By Francis Bayes, WCI ColumnistBefore we married, my partner and I were in contrasting financial situations. My partner had more income and savings than me, a high savings rate, and a “set-it-and-forget-it” approach that was invested in a target date fund. Meanwhile, I was scraping by on an MD/PhD stipend, and I had to get up to speed on DIY personal finance.
When my partner and I married, we merged our finances and created a financial plan—for spending, saving, investing, and giving—that reflects our shared financial and non-financial goals. We have successfully worked together on various aspects of our financial plan: maximizing investing in our tax-protected accounts, refinancing my partner’s student loans, adjusting our spending, and saving to prepare for our child. Just as we have household chores that we prefer to do or avoid, I “enjoy” comparing student loan refinancing companies or learning about financial products that are better than Vanguard’s, so I have been responsible for implementing our decisions.
But more recently, when I try to improve any elements of our financial plan, I realize that I am tinkering. The Oxford Dictionary defines tinkering as: “to make small changes to something in order to repair or improve it, especially in a way that may not be helpful” (emphasis added). Our financial plan has been good enough for two bear markets, a job change, a cross-country move, and a new child. Yet, I still think about marginal, cumbersome ways to save money or boost investment returns.
I would save time and effort for myself and my partner if I consistently practiced partner-centered personal finance. This is inspired by patient-centered care, which focuses on the patient’s needs and desired outcomes. It is integral to all medical specialties, but especially so in psychiatry. Its applications range from using language such as “nonadherence” rather than “noncompliance” (thereby implying our shared responsibility) to helping the patient decide their treatment option via motivational interviewing.
In this column, I want to share how we have adopted a partner-centered approach to implementing our financial plan.
Use ‘Teach-Back' with Your Partner
Every year, we review our financial plan and progress toward financial independence, and we determine our spending, saving, and giving goals for the upcoming year. Some concepts, like savings rate and monthly cash flow, are familiar to both of us, so I provide summary updates. More esoteric concepts that would come out of a financial advisor’s mouth (e.g., how we calculate our annualized real return) require a refresher before we compare our annualized real return to benchmarks such as a target date fund (TL; DR: it is good enough).
At the end of our meeting, I use the “teach-back method” to assess how well I explain concepts that are unfamiliar to my partner. I borrow teach-back from my clinical practice in which I tell my patients or their family: “I want to make sure that I explained things clearly by asking you questions about what we have discussed. This is a way to test myself. Could you tell me about x-y-z?”
Teach-back elicits not only my partner’s understanding but also allows us to share each other’s thoughts and emotions about our financial plan and progress. It engages us in discussing important topics—such as the rationale for our asset allocation—that are not as interesting to my partner as knowing how much we spend and save every year. In some years, like 2022, teach-back helps reassess our ability to “stay the course” based on our shared understanding of stocks’ volatility and our investing timeframe. We can appreciate that we are on the same page emotionally and intellectually about our financial plan, and we can reinforce our positive progress.
More information here:
7 Ways to Get Your Partner on Board Financially
Actual Money Fights We’ve Had (and How We Solved Them)
Consolidate Brokerages and Accounts Where Possible
Myriad articles have been written about people losing track of their old 401(k) plans or making mistakes in the rollover process. When my partner switched jobs, I rolled over the old employer’s 401(k) into the new employer’s 401(k) right away. The process is so archaic, risky, and time-consuming—it requires a physical check to be mailed—that I would not wish it on my worst enemy.
I stopped dabbling in different financial products so that my partner can find most of our accounts with the brokerage where we already have our Roth IRA and HSA. Even with other banks and brokerages offering bonuses for new accounts, I have opened new accounts only with the same brokerage for various cash funds (e.g., emergency fund, baby fund) and investing goals (e.g., retirement, college). One exception is that I have wanted to use our brokerage’s cash management account as our checking account so that our cash would earn yield in their money market fund; however, my partner preferred to stay with our brick-and-mortar bank’s checking account for the sake of convenience and familiarity.
So, that’s what we did.
These consolidations are similar to how we changed my partner’s credit card strategy. I still “churn and burn” by opening new credit cards when their signup bonus is at or near an all-time high. I use 3-4 cards at any given time to maximize the return for each spending category, although it is like muscle memory at this point. Meanwhile, my partner only uses two credit cards to not bother with the complexity. The two cards provide a “good enough” strategy with points diversification and good earning rates.
Which one’s credit card strategy is better? On this site, many readers would side with my partner.
Include a Contingency Plan in the Financial Plan
I am only in my 30s, but it only takes one call shift to remind me that anything can happen to anyone at any time. If something were to happen to me, can my partner take over and follow our financial plan? Will they want to follow the plan alone?
My partner would very likely not care about investing in small-cap value. They would very likely not want to frequently rebalance crypto. They would likely not want to deal with (1) managing tax forms from different banks and brokerages or (2) consolidating those accounts.
Our financial plan includes the following contingency plan:
- Collect benefits from term life insurance policies.
- Follow up on beneficiary dispersion or account transfer for the deceased’s accounts.
- Continue to max out tax-deferred and tax-free accounts in the following order: 1) 401(k) employer match, 2) Roth IRA, 3) HSA, 4) 401(k). Every year, make sure to check the maximum contribution limits for the Roth IRA and HSA.
- Asset allocation. Buy US total stock market index funds (e.g., FXAIX, VTI) each time you contribute to the Roth IRA or HSA. For existing assets that are not US total stock market index funds, either: leave it as is OR sell all and buy VTI.
- Credit cards (what happens to points when one of us dies?). Transfer the deceased’s transferable credit card points to your account. Request Airline X, Airline Y, Hotel A, and Hotel B to transfer points.
- If this plan is too challenging or confusing, share this with our friend ABC and ask for help.
Most importantly, my partner will have the financial power of attorney so that they would not have to go through hoops to access my accounts and manage our finances if I am incapacitated.
More information here:
Preparing for Tragedy: Ensuring Your Partner Can Manage Without You
The Perspectives of an Older Investor vs. a Younger Investor
‘Make the Unbearable Bearable'
In some relationships, one partner—regardless of gender—approaches personal finance as a DIY hobby, while the other is less enthusiastic about the nuts and bolts of pursuing financial independence. Talking about anything finance-related can even be unbearable for the latter. If patient-centered care made Ken Schwartz’s experience with lung cancer more bearable, then surely a partner-centered approach to personal finance can help the more aversive partner be more involved in their shared journey to financial independence—and to be more prepared for any unexpected setbacks in their partnership.
Physicians train for years to learn about medicine. But financial literacy was not part of the curriculum. That’s where The White Coat Investor comes in—by offering tons of entry-level information to get you started on the right path. We have a FREE email series called WCI 101 that reviews the basics in bite-sized chunks. You can check out our Start Here page to learn all about personal finance for doctors. And you can peruse our Frequently Asked Questions to get even more info. It’s easy to feel overwhelmed when learning about finance. WCI is here to help!
What do you think? Would partner-centered personal finance help in your own relationship? Would you do anything different?
Thank you for this helpful post.
I really hate the word partner, I stopped reading after I saw that. Unless you’re gay, or you’re actually in a business together, describing the person you’re with as partner is the dumbest and the most vague possible descriptor. He’s obviously married, but he still says partner. Woke language continues to torment us even in 2025.
100% agree. This was a clunky painful read. Partner this, they that. The assiduous avoidance of specificity (wife? Husband? Him? Her?) overwhelmed whatever message this writer was aiming for.
People are increasingly forming households without getting married, whether they have kids or are heterosexual. High-income professionals are no different, although higher income correlates with higher marriage rate. I wanted to include those “nontraditional” households as well. This isn’t wokeness. It’s trying to reach a wider, and perhaps younger, audience who may need engagement on this topic even more. The same reason the WCI has columnists as a business decision.
If this were written just for me or a narrower audience, “wife-centered” or “spouse-centered” would’ve been fine. But would any of the following be any less clunky?
“Spouse/fiancé/boyfriend/girlfriend-centered finance”
“Husband/wife-centered finance”
Not everyone is married, and some adults feel that “boyfriend” or “girlfriend” sounds too juvenile or casual for a long-term um … partner. See? It just makes sense. Also, this nomenclature is nothing new, and certainly not “woke” (whatever that means in this context). I distinctly remember a mattress commercial in the early 2000s using the term partner in the context of sleep. That was probably the first time I heard the term used that way. Lots of people, regardless of sexuality, use it. If it’s distracting to you, you’re the odd one out.
Thanks for the feedback. Sometimes people use terms like that in hopes of offending as few people as possible in order to help as many as possible. Occasionally, that backfires, like in your case. Take what you find useful, leave the rest, and recognize we’re not intentionally trying to offend anyone.
What does “woke” mean? Many of what folks despair of are actually long standing in English. Using terms like “they” to denote a single person isn’t woke; in English it dates back to Shakespeare. Indeed, American courts have struggled with this since the 1800’s when deciding if statutes which say “he” include women. Even Jefferson wrote about English’s use of these terms – genders and plurals – shortly before his death entitled: “An essay or introductory lecture…dialects of the English language, 1825.” Partner also isn’t “woke.” Many of us know married folks whose spouse isn’t their partner in any sense of the word, just considered those who are abused. On the other hand, many seniors choose not to marry but they have a partner.
Note this important distinction: “my partner will have the financial power of attorney so that they would not have to go through hoops to access my accounts and manage our finances if I am incapacitated or dead.” The financial PoA applies for incapacitation but ends at death. When you are dead they will have to probate or otherwise transfer any of your accounts they are not listed on as coowners.
I have even been nervous about joint accounts and had spouse and MIL open a new account to ensure she had money if they bank froze any assets joint with FIL when he died. Probably unnecessary (and it was in that case) but worth verifying in advance with financial institutions and if as worried as me make JIC plans. (Guess I or my spouse would have to tap our separate credit union accounts, opened just for the interest rates, or borrow from the kids, if we suddenly couldn’t get to the main checking with all our direct deposits?) And I always recall that while a death certificate is all that’s needed for transfer on death etc. that death certificate took a month or more for the 3 parents who have died so far.
That’s a good catch! Hopefully Josh or WCI will see this and change accordingly, as it should say “…would not have to go through hoops to access my accounts and manage our finances if I am incapacitated” and exclude “and dead.”
I think you are also trying to highlight the differences between Joint With Rights of Survivorship (JWROS) vs. Joint Tenants In Common (JTIC) vs. Transfer on Death (TOD). At least on my brokerage, statements tell me that we have “JWROS TOD” accounts, so upon my death, my wife will still have 100% ownership, and she won’t have to show any death certificates.
Good points Jenn. Whether joint or separate, it may make sense to have a second, cash bearing account at a different institution than your primary bank/broker/custodian, in case of an emergency situation (tech foul-up, federal seizure, etc.). It would be bad luck for this to occur when you need some cash available.
One other thought, be sure your significant other has at least one credit card, where they are the primary holder. If all your credit cards list one of you as primary, when they die all the cards are closed and the survivor is left without. Dealing with this, while dealing with the death of a partner may be a struggle, both emotionally and financially.
Yikes! New issue to verify- think he’d be stuck with his Best Buy Visa card…
One other caveat; when we addressed this issue, I hoped to simply change the primary on one of our existing cards. No dice. I was told by all that this is not possible, so my partner had to apply for a card. That card was issued with a much lower limit than our other cards (about 1/4 of any other card), even though our credit scores are outstanding, she has the higher income, etc., etc. I imagine we will be able to increase this over time, but it points to doing this sooner vs. later, so the limit is high enough to be useful, when it is needed.
Franices nice article man and I like the partner focus 🙂