“Your Husband Should Pay for Child Care!”
This morning, I had the unfortunate experience of stumbling over an advice column featured on New York Magazine’s “The Cut.” The piece was titled simply, “My Husband Won’t Pay for Child Care!” and in just a few paragraphs, financial advice columnist Charlotte Cowles proceeded to give absolute dangerous and ill-suited advice to a reader, whom was experiencing financial abuse at the hands of her husband.
Her husband, the reader explained, was refusing to contribute to child care expenses for their shared child. In addition, he was withholding money from her and being secretive about his earnings. The reader explained that she was paying a lot of their bills, while he paid for things like their cable subscription (I am confident he is the only one watching TV in their home so of course it’s a bill he doesn’t mind paying for) and whatever vacations they have embarked on.
I am still fuming and absolutely shocked at the advice Ms. Cowles gave this reader, so I would like to state in clear terms that withholding money, being secretive about your income, not permitting your spouse to “see” what you spend your money on, not contributing to the financial wellbeing of your children/household and utilizing money (or lack thereof) to cause harm, anxiety, doubt and to instill fear in your partner is an act of financial abuse.
I would also like to state in clear terms that violence is not just limited to the physical harm of another person; violence is restricting your partner from participating in their day-to-day life without restriction. Violence is limiting your child’s growth and educational opportunities by refusing to contribute. Violence is denying your partner access to capital in all of its forms; financial, social and otherwise.
Because women — statistically — earn less than men and therefore, have access to less financial resources, financial abuse is a particularly cunning act of violence.
This reader wrote Charlotte Cowles quite desperately and she deserved better than this. She deserved for Ms. Cowles to say, “Dear Reader, here’s my two cents: your husband is placing you and your child at risk by causing financial harm; by not contributing to the financial well-being of you and your child, he is causing an instability that otherwise would not be present. I find it particularly concerning that when he does pay for things, they seemingly directly benefit him. I am also concerned that he is utilizing his funds to inflict fear and distress upon you, to the extent that you felt the need to write to me. Please consult with a local domestic violence shelter whom can further elaborate on what financial abuse entails and please begin to consider how else your husband has likely harmed you and your shared child. Be well, Charlotte Cowles.”
Instead, Ms. Cowles encouraged her reader to give her husband “the benefit of the doubt.” something the reader obviously already had done because she was writing Ms. Cowles for help. Ms. Cowles and New York Magazine had an opportunity to educate their readers on financial abuse and they failed. They failed this reader, her child and the other women whom will read this particular piece looking for guidance. The men reading this piece would at no point reconsider how they may be exerting control over their household either. They would likely just feel justified in their actions.
I am disappointed but not shocked. We have seen major publications drop the ball this year as it regards the topic of violence against women and children. I am writing this piece in the hopes that we can start a dialogue that counters some of these harmful narratives.
Women and children deserve better than this. Financial abuse has lifelong, multi-generational implications. To downplay this type of behavior is reckless and careless. Do better, New York Magazine and Ms. Cowles.
