My daughter's first job post school - what to do with her $?

small bean

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:01 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

Yes, you're mistaken. Halacha is not optional and not there for disputes. Halacha is to be followed. There are different types of mitzvos and a person can be mevater something like the father saying he allows his daughter to keep the money, but a person can't decide "halacha does not apply to me" chv and move on. Hilchos shabbos are the halachos applicable to shabbos, hilchos brochos to brochos, hilchos lashon hara to lashon hara. And so on and so forth. Shulchan urech would be a good place for you to begin learning about all of the halachos.

My husband said for a legal adult it's not so clear cut that the father can just take it. I didn't really understand the distinctions so I'm not going to quote.

He said it's a traditional thing and most don't do it today.

Either which way if you grew up knowing your parenrs take your money vs deciding at 17 it's different.

mommy3b2c

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:03 pm

simba wrote:

But calling a specific communities dysfunctional...

I have no idea which “community” this is. I don’t believe there is such a community. This practice is dysfunctional.

amother

Peony

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:17 pm

Op your answer is in your thread title it is "her money".
hope things improve fast

amother

Ebony

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:18 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

Of course, ok, to me there is a difference between the halachos between family members and hilchos shabbos or hilchos basor v'chalov, etc.

faigie

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:19 pm

| Yevamot
"Ishto k'gufo, ba'al k'ishto", one's wife is like one's own self; a husband is as one with his wife. Jewish thought viewed a husband and wife as one unit. Flowing from this assumption is the notion that all monies earned by the family would be pooled into one bank account. It was the husband's obligation to provide for the family, at a level on par with the living standard the wife was accustomed to in her home--unless the husband came from a wealthier family than his wife, in which case he was to maintain this higher standard of living for the family: "She rises with him, but does not go down with him" (Ketuvot 48a).

This holds true whether or not the wife decides to work--a decision left to her discretion--but if she so chooses to work, it was expected that her earnings would be included in the family bank account. Whether monies earned by a single women should also join the "family pool" upon marriage is subject to debate and discussion, and is a topic we hope to revisit when we study masechet Ketubot. But all agree that before a woman is married, she may do with her money as she pleases.

"Shomeret yavam, a women awaiting yibum, who acquired property, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel agree that she may sell them [or] give them away" (Yevamot 38a). If not for this ruling, one might have thought that the automatic bond created between the shomeret yavam and her brother-in-law may have designated any windfalls she receives to be included, once yibum occurs, in the family monetary pool. Yet while this woman is legally bound to her brother-in-law--a bond that will be affirmed and strengthened upon yibum, or broken due to chalitzah--in regards to her economic status she is free to do as she pleases. Once married, economic decisions had to be made in conjunction with her husband[1].

At the same time, once yibum is done and the couple married, the husband is responsible to support his sister-in-law turned wife[2]. At the same time, "he merits the possession of his [deceased] brother's assets" (Yevamot 40a) and according to many, upon the death of his father, he would receive a double inheritance--both his share and that of his deceased brother.

And if he does chalitzah? "One who performs chalitzah with his sister-in-law is like any of the other brothers regarding inheritance". The Gemara gives two (contradictory) explanations on the need for this ruling of the Mishnah.

On the one hand, one might have thought that just as one who does yibum inherits his brother's assets, such would be the case for one who does chalitzah as well, as it is "in place of yibum". This view resonates according to those views that chalitzah takes precedence over yibum. On the other hand, one might have thought that one who does chalitzah instead of yibum is to be "punished" for not carrying on his brother's legacy, a policy that accords with the view that yibum is to take precedence.

Yet whether yibum or chalitzah is to take precedence in theory (see here) has no economic bearing after the fact. One who does chalitzah is treated like any of the other brothers, who inherit the deceased brother's assets equally[3].

[1] With the husband the (only) one responsible to provide for the family, he was responsible for the family budget, which included, for example, buying his wife a new dress three times a year (Pesachim 109a). Interestingly, the wife could "opt-out" of the system (Ketubot 58b) and fully support herself with her own earnings, allowing her to keep a separate bank account free of any influence from her husband. While some may prefer a more "egalitarian approach" to family finances, I find this Talmudic discussion most fascinating, relevant, and ahead of its time. Our Rabbis grappled with what research has shown over and over again as the primary source of marital discord.
[2] Presumably, this would include any children the woman may have had from a previous marriage. The applicability of yibum is dependent on whether the husband had children, and any children he may be raising with his wife do not free her from yibum or chalitzah.
[3] If the father was still alive, he would inherit his son's assets, and only upon his death would the brothers inherit.
Related Posts

Some Concluding Thoughts on Masechet Yevamot
FEB 4, 2015 VIEW
Yevamot 116: One Witness Is Enough
FEB 2, 2015 VIEW
Yevamot 115: To Believe or Not to Believe
JAN 30, 2015 VIEW
Yevamot 114: Put Out the Fire
JAN 28, 2015 VIEW
Yevamot 109: Torah Study
JAN 23, 2015 VIEW

amother

Lightyellow

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 8:54 pm

mommy3b2c wrote:

I have no idea which “community” this is. I don’t believe there is such a community. This practice is dysfunctional.

There is no such community.
Some people think that if this is what their family does, then the entire community does it too.
But they don't.

Last edited by amother on Tue, Dec 21 2021, 8:44 am; edited 1 time in total

amother

DarkRed

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 9:11 pm

mommy3b2c wrote:

I have no idea which “community” this is. I don’t believe there is such a community. This practice is dysfunctional.

It's not a community practice. It's considered acceptable in many communities and would not be called dysfunctional the way you are viewing it, even amongst some people who do not practice it.

My mothers classmates all gave their parents their paychecks. Probably most of mine did too. Today many do but many don't.

Some of those parents use the money for day to day, some for their children's weddings, some only for extras,, some save it in an account, some don't need it but don't keep it separate, some gift it back, etc It's not a community practice with guidelines but it's not considered dysfunctional on a community level.

Everyone should do what's appropriate for their families in their communities without calling something perfectly functional dysfunctional. That's the issue here. You understand people have different expectations of themselves and their children/parents/finances right?

dancingqueen

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 9:18 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

But not everything in the shulchan aruch is halacha lmaaseh today. The reason that people see your comments as dysfunctional is that most people nowadays don’t live with the paradigm that a woman is the property of her father and then her husband. It’s really foreign to me and other posters I assume.

imanotmommy

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 10:15 pm

Sunny Days wrote:

I think after all these pages this is most down to earth understanding response. I hope op skips through all the rest and reads just this.

I think this is a good rule to follow in general... Always follow my opinion, because it's usually the right one.

(Sorry, it was too hard to resist adding this! Wink

)

amother

Lightyellow

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 10:18 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

You're assuming that this is what your mother's classmates and your classmates did.
I think you'd be surprised to find out that they did things very differently than your family did.
It is considered dysfunctional in your community. Even if people never said it to your face.

Last edited by amother on Tue, Dec 21 2021, 8:40 am; edited 1 time in total

Zehava

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 10:22 pm

I actually called a rav about this once. When I was 18 and idealistic. His answer was disappointingly on the side of “it’s not so clear cut but technically what you earn belongs to your father”.
I still had my own bank account and put most of my earnings in there. This question was regarding checks I was getting in the mail and that my father would open before I got a chance to see them.

amother

Salmon

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 10:42 pm

I can believe this was done "back in the day" as a matter of course, but I am sure it is not across the board anymore.

amother

DarkRed

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 10:58 pm

SafeAtLast wrote:

No it's not considered dysfunctional and it's even discussed and taught to us in school.

Mommyg8

Sun, Jul 04 2021, 11:35 pm

simba wrote:

Its dysfunctional cause it doesn't line up with your word view?

It actually sounds functional. Today we mostly live in a time of prosperity. We want more and better for our children. Maybe even coddle them to a fault..the snowflakes, cancel culture, self absorbed youth come from somewhere.

I was not raised like this but that doesn't mean I can't see it as a valid option. Especially when It may even have halachic backing.

Why are we all so close minded when veering right but when people announce on here the absolute craziest things we salute their bravado?

And to whomever compared this to rape, you should think many times before inflicting pain on the many rape victims here.

I love what you wrote here.

It was just a few short years ago that children, even adult children, were expected to work and contribute to the family. Many even left school in order to do so.

It's true that we live in unprecedented times, and many of us are uber comfortable, but it would be lying to say that EVERYONE today is equally comfortable. There is still a lot of poverty, unfortunately, and it would be wrong to judge someone when you've never lived in their shoes.

amother

Periwinkle

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 8:03 am

Can you ask her for her maaser? That might be a win win on both ends.
She will be contributing to the household while still keeping the money and practicing giving maaser.
Keep in mind that whatever decisions got you into this debt in the first place(amount of children, location, standard of living) were never hers to begin with. She may or may not make changes when she gets the chance.
Also keep in mind that there will be no motivation for her to work if you will take all her money.
Let her spread her wings, learn responsibility and how to handle money.

JoyInTheMorning

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 1:46 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

The things you mentioned aren't generally done but let's pretend they are....
Do they need to happen right away?
After the wedding her money goes to her husband so they can save, especially if the parents are shtitzing them but not all can afford that.
Some people have drusha geshank money.
Other people do get money gifted back from their parents. Everyone is different.
What happens when you pay for a wedding and have no savings left either? I don't see the difference here.

I don't understand some words.
What is shtitz?
What is drusha geshank?

Thank you.

amother

Salmon

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 1:54 pm

I think drusha geshank means dowry.
It's just a bit of an old fashioned way of doing finances, I guess, instead of doing it in a modern way where the girl saves up for marriage on her own.
If the girl's parents have been getting her money all along and then give her a dowry it really is her money anyway.
Interestingly I was recently reading an old book called Daughter's of Destiny about women who were a part of the European BY movement pre war.
One woman interviewed was the daughter of the Chafetz Chaim (she was from.his second marriage when he was much older). When she married, he signed a contract detailing her dowry. He promised to provide room and board for a certain amount of years, give quilts and feather pillows (the young couple lived on the second floor of his house and ate meals with the CC and his wife), but if something happened and he could no longer afford this, he did not need to sell his possessions to support them further.
I think the idea of a dowry is a throwback to what was done in Europe. In all Jewish circles.

amother

Wandflower

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 1:56 pm

JoyInTheMorning wrote:

I don't understand some words.
What is shtitz?
What is drusha geshank?

Thank you.

Shtitz is Yiddish for support
Drusha geshank is a wedding gift. It could be from friends and relatives as well, not necessarily parents (like dowry [נדן] would be).

amother

DarkRed

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 1:57 pm

JoyInTheMorning wrote:

I don't understand some words.
What is shtitz?
What is drusha geshank?

Thank you.

Shtitzing means supporting.
Drusha geshank means gifts. In the old days a chussen would give a drusha by the chasuna (like the pshetel said by a bar mitzvah bucher) and he'd get the wedding presents then so the gifts got the name drusha geshank.

amother

Wandflower

Mon, Jul 05 2021, 1:59 pm

amother [ DarkRed ] wrote:

So cute, I was wondering where drusha comes in! I learnt something new!