To what extent should two people merge after marriage?

[Thornton]

I've seen a few threads on this forum lately where people are discussing to what extent someone should merge with their spouse after marriage. Some people seem to think that a married couple should share everything: pay all their money into a joint account, "your" debts become "our" debts and we pay them off together, "your" kids become "our" kids and I pay half the child support and expenses, or do half of the parenting if the kids live with us, "your" problems become "our" problems and we deal with them together, "your" friends and hobbies become "our" friends and hobbies, etc. Other people think that a couple should maintain separate finances and pay equal amounts into a joint account, if the guy has kids then he should pay the child support out of his own money and the woman should only be responsible for the kids they have together, maybe one spouse shouldn't expect the other to be a parent to his/her child, and both people should still have their own friends and hobbies, etc.

 

Where do you draw the line at merging with a spouse after marriage? Do you merge emotionally but not financially? Do you merge families but not bank accounts? Would you put your spouse's name on an asset you already own, such as a house? Do you expect your spouse to share all their friends and hobbies? Should one spouse support the other through a college degree or something? Also, do you think different generations have a different attitude? Are younger or older people more likely to maintain their independence after marriage? Are people who have had more relationships (and therefore more breakups) more sceptical about merging with a spouse? I'm interested to hear people's opinions!

[Thornton]

Since I posted the original question, here is my take on things:

 

As I've lived with a few guys and have been engaged twice, I'm fully aware of how easy it is to be blinded by love and be mistaken about someone, and how easy it is for a relationship to break up, so I'm sceptical about completely merging with someone. I'm happy to merge families, I'm happy for my relatives to meet his and for my parents to treat the guy like a son. I'm happy to help a guy with his problems, support him emotionally, love him and do nice things for him, buy him gifts etc. If the relationship ends I don't lose out by having done any of those things. But I'm not keen to merge finances, to pay off his debts and share my savings with him, because if we separate I lose out big time given that I'm always the one with a small amount of savings and no debt or financial obligations. I guess if the guy was better off than me I would be more keen to merge financially, but in my experience that's hardly ever the case. I would be prepared to love someone's kids, to buy them gifts and help them out financially if they needed it, but I'm not prepared to pay any child support to his ex out of my own pocket.

 

I think older people who own significant assets like their own houses and who aren't ever planning to have kids together are much less likely to merge financially, especially if they've previously been divorced. Perhaps they're also more set in their ways and are also less likely to completely merge friends and hobbies etc. Very young people who have nothing to lose usually merge completely, but once people reach a certain age where they've experienced several breakups they're much more likely to be sceptical about merging completely with someone in case the relationship doesn't last. In my opinion, people of any age who hold more traditional values are more likely to merge completely.