Ask A Financial Therapist: What Happens When My Partner’s Rich And I’m Not?

You grew up “normal”—your partner grew up rich. Let the tension begin

Money is complicated in more ways than we realize. Most advice speaks to numbers, but financial therapist Amanda Clayman gets to the root of the problem: the underlying needs, emotions, and behaviors that drive our financial choices.

Dilemma: You’re in a relationship with someone who grew up in circumstances you might describe as “privileged”—or wealthy—with access to second and third homes, private chefs, and what seems like a never-ending trust fund. You came from a middle-class home where vacations happened once every decade. The differences weren’t apparent at first, but as you move forward with day-to-day life, from dinners out, to expensive, spontaneous splurges, the tension is starting to build. Can two people from different financial backgrounds be happy together?

Amanda Clayman: When it comes to money and relationships, difference is the norm. It may not sound very romantic, but one of our primary motivations for partnering up is to form a team: with our partner, we get a stable source of support; we have a shared vision and a shared effort to achieve that; and we can divide up tasks and specialize, so each person doesn’t have to be and do all of the things.

Here’s the secret: The strongest teams are not made up of partners who have exactly the same strengths. In fact, our subconscious has a way of attracting us to someone who has a different approach and different point of view, because they have the potential to contribute something that’s needed for a more balanced system.

When working with couples, I define a healthy financial decision-making process model as one that has five characteristics:

  1. Equal (both partners have the same amount of power)
  2. Inclusive (both participate)
  3. Transparent (both have access to information)
  4. Sustainable (it is not unfairly burdensome to either)
  5. Flexible (it can change as needs and priorities shift)

Look at how you and your partner approach financial decisions and management. Where do these characteristics show up? Where are they lacking? For example, do you both have a say in the family budget? Does one person feel tempted to act out and hide their spending, because the other is so controlling? How do you introduce new goals or propose changes to earning and spending?

Get specific about your differences and where they come from

Whether we mean to or not, there’s a lot we assume when we see someone as different. Growing up in a nonaffluent family money culture, it’s possible you were exposed to negative messages about wealth that you may not have even noticed. Maybe you remember your dad grumbling about “that jerk in the Mercedes” who just cut him off. The association between selfish behavior and luxury vehicles was probably not intentional, but that was the message you might’ve picked up: that rich people were jerks and your dad didn’t like them.

When you notice ways that your partner views money and luxury differently than you, try to be as specific as possible about how that difference shows up. When your partner argues that you should buy a designer couch because a quality piece will last longer, do you see that as a valid point, or evidence that this person never had to sleep on a futon in their life? (And futon-sleeping builds character, thank you very much!)

What to do next: When you notice instances of your partner’s behavior that reflect their wealthy upbringing, ask yourself: What associations do I have with these kinds of actions and words? How do I feel in these situations? Are you anxious, angry, resentful? Why?

Identify power dynamics

People who grew up with the status and privilege of wealth may come into relationships with an expectation that their opinions will be heard and their wishes heeded. They may even feel as if wealth serves as confirmation that their opinions and beliefs are correct—and anyone who comes from less money and who thinks differently is simply wrong.

This imbalance of financial power can complicate adult partnerships in a couple significant ways. First, if there are financial strings attached, it can be difficult for the person from wealth to fully separate from their family in order to establish a primary bond with a partner. Money keeps them dependent on their family of origin. If someone grows up in a dominating, autocratic family system, they may also have trouble understanding what appropriate communication, collaboration, and compromise even look like. They see control as “all or nothing.”

One such couple I worked with struggled with how to manage the wife’s trust fund. She saw it as her money and resisted using it for joint responsibilities and goals. She didn’t even want her partner to know how much was in it, as this information was treated as extremely private within the family. She also insisted they spend weeks of the summer at her parents’ beach house, though she herself chafed at this obligation. Her husband resented being shut out of these decisions. He felt like an outsider, powerless to change the dynamic that affected them both. It took a tremendous amount of work to overcome the wife’s conditioning to control information, protect her family of origin, and learn to share decision-making power.

What to do next: Think about how your family system and your partner’s were different. Invite your partner to talk about these differences in a way that is nonjudgmental and focused on exploration as opposed to change. Here are a few starter questions: How did people talk about money in your family? How did financial decisions get made? In what ways do you feel as if this affected you and your financial choices?

Make a money mission statement

You and your partner each bring something necessary and valuable to the relationship—including the different approaches you bring to money. When your partner wants a five-star resort, they might appreciate a reminder that the goal is to pay off student loans, and that a staycation would be better choice this year. Perhaps you even meet in the middle and road trip to a nearby state park. It’s when you each insist on getting “your way” that cooperation and trust break down, and money turns into a source of competition, conflict, and control.

What to do next: To develop cooperation and trust, I recommend creating a Money Mission Statement for you and your partner. Think of it as a way of documenting what you both agree is important in terms of financial values, goals, and process.

Here’s an example:

In our family, we agree that adventure, caring for others, and doing work that we love are central to a happy life. We believe experiences are more important than things, and we commit to a simpler material life so that we can prioritize these values. We make time to think about our money, talk through decisions, and support each other’s dreams and goals. In the future, we hope to have the financial freedom to travel and spend time with family. Saving and investing today are how we can make that hope a reality.

The goal is to shift focus from your differences to what you have in common with your partner. It can also serve as a point of reference, so you recognize when one or both of you make financial choices that are not “on mission.” It is much more neutral to say, “By going out to eat so much, I feel like we’re not sticking with our value of preparing for the future,” as opposed to, “You spend too much on restaurants.”

Money often points us toward ways that we can grow as people. Exploring you and your partner’s differences can help create a more harmonious financial life—and a deeper level of intimacy and commitment.

Screenshot via (left) Wikimedia Commons (right)

Greta Thunberg has been dubbed the "Joan of Arc of climate change" for good reason. The 16-year-old activist embodies the courage and conviction of the unlikely underdog heroine, as well as the seemingly innate ability to lead a movement.

Thunberg has dedicated her young life to waking up the world to the climate crisis we face and cutting the crap that gets in the way of fixing it. Her speeches are a unique blend of calm rationality and no-holds-barred bluntness. She speaks truth to power, dispassionately and unflinchingly, and it is glorious.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Ottawa Humane Society / Flickr

The Trump Administration won't be remembered for being kind to animals.

In 2018, it launched a new effort to reinstate cruel hunting practices in Alaska that had been outlawed under Obama. Hunters will be able to shoot hibernating bear cubs, murder wolf and coyote cubs while in their dens, and use dogs to hunt black bears.

Efforts to end animal cruelty by the USDA have been curtailed as well. In 2016, under the Obama Administration, the USDA issued 4,944 animal welfare citations, in two years the numbers dropped to just 1,716.

Keep Reading Show less

The disappearance of 40-year-old mortgage broker William Earl Moldt remained a mystery for 22 years because the technology used to find him hadn't been developed yet.

Moldt was reported missing on November 8, 1997. He had left a nightclub around 11 p.m. where he had been drinking. He wasn't known as a heavy drinker and witnesses at the bar said he didn't seem intoxicated when he left.

Keep Reading Show less
via Real Time with Bill Maher / YouTube and The Late Late Show with James Corden / YouTube

A controversial editorial on America's obesity epidemic and healthcare by comedian Bill Maher on his HBO show "Real Time" inspired a thoughtful, and funny, response by James Cordon. It also made for a great debate about healthcare that Americans are avoiding.

At the end of the September 6th episode of "Real Time, " Maher turned to the camera for his usual editorial and discussed how obesity is a huge part of the healthcare debate that no one is having.

"At Next Thursday's debate, one of the candidates has to say, 'The problem with our healthcare system is Americans eat shit and too much of it.' All the candidates will mention their health plans but no one will bring up the key factor: the citizens don't lift a finger to help," Maher said sternly.

Keep Reading Show less
via Gage Skidmore

The common stereotypes about liberals and conservatives are that liberals are bleeding hearts and conservatives are cold-hearted.

It makes sense, conservatives want limited government and to cut social programs that help the more vulnerable members of society. Whereas liberals don't mind paying a few more dollars in taxes to help the unfortunate.

A recent study out of Belgium scientifically supports the notion that people who scored lower on emotional ability tests tend to have right-wing and racist views.

Keep Reading Show less