Tension with Wife's Family over Finances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lmao ok look I have another take. if her parents really cared about getting the money back for college, they would’ve documented it and made her sign it formally alongside a payment plan. At the same time, they probably would’ve agreed to pause the loan if she was a student again. I think it’s right that OP shouldn’t have to pay back this “loan” (which for all intents and purposes is really just a lesson in debt management), and the wife should just work it out with her parents without OP’s involvement or money.

I don’t see OP’s point about subsidizing though. You’re paying your own way for your own things on vacations. You have the option not to go. If the ILs complain you could be really blunt: we can’t currently afford it unless you pay for our flights and hotels.

For restaurants, you could lean in and force your FIL to itemize and not split 50/50 if you think it’s very unfair or lopsided.

What do you think forcing someone to sign something like that does? Are they going to take her to court and sue her?

DP. I mean, yes? If the parents expected to be paid back then everything should be done at an arms-length including the note. Leaving these things unclear is how people manipulate others.

+1. I really think OP needs to step back from the loan piece- just defelct to your wife, because whatever agreement there was is between the wife and her parents. There's no formal debt that OP assumed by marriage. She needs to stand up for herself and work it out on her own.

Just say no to some of the expensive trips and dinners- who cares if they get mad? It's wild that people would drop so much money on luxuries but be so stingy with funding education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lmao ok look I have another take. if her parents really cared about getting the money back for college, they would’ve documented it and made her sign it formally alongside a payment plan. At the same time, they probably would’ve agreed to pause the loan if she was a student again. I think it’s right that OP shouldn’t have to pay back this “loan” (which for all intents and purposes is really just a lesson in debt management), and the wife should just work it out with her parents without OP’s involvement or money.

I don’t see OP’s point about subsidizing though. You’re paying your own way for your own things on vacations. You have the option not to go. If the ILs complain you could be really blunt: we can’t currently afford it unless you pay for our flights and hotels.

For restaurants, you could lean in and force your FIL to itemize and not split 50/50 if you think it’s very unfair or lopsided.

What do you think forcing someone to sign something like that does? Are they going to take her to court and sue her?

DP. I mean, yes? If the parents expected to be paid back then everything should be done at an arms-length including the note. Leaving these things unclear is how people manipulate others.

Do OP's elders have a contract with him to pay for everything as they age? I don't think they do so maybe wife should put her foot down on that. Who do they think they are asking the young to pay for the old?

I know you think you are being clever but you are actually just supporting OP’s point. It is a healthy family dynamic where the elders support the youngers financially and the youngers help the elders later on if finances change. That reflects one normal course of economic resources and interdependence in an extended family. This isn’t the only possible way to do it, but it is one *reciprocal* arrangement that is morally supported and fair.

What the FIL did is no such thing. He neither engaged in an actual arms length transaction (which would have made everything clearer and more understandable and thus not manipulable later on); nor did he put reasonable parental limits on college costs; nor did he just do what the vast vast majority of parents fortunate enjoy to have the money would do (just pay for college).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

Again, I cannot genuinely beleive that some of you think this approach was good parenting- you do you though. "Skin in the game" to me means defining up front how much we plan to contribute and helping our kids figure out how they can finance the rest if there is a differntial at their chosen school- e.g., summer/part-time job (which I would encourage regardless), applying for scholarships, modest loan if needed but only what they would qualify for indenpendently. No 17-18yo child would be able to take out $200k on their own, GMAFB.

You have no idea if they talked about all of this or not. IMO sounds like the wife isn't very smart about finances and expects her wealthy father or husband to always subsidize her choices.

You are correct that no 18 yr old would be able to take out a $200K loan. And that's why the dad was willing to give her that interest free, lifetime loan.

He built his wealth on his own presumably without a parent who gave him a 0% $200K loan that he could pay pack over his lifetime. He expected her to be able to do the same. Knowing that she had to pay back the loan, she still chose to get a graduate degree that paid little. She's no longer an 18 yr old, presumably, but continues to make bad choices. That's on her.

Plenty of parents expect their kids to pay some rent at some point if they return home after graduation, even those who chose expensive colleges majoring in low paying fields. I guess the parents are being manipulative for expecting their adult kids to pay their way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

This was not “skin in the game.” It was financial manipulation of a naive child. Refusing to pay anything for college when you have plenty of money is crummy parenting. Putting reasonable conditions and limits on what you would pay is fine - but that’s not what FIL did.

Expecting your children to pay some of their way through college is the definition of "skin in the game". They didn't refuse to pay for college. They gave her a 0% interest loan to pay for an expensive college majoring in something with low ROI. She needed skin in the game.

More than likely, she has her entire life to pay off the loan, again, with 0 % interest. Perhaps they never expect her to pay back all of the loan, but they want her to have some skin in the game, so they gave her the lifetime 0% interest.

The wife sounds entitled, IMO.

“We don’t want to pay for college so we will just give you a ‘loan’ that you have to repay forever in whatever amount we decide at the time” is textbook manipulation. Not “skin in the game.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

Again, I cannot genuinely beleive that some of you think this approach was good parenting- you do you though. "Skin in the game" to me means defining up front how much we plan to contribute and helping our kids figure out how they can finance the rest if there is a differntial at their chosen school- e.g., summer/part-time job (which I would encourage regardless), applying for scholarships, modest loan if needed but only what they would qualify for indenpendently. No 17-18yo child would be able to take out $200k on their own, GMAFB.

You have no idea if they talked about all of this or not. IMO sounds like the wife isn't very smart about finances and expects her wealthy father or husband to always subsidize her choices.

You are correct that no 18 yr old would be able to take out a $200K loan. And that's why the dad was willing to give her that interest free, lifetime loan.

He built his wealth on his own presumably without a parent who gave him a 0% $200K loan that he could pay pack over his lifetime. He expected her to be able to do the same. Knowing that she had to pay back the loan, she still chose to get a graduate degree that paid little. She's no longer an 18 yr old, presumably, but continues to make bad choices. That's on her.

Plenty of parents expect their kids to pay some rent at some point if they return home after graduation, even those who chose expensive colleges majoring in low paying fields. I guess the parents are being manipulative for expecting their adult kids to pay their way.

lol OK. If it was an “interest fee lifetime loan” then I guess it is due in a balloon payment in 2075.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You told your father-in-law that your wife wouldn’t be paying back a family loan? No wonder he’s pissed.

OP here. She would not be paying it back with marital income. Since she is now back in school and not earning income that means that I would not be making payments on it with my income.

That’s not how debt works. Jesus, I would hate you too.

Meh. If the FIL wanted to be repaid like a bank then he should have set the loan up with formalities or just made his daughter take out actual loans. While I think in good conscience OP’s wife should try to pay something back, it also seems like the FIL is a cheapskate and possibly using the money to try to control his daughter. Possibly the FIL had no intention of ever collecting on the “loan” but is now acting like a bank that he has a rich son in law. And of course, one expects and hopes that a parent has more regard for the affordability of debt as compared to a shady payday lender …

Yeah I was wondering that too. Like if she didn't marry someone wealthy would FIL still be inivitng them on expensive pay-your-own-way trips while collecting on this loan? Because when I was paying back my loans (not nearly as much as the one in question here) as young professional there was no way I could afford expensive travel. I was scouring Southwest deals.

But she is married to a rich man, and they can afford to pay back the loan. They can also choose to not go to these dinners and trips.

Where is the wife in all this? Does she say no to the parents when they say they want to go to an expensive trip or dinner? She seems to have no backbone but wants the men in her life to subsidize her poor choices, and then not have to deal with the consequences of those choices.

She chose twice to get a degree that doesn't pay much. She seems to have gone from one rich man to another expecting them to pay her way.

This man is selfish and controlling. She needs to get a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

Again, I cannot genuinely beleive that some of you think this approach was good parenting- you do you though. "Skin in the game" to me means defining up front how much we plan to contribute and helping our kids figure out how they can finance the rest if there is a differntial at their chosen school- e.g., summer/part-time job (which I would encourage regardless), applying for scholarships, modest loan if needed but only what they would qualify for indenpendently. No 17-18yo child would be able to take out $200k on their own, GMAFB.

You have no idea if they talked about all of this or not. IMO sounds like the wife isn't very smart about finances and expects her wealthy father or husband to always subsidize her choices.

You are correct that no 18 yr old would be able to take out a $200K loan. And that's why the dad was willing to give her that interest free, lifetime loan.

He built his wealth on his own presumably without a parent who gave him a 0% $200K loan that he could pay pack over his lifetime. He expected her to be able to do the same. Knowing that she had to pay back the loan, she still chose to get a graduate degree that paid little. She's no longer an 18 yr old, presumably, but continues to make bad choices. That's on her.

Plenty of parents expect their kids to pay some rent at some point if they return home after graduation, even those who chose expensive colleges majoring in low paying fields. I guess the parents are being manipulative for expecting their adult kids to pay their way.

I agree that the wife sounds completely financially illiterate. That is partly a parental fail though. Maybe the parents despite their wealth weren't very literate either. Like they didn't even have a dedicated savings account to pay for part of college? They could have used that to help educate her by having her contribute earnings from her HS job. Because surely a blue collar dad like that would have his kids out there working and getting experience once they could, right? I don't think a loan for part of it is totally out of line but to do that for the entire pricetag is wild to me for such a wealthy family. Maybe rich folks do things differently than the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

Again, I cannot genuinely beleive that some of you think this approach was good parenting- you do you though. "Skin in the game" to me means defining up front how much we plan to contribute and helping our kids figure out how they can finance the rest if there is a differntial at their chosen school- e.g., summer/part-time job (which I would encourage regardless), applying for scholarships, modest loan if needed but only what they would qualify for indenpendently. No 17-18yo child would be able to take out $200k on their own, GMAFB.

You have no idea if they talked about all of this or not. IMO sounds like the wife isn't very smart about finances and expects her wealthy father or husband to always subsidize her choices.

You are correct that no 18 yr old would be able to take out a $200K loan. And that's why the dad was willing to give her that interest free, lifetime loan.

He built his wealth on his own presumably without a parent who gave him a 0% $200K loan that he could pay pack over his lifetime. He expected her to be able to do the same. Knowing that she had to pay back the loan, she still chose to get a graduate degree that paid little. She's no longer an 18 yr old, presumably, but continues to make bad choices. That's on her.

Plenty of parents expect their kids to pay some rent at some point if they return home after graduation, even those who chose expensive colleges majoring in low paying fields. I guess the parents are being manipulative for expecting their adult kids to pay their way.

lol OK. If it was an “interest fee lifetime loan” then I guess it is due in a balloon payment in 2075.

hahaha exactly- OP has tons of time if she has her whole life to pay. Who does she send the payments to after her parents pass on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You told your father-in-law that your wife wouldn’t be paying back a family loan? No wonder he’s pissed.

OP here. She would not be paying it back with marital income. Since she is now back in school and not earning income that means that I would not be making payments on it with my income.

That’s not how debt works. Jesus, I would hate you too.

Meh. If the FIL wanted to be repaid like a bank then he should have set the loan up with formalities or just made his daughter take out actual loans. While I think in good conscience OP’s wife should try to pay something back, it also seems like the FIL is a cheapskate and possibly using the money to try to control his daughter. Possibly the FIL had no intention of ever collecting on the “loan” but is now acting like a bank that he has a rich son in law. And of course, one expects and hopes that a parent has more regard for the affordability of debt as compared to a shady payday lender …

Yeah I was wondering that too. Like if she didn't marry someone wealthy would FIL still be inivitng them on expensive pay-your-own-way trips while collecting on this loan? Because when I was paying back my loans (not nearly as much as the one in question here) as young professional there was no way I could afford expensive travel. I was scouring Southwest deals.

But she is married to a rich man, and they can afford to pay back the loan. They can also choose to not go to these dinners and trips.

Where is the wife in all this? Does she say no to the parents when they say they want to go to an expensive trip or dinner? She seems to have no backbone but wants the men in her life to subsidize her poor choices, and then not have to deal with the consequences of those choices.

She chose twice to get a degree that doesn't pay much. She seems to have gone from one rich man to another expecting them to pay her way.

This man is selfish and controlling. She needs to get a job.

pp here. I don't disagree that the FIL sounds controlling, but so does her DH. And she also sounds like a leech expecting the men her in life to pay her way for the bad choices she makes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a baby. Figure out your boundaries and communicate them.

He has and FIL has pushed back. FIL wants it done his way.

I think the difference is that OP's grandfather established an attitude of noblesse oblige in his family, which has become firmly rooted in the family. FIL was clearly a blue collar guy, no doubt struggled, then made it big. That sort of person rarely overcomes the mindset of need in their lifetime. He also wants his children to have the same "hunger" for success, making them work for it. OP is pushing his ways on his FIL as much as FIL is pushing his ways on OP. They see life through a different lens.

OP needs to be strong enough to say, No, we can't afford the vacation and stick to that. In fact, OP, is your wife an only child? If not, how does FIL treat his other kids who might not have the kind of money you do? If he is paying for them to go on vacations, then that is bad. But if he doesn't pay for any of them, then that's his right and he is not justified in being upset if people don't go. Easier said than done, I get it, especially since DW probably wants to go.

Regardless, OP, you married your DW. And a successful marriage is all about compromise. You and your wife need to decide what those are.

Also, if your DW had loans with an outside entity, would you pay then? Or let her default? Frankly, this sounds like two men who are butting heads over differing ideologies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

- He had her take out "loans" from him informally for college and a graduate degree. He was ticked off at me once I informed him the payments on these "loans" would come to an end once our marriage took place.

- He and my MIL invite us on very expensive vacations and then expect us to cover our own cost which can be in the tens of thousands of dollars for some of the trips he likes.

- Similar situation with restaurants. He will propose an expensive restaurant, order expensive items, and then want to split the check 50/50.

I cut down OP's post above to the examples.

OP, your FIL has a pay-as-you-go approach to life. He wants his kids to be responsible for their own choices but he is still generous enough to advance funds for your wife to do the schooling she wants to do.

You don't say if he has a sexist view of the world where a man/husband is responsible for his wife's money/debt/support but not the other way around. That may complicate things.

I agree that you do not have to pay your FIL for your wife's debts to him. Presumably she plans to work after getting the degree. And perhaps you are carrying the household expenses while she studies. Although maritally you may be jointly responsible for her debts legally, I think ethically she both undertook the obligation and should be prepared to pay it back. Have her settle the repayment plan on her parental loans with her parents and have the payments begin when she starts to earn money. Her dad wants to teach her responsibility. Marrying you so you could pay them off was not likely her plan. Have her figure it out.

Next the vacation. You and your wife should pay your own way if you go. If you do not want to go and do not want to pay, skip the vacation. Norms differ. Only some parents treat. Tell your FIL that your family of origin treats and you are not placing a priority on expensive vacations with your own money because you have x, y, z other goals. Let them get mad.

Restaurants. Split the check. It's another case of different norms. Neither party is more correct. Surely you can afford to socialize with them some of the time.

Your in-laws should be glad to have a son-in-law with zero debt. You should agree to do some things with them even if they aren't "worth it". Those are the concessions you make to be part of an in-law family. You cannot have everything your preferred way.

Sounds like your wife needs to step up her earning to stay in good grades with her family of origin. Encourage her to have a plan. If she decides to be an overexcited SAHM and wants to pay her dad back, you'd best get that hashed out ASAP.

OP here. The not paying the "loan" is a settled topic. There was no formal loan document. The "loan" was an absurd issue in my opinion. Due to her family's financial position she was a full pay student. She attended a private OOS school to the tune of over $200,000. The degree which she is currently pursuing (which I am paying for) is not a highly paid field and my wife will likely be doing a fair amount of charity work. I'm sorry, but the notion that her parents think its reasonable to try and saddle an 18 y/o with such a loan for a low paying degree at a private school is ridiculous and consequently they are the ones who paid after I came on the scene. This non-repayment though is such a miniscule percentage of their net worth that it did not make a difference in their circumstances.

PP. The idea of this "loan" is likely her father's comment on the usefulness of spending $200K on this degree.

There is obviously an attempt here to "teach" something to the daughter. You and your norms from your family of origin are external to it. Whether the lesson seems ridiculous to you is kind of beside the point.

It's not unusual for parents to try and get kids to pay for their college. Even rich ones. From my observation, it does take several generations of wealth to create the kind of family generosity engine that you have benefitted from.

An 18 year old is an adult. It may be the case that your wife could have picked a less expensive college and that a $200K education was an expensive choice she made as an adult. Her father may view that education as a pure luxury that she chose, knowing her career could never pay it back. As a self-made blue collar person, perhaps he did not agree with her path, despite providing the up-front money to fund it.

The more interesting thing here is that you appear to have signed up for an asymmetric financial relationship with your wife. Therefore, you will always be transferring your money (which you consider subsidized by your family's gifts) to cover your wife's expenses. You clearly do not see her as a 50% partner in your money since you do not want to fund the things that she would probably spend money on related to her parents if you did not object. It sounds like she has transferred her loyalty from one controlling man to another. That's why my sister and have chosen to remain high-earning working mothers. We don't want this kind of money-based financial dependency and guilt in our lives.

100% The fact that they still funded it with 0% interest means that they were willing to support her but wanted her to understand what her choices meant. That's on her.

Just because you have money doesn't mean you should spend it on something that has low ROI. That's not a good use of money, and the FIL knows that.

As a blue collar worker who built up his own wealth, he's given her the means to do the same, but she's chosen a different path.

You, OP, don't know what it's like to not be wealthy and build up your wealth on your own. You come across as an elitist snob.

Ok but he was setting up his own daughter to fail- $200k loan knowing shw was going into a non-lucrative career just to make a point? I'm sorry but that's crummy parenting, there were way better ways to handle this. No wonder she felt like she had to marry the douchebag OP.

It's scummy parenting to let your kids choose their own path but expect skin in the game? What?

If he had said he wouldn't pay for her college unless she majored in engineering or business, some would call that crummy parenting.

You know what's crummy? Saying you would pay back a loan and then deciding later not to even though your rich husband can afford to.

Again, I cannot genuinely beleive that some of you think this approach was good parenting- you do you though. "Skin in the game" to me means defining up front how much we plan to contribute and helping our kids figure out how they can finance the rest if there is a differntial at their chosen school- e.g., summer/part-time job (which I would encourage regardless), applying for scholarships, modest loan if needed but only what they would qualify for indenpendently. No 17-18yo child would be able to take out $200k on their own, GMAFB.

You have no idea if they talked about all of this or not. IMO sounds like the wife isn't very smart about finances and expects her wealthy father or husband to always subsidize her choices.

You are correct that no 18 yr old would be able to take out a $200K loan. And that's why the dad was willing to give her that interest free, lifetime loan.

He built his wealth on his own presumably without a parent who gave him a 0% $200K loan that he could pay pack over his lifetime. He expected her to be able to do the same. Knowing that she had to pay back the loan, she still chose to get a graduate degree that paid little. She's no longer an 18 yr old, presumably, but continues to make bad choices. That's on her.

Plenty of parents expect their kids to pay some rent at some point if they return home after graduation, even those who chose expensive colleges majoring in low paying fields. I guess the parents are being manipulative for expecting their adult kids to pay their way.

lol OK. If it was an “interest fee lifetime loan” then I guess it is due in a balloon payment in 2075.

hahaha exactly- OP has tons of time if she has her whole life to pay. Who does she send the payments to after her parents pass on?

Right. So, they and she knows that in reality, she doesn't have to pay back the entire loan. Yet, OP thinks that since the FIL is wealthy, why should they have to pay back anything?

This isn't about money. This is about choices, dealing with the consequences of your choices, and honoring your word. If OP didn't want to pay back the loan, then he should have made that clear to his wife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You told your father-in-law that your wife wouldn’t be paying back a family loan? No wonder he’s pissed.

OP here. She would not be paying it back with marital income. Since she is now back in school and not earning income that means that I would not be making payments on it with my income.

That’s not how debt works. Jesus, I would hate you too.

Meh. If the FIL wanted to be repaid like a bank then he should have set the loan up with formalities or just made his daughter take out actual loans. While I think in good conscience OP’s wife should try to pay something back, it also seems like the FIL is a cheapskate and possibly using the money to try to control his daughter. Possibly the FIL had no intention of ever collecting on the “loan” but is now acting like a bank that he has a rich son in law. And of course, one expects and hopes that a parent has more regard for the affordability of debt as compared to a shady payday lender …

Yeah I was wondering that too. Like if she didn't marry someone wealthy would FIL still be inivitng them on expensive pay-your-own-way trips while collecting on this loan? Because when I was paying back my loans (not nearly as much as the one in question here) as young professional there was no way I could afford expensive travel. I was scouring Southwest deals.

But she is married to a rich man, and they can afford to pay back the loan. They can also choose to not go to these dinners and trips.

Where is the wife in all this? Does she say no to the parents when they say they want to go to an expensive trip or dinner? She seems to have no backbone but wants the men in her life to subsidize her poor choices, and then not have to deal with the consequences of those choices.

She chose twice to get a degree that doesn't pay much. She seems to have gone from one rich man to another expecting them to pay her way.

This man is selfish and controlling. She needs to get a job.

pp here. I don't disagree that the FIL sounds controlling, but so does her DH. And she also sounds like a leech expecting the men her in life to pay her way for the bad choices she makes.

I agree they both sound controlling, but the DW took out a loan from her dad. Now SHE doesn't want to pay and blaming it on OP that she isn't paying. What would she have done if she hadn't married and wanted to go back to school? Another loan from Dad? What would have happened to the payments then? Deferred until she was employed again and just have bigger payments?

[Anonymous]

I didn't read all the comments, but I think separating finances might be an option, plus declining family trips if you don't want to pay for your family's costs. Splitting meals at a restaurant is totally fine. DH and I essentially separated over finances because he was giving his parents way too much money at the expense of my being able to save for our kids' college, etc. Really, the only solution was to split finances and monitor his credit. He can give away his money after he funds his pro rata share of our household expenses. Because he has no boundaries with his extended family, it means he'll never retire, and he will have no legacy when he dies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You told your father-in-law that your wife wouldn’t be paying back a family loan? No wonder he’s pissed.

OP here. She would not be paying it back with marital income. Since she is now back in school and not earning income that means that I would not be making payments on it with my income.

That’s not how debt works. Jesus, I would hate you too.

Meh. If the FIL wanted to be repaid like a bank then he should have set the loan up with formalities or just made his daughter take out actual loans. While I think in good conscience OP’s wife should try to pay something back, it also seems like the FIL is a cheapskate and possibly using the money to try to control his daughter. Possibly the FIL had no intention of ever collecting on the “loan” but is now acting like a bank that he has a rich son in law. And of course, one expects and hopes that a parent has more regard for the affordability of debt as compared to a shady payday lender …

Yeah I was wondering that too. Like if she didn't marry someone wealthy would FIL still be inivitng them on expensive pay-your-own-way trips while collecting on this loan? Because when I was paying back my loans (not nearly as much as the one in question here) as young professional there was no way I could afford expensive travel. I was scouring Southwest deals.

But she is married to a rich man, and they can afford to pay back the loan. They can also choose to not go to these dinners and trips.

Where is the wife in all this? Does she say no to the parents when they say they want to go to an expensive trip or dinner? She seems to have no backbone but wants the men in her life to subsidize her poor choices, and then not have to deal with the consequences of those choices.

She chose twice to get a degree that doesn't pay much. She seems to have gone from one rich man to another expecting them to pay her way.

This man is selfish and controlling. She needs to get a job.

pp here. I don't disagree that the FIL sounds controlling, but so does her DH. And she also sounds like a leech expecting the men her in life to pay her way for the bad choices she makes.

I agree they both sound controlling, but the DW took out a loan from her dad. Now SHE doesn't want to pay and blaming it on OP that she isn't paying. What would she have done if she hadn't married and wanted to go back to school? Another loan from Dad? What would have happened to the payments then? Deferred until she was employed again and just have bigger payments?

She can pay it back when she's done with school again if he insists on repayment. Obviously, borrowing money from her dad was a terrible mistake. Look what a mess it is causing in her marriage. She would've been better off borrowing from a third party lender.

[Anonymous]

Your view is strange to me, especially on the loans. If they had been private loans, she wouldn’t be able to stop paying. She owes the money to her father and he deserves to be repaid. DH helped me pay off my loans and he came from a background of lower means than I did. It was very generous of him. Why wouldn’t you be as generous towards your wife as you would be towards other relatives? Your father-in-law isn’t asking for any handouts. He is asking for you and your wife to pay your share.