Wife Sparks Debate After Asking Husband To Pay $50k For Her Pregnancy

A man who has been dating his partner for six years said that they’ve been “spiritually married” for two years. Since there are no laws involved, their financial situation is usually planned out properly. They both earn over $175k a year after taxes and own a home together and split their finances 50/50. Now, the couple is considering having children. The man asked others online for support because he now feels like his wife is asking him to pay for her pregnancy. He said that she is asking him to compensate her for 6 to 12 months for the time she will have to take off to have their child. He's also scared of giving her an answer as he is worried that she might actually be pregnant.

The OP wrote: Her work place allows for maternity leave for up to a year, but only provides 50% of her salary for up to 6 months. The remaining 6 months is unpaid. She was very direct, and said that while her insurance would cover the vast majority of hospital related costs during pregnancy and childbirth, taking a 6 month break from work would cost her almost $50,000 since her pay would be cut in half. She is asking me to compensate her for that $50,000, in addition to agreeing to split any related but unexpected costs to pregnancy and childbirth. Her stance is that she is doing something for us to start a family, but it is not a true 50-50 split if she is expected to take a financial hit for it and I am not, given that our finances are separate. She had a printed list of expectations in terms of what she expected financially, listed some things that her insurance may not cover.

But the man hesitated, going on to write: While her ideal is to return to work after 6 months, she says it’s a real possibility that she may require more time off and decide, as things happen, to take up to a year off. So, she had another plan drafted for that. For the first 6 months, her work will give her 50% of her salary, and I would compensate her for the rest, but for the next 6 months, since her work would not compensate her, and because this loss is something she is doing for the family, she is “comfortable splitting the loss of her income”, and only asking me for 50% of her salary instead of 100% for the second 6 month period, and she will take the loss of 50% of her salary. The idea I guess is that both of us “suffer” half the loss of income for the second 6 month period. However, if she takes 7 to 11 months off, any months after the 6th can be prorated. “The idea of a payment plan to have a child is just gross,” he continued. “And many couples manage to do this without paying their wives to have children. But then, I suppose most couples are married legally and a loss to one person’s income is a loss to everyone. So in our situation, it makes logical sense, but there’s something so transactional about it that puts a bad taste in my mouth.”

Sure enough, the man's story made its way to other platforms including Twitter. Many Internet users trashed the man and thought the wife was being incredibly logical and smart. Many also noted how the OP did not want an official marriage because that makes it easier to “walk away,” should something “significantly change.” One person tweeted: Girl needs to get a cohabitation agreement or something, but I'm 100% for this. Reproductive labor is *work*, and the birthing partner should be financially compensated for this. Another called the man out saying: So what I just read is, "My partner will take the physical and career damage in order to bear our child (and the long-term financial consequences arising from those), but I am deeply repulsed and offended that she won't take the short-term financial damage as well."