wrong way a bit, but I understood her view and the need for her to lay claim to "owning" a major piece of the financial picture in our relationship. That separate CD was in her name for many years and she's added others as separate CDs but recently we moved to having all CDs entered as joint accounts. My wife still needs to lay ownership claim to some things and that's all right with me, especially because she wants to retain a certain degree of financial independence separate from me.

When my wife points out that she paid the downpayment for our first house and her income paid off our mortgage, I start tallying the other numbers and it's clear to us that my financial contributions over the years dwarf her contributions. My steady income over the years and one big financial award I received around ten years ago have anchored our financial situation and all of it has gone in joint accounts. In fact, my retirement accounts and stable pension will provide us with most of the financial security when we both retire (and we are literally "3 bad days from retirement"). Two years ago, I inherited a valuable piece of real estate along with my siblings. The value of the property is quite considerable -- even in this downturn. I view this property has "joint property" with my wife but decisions over its use or sale, like the property my wife previously inherited, simply rest with me -- I consult with my wife about this because she's my partner in life and I hope she agrees with what I doing -- but I view this matter as solely within my decision-making realm, as long as it doesn't implicate the use of our joint funds.

I think Jambo's wife is entirely right in solely deciding what she wants to do with her inheritance which has special significance to her. Give her more space; let her have her say on this one; let her operate freely on this. It's only money in the end, right? Eventually she'll come around, and 32 years of history would suggest that her inheritance will likely, according to her own schedule, be used for the common benefit.

 

[FinanceDude]

In the reality of today when divorce rates are 60% and mates are trading in their spouses for a younger version....how can one not be realistic and have a pre-nup where both parties are protected in case of divorce?

Pre-nups are tough when you're 32 years in.......