When money is a couple's secret, children also pay the price

BarcelonaMoney has a peculiarity: it is essential to support a family, but it remains one of the topics that is hardest to talk about. How much does each person earn? What belongs to both? What can be spent without consulting the other? What debts are there? What savings? And, above all, what happens when one of the members of the couple decides that a part of this information is theirs alone?

A bank account that the other does not know about, a part of the salary that is hidden, an investment that is not explained, purchases that are denied, or a debt accumulated in secret. These are behaviors that have begun to be grouped under the concept of financial infidelity, a concept that resonates more strongly than ever in psychology consultations, couples therapy sessions, and financial advisory offices. But, when there are children, the consequences can go far beyond the relationship between the two adults.

To understand why money can come to have so much power within a couple, the psychologist and expert in relationships and human systems Dimitra Doumpioti proposes looking at it precisely as a matter of power. “Money is power,” she explains. And within a couple, she says, there exist power dynamics that are not necessarily negative: they are part of the relationship and the exchange of value between two people.

The peculiarity of a couple is that it implies a fusion that does not occur with the same intensity in other relationships. Sharing money, housing, projects, or children also implies sharing a part of one's own vulnerability. “Sharing makes us more vulnerable,” points out Doumpioti. And when members of a couple do not know how to manage these power differences—who has more money, who earns more, who decides what is done with it—dynamics of control can appear.

This helps to understand why financial infidelity is not simply an argument about an expense. What lies behind it is the breaking of a pact on how resources are shared and how decisions are made within the family.

The secret that eats away at the family project

Octavi Garcia, financial advisor and author of several books, defines financial infidelity as "the concealment of one's financial situation from one's partner." The forms can be diverse: "Layoffs that are not explained, investments that have not been consulted, cryptocurrencies, hidden expenses, secret accounts, debts, loans, gambling, or compulsive purchases."

It can also happen in reverse: someone hiding income or assets. In all these cases there is a common element: a part of the family's economic reality remains unknown to the other member.

And the problem is not necessarily that a couple has separate accounts. Garcia considers economic autonomy to be healthy. The conflict appears when autonomy ceases to be a shared agreement and becomes concealment. That is why he advocates for total transparency and for both members to jointly analyze family income and expenses. "There is still a great taboo about talking about money," he notes.

For Doumpioti, this difficulty in talking about it has a deeper explanation. Money is one of the dimensions in which power is manifested within a relationship, and this can make certain conversations especially uncomfortable. Talking about money involves showing what we have, what we need, and to what extent we depend on the other.

The psychologist also recalls that money and sex are two of the elements that help differentiate a couple's relationship from other human systems. Sharing them involves exposing oneself. And when one does not know how to manage this vulnerability, power can end up becoming control.

That is why, says Doumpioti, when one of the members hides money, the issue is not just what they have done with the resources. It is also necessary to ask what that secret means within the relationship and what consequences it has for the other.

And the children, where do they fit in?

This is where an issue that initially seemed to be between two people becomes a family problem. Maria Rosa Mirada, psychologist and director of Parèntesi Espais Psicoterapèutics, is blunt: "Financial infidelity inevitably has consequences for children."

The reason is that the children are part of the family project that is affected. When one of the parents decides to allocate money to a matter that falls outside this project, Mirada explains, it can create a situation of loneliness and stress for the other parent. And this wear and tear ends up affecting parenting.

The effects can be much more material than it seems. If the family economy suffers, activities that were previously part of the children's daily lives may be reduced: soccer, painting, music, or other extracurricular activities. Routines may also change or, in more serious situations, their housing.

"Children are not stupid," points out Mirada. If the family has to move house or can no longer do things they used to do, the child knows that something has changed, even if no one explains exactly what has happened.

The problem is that adults often try to protect them precisely by hiding the situation from them. Mirada explains that it may happen that one parent assumes the pressure of not telling the children anything while trying to support the family. But the secret does not necessarily eliminate what the children perceive.

As they grow older, they may see that their mother or father works more, is more stressed, or has less time. They may observe arguments, changes in routine, or sacrifices they do not understand. "Children end up living in a mirage," summarizes the psychologist.

When the child tries to restore order

The situation can become even more complicated when the child ends up assuming a responsibility that does not belong to them. According to Mirada, faced with an overwhelmed family context, some children develop "an urgency to become adults" and to try to "bring common sense to the house".

It is a role reversal: the adults, who should provide security, are immersed in the conflict and the child tries to compensate for this instability. "The parents are such children that they cannot be children," says Mirada.

This idea is especially relevant because the problem is not only whether the child knows or not the exact amount of money there is at home. What they may end up absorbing is the tension that surrounds money.

And here the economic issue reconnects with Doumpioti's idea of power. If money determines who can decide, who depends on whom, or who has the capacity to leave a relationship, children grow up within this system even if they do not participate directly.

Doumpioti establishes a fundamental difference between the couple and the children: "The couple can take the money and leave, children never stop being children". The child, therefore, does not have the same capacity to escape from a family dynamic as adults. For this reason, according to Mirada, the child is "the one who has and suffers the greatest helplessness".

A lesson for the future

The conflict can also leave a mark that goes beyond the specific moment. Mirada believes that a situation of this type can generate an "economic trauma" and, above all, a lot of distrust. If the person with whom a family project was to be built has used the money outside of that project, the experience can influence the way the child understands relationships when they become an adult. A tendency to control money within future romantic relationships or a difficulty in trusting the other when it comes to sharing resources may appear, she explains.

It is an especially significant consequence because children not only learn what adults tell them, but also what they observe. If at home money is a secret, a source of control, or a constant motive for conflict, that is the relationship with money that they see.

Doumpioti places it in a broader framework: romantic relationships are also relationships in which value, autonomy, and power are exchanged. "We haven't been trained to have difficult conversations," she states. And talking about money can be one of those especially difficult conversations. Not talking about it, however, does not make the problem disappear. It only makes it more difficult to know what is happening.

Explaining without burdening them with the problem

For this reason, one of the most delicate issues is what should be explained to children when the family's economic situation becomes complicated. Mirada argues that it is necessary to stand together and convey that there is a problem, but also that the adults will work to solve it.

This does not mean turning children into confidants or giving them a responsibility that does not belong to them. If the family cannot afford a certain activity, it is possible to say no and explain that it is not possible right now. But Mirada warns against constantly repeating "we don't have money," because this message can end up triggering in children the need to become adults. The key is for the child to understand that the problem belongs to the adults and that the adults will take care of it.

It is also necessary to observe how the child responds. The discomfort, explains Mirada, can appear in their behavior, in their relationship with other children, or in daily habits. A child may be more irritable, talk back more, or have their routines altered because they spend more time with other relatives while the parent works.

Not all children will react the same way, nor does an economic difficulty necessarily imply these consequences. But when economic concealment becomes a sustained family conflict, the child can end up paying a price that does not belong to them.

Shared money, shared responsibilities

Family economy, therefore, is not just a sum of income and expenses. It is also a way of organizing life. Who works, who cares, who saves, who decides, and who has the capacity to manage resources are issues that end up affecting the family as a whole.

Garcia argues that couples should jointly review their income and expenses and reach clear agreements. For him, transparency is key. Doumpioti adds that the relationship with money also requires a pact regarding power and everyone's autonomy. And Mirada takes this conversation to the place where it is often looked at the least: the children.

Because a child does not need to know how much each of their parents earns or know all the details of a debt. But they do need to know, through actions, that the adults who care for them can work as a team, that problems are not their responsibility, and that, even when money fails, security and care should not cease to be shared.