$1m unequivocally not enough to retire on OR, come laugh at this thread with me

[LPeters]

So I was over in r/relationships looking for stories about inheritance drama (because that's the sort of person I am) and I found this horrific gem of terrible relationship and financial advice:

https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/2h5kmf/my_29f_hubby_34m_is_dictating_how_i_spend_my/

We got married 4 years ago and have 2 kids, 2.5 and .5 years.

I like my job well enough but it's very stressful and I've never been over the moon about our kids' daycare. They are safe and mostly happy there but I wish they had more education (for the older one) and more one on one contact (for the younger one).

I recently lost my beloved aunt, my mother's sister who I was very close to. She had no kids of her own and left me a big inheritance, a little under $1 million. I never knew she had that kind of money, she was very frugal and always bought gifts from thrift stores and such. Also lot of the inheritance was from the sale of her condo.

I told hubby I want to take this money to quit my job and stay home with the kids. He says it's not really enough money to quit working permanently, I may not be able to get back to work above being a walmart greeter if I leave now. He said the money really belongs to our family, not just to me, and we should make a decision about how to spend it as a unit.

This is not the kind of thing we ever discussed before marriage because we never saw this happening to us.

I am finding myself very angry with my husband. My kids are the most important thing in the world to me and I can't think of a better way to use this money than to get more time with them.

What should I do. Any advice?

tl;dr: Unexpected inheritance, want to stay home with my kids, hubby thinks it's a bad idea and I should keep working.

Tl;dr: OP is inheriting $1m from a Mustachian aunt, and wants to stop working to raise her children. Husband doesn't want her to do this, asserts that $1m is definitely not enough to retire on, says she needs to keep working. Getting a condecending/controlling vibe from OP's husband. (Interestingly just about everyone is distracted by the abrupt need to be loudly wrong on the Internet and no one addresses her actual problem of a controlling husband, too busy are they giving her incorrect financial and life advice.)

Alright, sorry for the long-ass post, I was going to quote, but I wanted you to see this in its unaltered glory.

Okay, complete shot in the dark here but I'm going to hazard a guess as to what the vast majority of your reactions would look like-

'Oh so sorry for your loss but, er, also, ah... Congratulations! Yes, you can retire on $1m! Yes, you can stay home with your children! Your husband is ignorant and/or overcontrolling, you should talk to him about that. [Insert info about investing, 4% rule, Yada yada]'

Right? Simple, cut and dry, no problem, but oh no—

Do you wanna guess what the commenters over there on r/relationships said? Come on my fellow Mustachians, I'll give you three shots, and the first two don't count.

"I told hubby I want to take this money to quit my job and stay home with the kids. He says it's not really enough money to quit working permanently"
He is 100% correct, six figures is a nice cushion, but it is NOT life changing amounts of $$ and your husband is correct on this one.

Succinctly, that is what the vast majority or the responses say. Wtf, everyone?

This is my favorite turd of a response:

If it pays 4-6%... after taxation and inflation it is decreasing in value annually, odds are.
I know the numbers of compound interest sound impressive, but just look at a typical year, if it pays 4%.
You have $1,040,000 at the end.
You pay between $10,000 and $20,000 in taxes on the investment earnings. We'll say $15,000, leaving $1,025,000.
In a typical year of 3% inflation, that $1,025,000 is worth $995,145.
If you are invested and exposed much more to the market, you can be "making" 8-10% per annum.. and if you want to keep the original $1M in value intact, then you can spend 2% of the savings... on years you've done well in the market. Otherwise, you're spending down the capital one way or another.
Source: I have >$10M and am not looking at numbers like you're talking about.

Other info: OP later clarifies that she has a degree from UC Berkeley and that after daycare expenses she takes home about $700.00 a month.

What do you guys think?

[Zamboni]

Well, I agree with you, of course. She can certainly comfortably quit her job if she wants. She could even front load the college savings accounts while she is at it. That thread is old or I would chime with the voice of reason.

Her husband does sound like a controlling ass, but maybe he just doesn't understand the simple math? My guess is that he has other plans for spending that money in the way he would like. Perhaps a bigger fancy house and a country club membership? Perhaps a fancy new luxury car? After all, those things would benefit "the family."

I'm sorry, but no one need permission from another person to take off time to care for their own children if they have the money to do it. Even if she gives him "his half", she still has the money to do it with the other half.

[cawiau]

I can see both sides and a lot of information is missing:

- Husband is an ass we get that ; no need to dwell into it.
-> if I was her I would make sure to keep that money separate and far far way from him.

but

1M is $40,000/year income at 4% withdrawal rate.

-> do we know her income currently?
-> $700/month does not give the whole story because she is paying daycare for 2 kids.
-----> depending on the area daycare for 2 kids is ~30-50k/year.
-----> I have a friend that is paying 98k for 3 kids under 4. Almost not worth working some would say but daycare is temporary and does not account for:
- loss in 401k contributions
- promotions
- upward mobility.

My wife is in one of those careers that if she takes 3-5years to stay with our kids she might as well kiss her bachelors and masters good bye. The speed of technology/advancement would put her behind the 8 ball and she might never be able to get back in or have to start all over at the bottom.

So my answer is two fold:
- could she afford to stay home: absolutely yes. And if it is something that is important to her he is an ass for not looking into it.

- BUT we are also missing vital information about their current lifestyle, long term plan, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[astvilla]

Money aside, it sounds like a deeper problem in the marriage is on decision making.

IMO, it sounds like the WIFE is the one with "controlling ass" problems.

"He said the money really belongs to our family, not just to me, and we should make a decision about how to spend it as a unit."

"My (29F) hubby (34M) is dictating how I spend myinheritance" (thread title)

The wife got a huge inheritance.  Now she wants to bail out and live the Mustachian lifestyle, leaving the husband to continue to work (it seems the wife wants the husband to keep working while she gets all the time with the kids, because her time with the kids is more important than his time with the kids)  Basically, her responsibility of bringing $$ into the household has been fulfilled by getting an inheritance, while the husband has to keep working and she gets to grow closer to the children.  And she's already made all these decisions without really asking the husband how he feels.  Didn't offer the husband to quit his job together with her, or for her to keep working while he "retires", we don't know details so we can't really say

What if the husband felt the math worked and decided to retire too?  Would the wife take kindly to that? Idk, maybe, maybe not. Maybe husband would be glad that wife can stay home to take care of kids instead of working while he continues to work and agrees w/her reasoning and values, but judging by the reaction, not so much.  If he doesn't think the math works for "them" than maybe it doesn't and maybe should go to part-time or per diem.   If he divorced, he'd get half that inheritance no?  Maybe husband can't imagine retiring on 1 million or is paranoid and thinks it's too little.  I'd say then it's more ignorance or unaware than "controlling".  If you show him the math, maybe he'd get it.

You also have to remember, the wife is angry, she's looking for sympathy and agreement on her side on the internet, so she'll mention parts of the story to support her end.  We will never get a full picture on everything. We're missing a lot of info on the relationship dynamics, spending, budget, incomes, COL, goals & expectations...

The question on whether an inheritance only belongs to one parent (for their personal use) or whole family has many different answers that should've been discussed before declaring "This is my money, not yours, you keep working, I'm gonna spend more time w/kids," etc...You could say inheritance belongs to one and not the other to avoid gold-diggers or have prenups instead.  We can't really conclude, since we're not given the whole story but I can also understand both sides.

[Zamboni]

If he divorced, he'd get half that inheritance no?

Actually, that is not usually the case. Since I am not a lawyer, here is the first hit on a search: http://family.findlaw.com/divorce/inheritance-and-divorce.html#sthash.Gc4zRum1.dpuf

"Generally, inheritances are not subject to equitable distribution because, by law, inheritances are not considered marital property. Instead, inheritances are treated as separate property belonging to the person who received the inheritance, and therefore may not be divided between the parties in a divorce."

So, while I get that he wants to view all monies as our money, and I like to think about things that way with my significant other, in reality and according to the law it is indeed her money.

I do agree that they need to talk about it more as a couple. If I inherited that much right now, then I would have a serious discussion about future plans with my SO.

But, back in the day when my tots were small, when I was stressed out about their care and involuntarily diverted to the mommy track at work anyway the moment I showed up looking pregnant, it would have been a different story. Since I was bearing the major brunt of the child care before and after work in addition to providing transportation to and from daycare, housework, and all of the cooking, back then I would have said "I'm taking time to care for my children until they are both in kindergarten, thanks to this generous gift from my late Aunt Bessie." Most working women work a double shift, and yes I am (perhaps unfairly) assuming this to be the case for the author of the original post. Multiple studies have shown that her spouse is likely overestimating the amount he is "helping" with the children and around the home.

I just thought that most of the replies there that purported to contain sound financial advice were total bullshit. People are crazy.

[LPeters]

Money aside, it sounds like a deeper problem in the marriage is on decision making.

IMO, it sounds like the WIFE is the one with "controlling ass" problems.

"He said the money really belongs to our family, not just to me, and we should make a decision about how to spend it as a unit."

"My (29F) hubby (34M) is dictating how I spend myinheritance" (thread title)

The wife got a huge inheritance.  Now she wants to bail out and live the Mustachian lifestyle, leaving the husband to continue to work (it seems the wife wants the husband to keep working while she gets all the time with the kids, because her time with the kids is more important than his time with the kids)  Basically, her responsibility of bringing $$ into the household has been fulfilled by getting an inheritance, while the husband has to keep working and she gets to grow closer to the children.  And she's already made all these decisions without really asking the husband how he feels.  Didn't offer the husband to quit his job together with her, or for her to keep working while he "retires", we don't know details so we can't really say

What if the husband felt the math worked and decided to retire too?  Would the wife take kindly to that? Idk, maybe, maybe not. Maybe husband would be glad that wife can stay home to take care of kids instead of working while he continues to work and agrees w/her reasoning and values, but judging by the reaction, not so much.  If he doesn't think the math works for "them" than maybe it doesn't and maybe should go to part-time or per diem.   If he divorced, he'd get half that inheritance no?  Maybe husband can't imagine retiring on 1 million or is paranoid and thinks it's too little.  I'd say then it's more ignorance or unaware than "controlling".  If you show him the math, maybe he'd get it.

You also have to remember, the wife is angry, she's looking for sympathy and agreement on her side on the internet, so she'll mention parts of the story to support her end.  We will never get a full picture on everything. We're missing a lot of info on the relationship dynamics, spending, budget, incomes, COL, goals & expectations...

The question on whether an inheritance only belongs to one parent (for their personal use) or whole family has many different answers that should've been discussed before declaring "This is my money, not yours, you keep working, I'm gonna spend more time w/kids," etc...You could say inheritance belongs to one and not the other to avoid gold-diggers or have prenups instead.  We can't really conclude, since we're not given the whole story but I can also understand both sides.

You know, I think you're right, there's too much missing or slanted in one direction. I got rather distracted by the whole OMG YOU NEED 700 MILLION TO EVEN THINK ABOUT RETIREMENT thing.

We can't really tell, but if you think about it, I suppose the husband is right, if you take for granted that the wife just wanted to stick the money in some little 0.03% savings account and then draw off of it, he's right that it won't last long, and we don't know much about what the wife wants for her career. I guess my opinion came from the impression I got from the original post,  like the OP brought up retiring early and her husband just scoffed and told her she'd be working at Walmart in a few years.

[LPeters]

If he divorced, he'd get half that inheritance no?

Actually, that is not usually the case. Since I am not a lawyer, here is the first hit on a search: http://family.findlaw.com/divorce/inheritance-and-divorce.html#sthash.Gc4zRum1.dpuf

"Generally, inheritances are not subject to equitable distribution because, by law, inheritances are not considered marital property. Instead, inheritances are treated as separate property belonging to the person who received the inheritance, and therefore may not be divided between the parties in a divorce."

So, while I get that he wants to view all monies as our money, and I like to think about things that way with my significant other, in reality and according to the law it is indeed her money.

I do agree that they need to talk about it more as a couple. If I inherited that much right now, then I would have a serious discussion about future plans with my SO.

But, back in the day when my tots were small, when I was stressed out about their care and involuntarily diverted to the mommy track at work anyway the moment I showed up looking pregnant, it would have been a different story. Since I was bearing the major brunt of the child care before and after work in addition to providing transportation to and from daycare, housework, and all of the cooking, back then I would have said "I'm taking time to care for my children until they are both in kindergarten, thanks to this generous gift from my late Aunt Bessie." Most working women work a double shift, and yes I am (perhaps unfairly) assuming this to be the case for the author of the original post. Multiple studies have shown that her spouse is likely overestimating the amount he is "helping" with the children and around the home.

I just thought that most of the replies there that purported to contain sound financial advice were total bullshit. People are crazy.

Reading that thread was like sitting in one of those psych trials where everyone around you raises the wrong answer to see if you conform. I read the comments and I thought the first post had to be trolling but then they were all like that and my brain just went poof-

Anyway. You're right about the inheritance being hers and only hers if her aunt left it to her. That was another thing that bothered me, that her husband was trying to tell her what she should or shouldn't do with it, especially because he was wrong. I think it would be 'their' money if she deposited it into a joint account or invested it into a home that they shared, then if they divorced, he could indeed consider that shared money/property...

[Villanelle]

While legally the money is hers, I think financial (and major life) decisions need to be made as a couple/family.  It's hard to know whether her RE plan came off as a discussion or a  mandate, but I know I'd be upset if DH come home and said, "I've inherited, and I've decided I'm quitting".  Of course, we've discussed finances and FIRE enough that it would likely come off as simply an early implementation of our existing plan.  It sounds like they don't have a Number and haven't done much discussing of retirement, which was problem one.

Also, while for most of us $1mm is retirement money, depending on their lifestyle, it might not be.  So she may not be being realistic.  If they have a ton of debt, it likely won't be enough.  If they currently spend $100k/yr, then this choice of her is mandating a great deal of change for both of them, and I don't think it is fair for one party to dictate that, even if one considers this money entirely hers to do with as she sees fit.  Does she have the right to suddenly tell him that his life must change dramatically (if that's the case)?  I don't think so. 

These things need to be hashed out as a couple.  One party presents a plan and her desires, and the other party considers and makes suggestions that he thinks work for him.  Perhaps she agrees to stay home for 4 years until all kids are well in to school, and then return to work.  Or she agrees to work part time.  And to downgrade her car and bike when possible.  And then he agrees to cut back on eating out by 50%, but not entirely.  Etc. 

Yes $1mm is plenty on which to retire.  But only if one has the correct lifestyle, and I don't think she gets to just dictate that they are both going to start living that lifestyle immediately, if it was never part of the plan or something they discussed.  That's a partnership decision, not an individual mandate.  We've had many threads here about how to get a spouse on board with the MMM mindset.  This woman doesn't get to skip all that just because she came in to money. 

[Gin1984]

Also, while for most of us $1mm is retirement money, depending on their lifestyle, it might not be.  So she may not be being realistic.  If they have a ton of debt, it likely won't be enough.  If they currently spend $100k/yr, then this choice of her is mandating a great deal of change for both of them, and I don't think it is fair for one party to dictate that, even if one considers this money entirely hers to do with as she sees fit.  Does she have the right to suddenly tell him that his life must change dramatically (if that's the case)?  I don't think so. 

Yes $1mm is plenty on which to retire.  But only if one has the correct lifestyle, and I don't think she gets to just dictate that they are both going to start living that lifestyle immediately, if it was never part of the plan or something they discussed.  That's a partnership decision, not an individual mandate.  We've had many threads here about how to get a spouse on board with the MMM mindset.  This woman doesn't get to skip all that just because she came in to money.

Except if she is bringing in only $700/month after daycare one million would cover that even after taxes.  I am unsure how her staying home, would change his life if she is only bringing in $700/month after daycare.

[MgoSam]

I think the husband is being an ass, but we are only hearing from her perspective. It's entirely possibly that he is way more reasonable than is being presented.

I just think it's sad that they haven't had a discussion about their desires and how they would handle finances. I'm single, but fully intend on having a conversation well before considering marriage. I believe that 3 main causes of divorce/strife are children, sex, and finances (not in any particular order) and just shudder at imaging how many couples don't bother to discuss any of them before getting married.

[bacchi]

This is my favorite turd of a response:

If it pays 4-6%... after taxation and inflation it is decreasing in value annually, odds are.
I know the numbers of compound interest sound impressive, but just look at a typical year, if it pays 4%.
You have $1,040,000 at the end.
You pay between $10,000 and $20,000 in taxes on the investment earnings. We'll say $15,000, leaving $1,025,000.
In a typical year of 3% inflation, that $1,025,000 is worth $995,145.
If you are invested and exposed much more to the market, you can be "making" 8-10% per annum.. and if you want to keep the original $1M in value intact, then you can spend 2% of the savings... on years you've done well in the market. Otherwise, you're spending down the capital one way or another.
Source: I have >$10M and am not looking at numbers like you're talking about.

Translation: "Source: I'm a freshman in business school and I think a professor mentioned something about 4% from investments."

[Zamboni]

^Nailed it.

It's very hard to believe that someone with a self-declared >$10M would not understand the difference between short term and long term capital gains tax rates. After the first year, and minus any ridiculous fiddling by day trading, the taxes would all be at the long term rate, which is probably 15% unless the OP's spouse has a huge income, in which case it would only go up to 20% tax rate by current law. The reply is quoting from 25-50% tax rate on the investment earnings, then settling on a 37.5% tax rate for the numbers going forward is his or her ridiculous calculation. I actually didn't read past that on my first time through the thread.

I do hope the OP on that site didn't take any of the numbers posted there seriously. Then again, she seemed to be looking for relationship advice more than financial advice, thus her choice of forums.

[JR]

So I was over in r/relationships looking for stories about inheritance drama (because that's the sort of person I am) and I found this horrific gem of terrible relationship and financial advice:

https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/2h5kmf/my_29f_hubby_34m_is_dictating_how_i_spend_my/

We got married 4 years ago and have 2 kids, 2.5 and .5 years.

I like my job well enough but it's very stressful and I've never been over the moon about our kids' daycare. They are safe and mostly happy there but I wish they had more education (for the older one) and more one on one contact (for the younger one).

I recently lost my beloved aunt, my mother's sister who I was very close to. She had no kids of her own and left me a big inheritance, a little under $1 million. I never knew she had that kind of money, she was very frugal and always bought gifts from thrift stores and such. Also lot of the inheritance was from the sale of her condo.

I told hubby I want to take this money to quit my job and stay home with the kids. He says it's not really enough money to quit working permanently, I may not be able to get back to work above being a walmart greeter if I leave now. He said the money really belongs to our family, not just to me, and we should make a decision about how to spend it as a unit.

This is not the kind of thing we ever discussed before marriage because we never saw this happening to us.

I am finding myself very angry with my husband. My kids are the most important thing in the world to me and I can't think of a better way to use this money than to get more time with them.

What should I do. Any advice?

tl;dr: Unexpected inheritance, want to stay home with my kids, hubby thinks it's a bad idea and I should keep working.

Tl;dr: OP is inheriting $1m from a Mustachian aunt, and wants to stop working to raise her children. Husband doesn't want her to do this, asserts that $1m is definitely not enough to retire on, says she needs to keep working. Getting a condecending/controlling vibe from OP's husband. (Interestingly just about everyone is distracted by the abrupt need to be loudly wrong on the Internet and no one addresses her actual problem of a controlling husband, too busy are they giving her incorrect financial and life advice.)

Alright, sorry for the long-ass post, I was going to quote, but I wanted you to see this in its unaltered glory.

Okay, complete shot in the dark here but I'm going to hazard a guess as to what the vast majority of your reactions would look like-

'Oh so sorry for your loss but, er, also, ah... Congratulations! Yes, you can retire on $1m! Yes, you can stay home with your children! Your husband is ignorant and/or overcontrolling, you should talk to him about that. [Insert info about investing, 4% rule, Yada yada]'

Right? Simple, cut and dry, no problem, but oh no—

Do you wanna guess what the commenters over there on r/relationships said? Come on my fellow Mustachians, I'll give you three shots, and the first two don't count.

"I told hubby I want to take this money to quit my job and stay home with the kids. He says it's not really enough money to quit working permanently"
He is 100% correct, six figures is a nice cushion, but it is NOT life changing amounts of $$ and your husband is correct on this one.

Succinctly, that is what the vast majority or the responses say. Wtf, everyone?

This is my favorite turd of a response:

If it pays 4-6%... after taxation and inflation it is decreasing in value annually, odds are.
I know the numbers of compound interest sound impressive, but just look at a typical year, if it pays 4%.
You have $1,040,000 at the end.
You pay between $10,000 and $20,000 in taxes on the investment earnings. We'll say $15,000, leaving $1,025,000.
In a typical year of 3% inflation, that $1,025,000 is worth $995,145.
If you are invested and exposed much more to the market, you can be "making" 8-10% per annum.. and if you want to keep the original $1M in value intact, then you can spend 2% of the savings... on years you've done well in the market. Otherwise, you're spending down the capital one way or another.
Source: I have >$10M and am not looking at numbers like you're talking about.

Other info: OP later clarifies that she has a degree from UC Berkeley and that after daycare expenses she takes home about $700.00 a month.

What do you guys think?

The one person claims to have over $10 million invested but tells the OP they will pay 37.5% taxes on their investment returns? Obviously that person does not live in the US.

[Capsu78]

Actually it was our family lawyer, who sees many FU'ed probate issues, who encouraged us to leave our assets strictly in our daughters name even though we love their spouses.  He advised that when the time comes, our daughters can freely make the choice if they wish to comingle with family assets or do something else based upon "future facts and situations".  That way, the decision takes place after we have departed based upon their own wishes. 
The "husband" in the OP thread is "assuming" its family money, and during most times in my 30 year marriage, that would be the outcome... but that's based on the "marriage" and not on any assumptions.  My SIL has just been named as a beneficiary for a favorite uncles estate and has no idea what the results will be- still have auctions to go and property to be sold, but I took my daughter aside and told her to treat it as "his" until he choses to co mingle it because that is how we want "hers" to be treated when the time comes. 

[MgoSam]

The one person claims to have over $10 million invested but tells the OP they will pay 37.5% taxes on their investment returns? Obviously that person does not live in the US.

Or could have his/her head up their ass.

That said, it's amazing how many wealthy people I know are utterly clueless about finances. I have family members that make high six figures or even seven figures that don't know anything about tax policy, but claim to be experts because they know how to avoid taxes. No, they likely hire good accountants, which is not unwise, but unless you actually know what the accountant is doing, don't pass yourself off as an expert on taxes. An example is my dad and brother both claiming that long-term capital gains taxes were taxed as individual. No amount of argument could convince them otherwise, even when I showed them Google results, they demurred. Nevermind that I was in school for accounting and working for a tax accountant. At least they understood how long long-term means.

[Papa Mustache]

Maybe this is an example of one of those couple dynamics where if one spouse gets a new toy, the other spouse thinks they deserve to have a new toy too i.e. she can't retire b/c I can't retire.

[SeaEhm]

If my wife's family member gave her $1,000,000, it would be up to my wife to do with it as she pleases.

The nice thing is that my wife would seek my opinion (one that she typically values) before she made her judgement.
If she wanted to spend it all on purses, then that's all right.  I am not planning my future on that money, therefore, I can live as if it didn't exist.

If the two of us were to win $1,000,000. I'd suggest that she nor I quit our jobs, but use that money to help us secure a brighter financial future through investments.  If she wanted to quit her job, I would support that as long as she understands the lifestyle sacrifices that she would need to make with the loss of her income. 

I am pretty materialistic and superficial, but luckily, I am more adaptable than those combined.

[obstinate]

It's easy to say that partners should make the decision together until you're partnered with a dumbass like this husband.

[RetiredAt63]

BTDT.  My Ex was very good at spending three windfalls (two mine, one his).  Lesson learned - my inheritance from my father stayed in a separate bank account.  He also, in his will, specified that the money was not to go to spouses of his children, so that was pretty clear. It was a good chunk, but would have been gone in a few years if Ex had had access.
 
OP can certainly discuss how they as a family can treat this money, but the final decision is hers.

[Proud Foot]

I didn't read the linked thread so it may have been mentioned there, and I didn't see it mentioned here, but how much does the husband make? If he makes enough to support the family (seems like he would based upon the comment of only $700/month of her paycheck left after daycare) then it definitely is not a problem.  Even if they invested this and then never added anything to any investment accounts they would have more than enough to retire by normal standards at 62.

[Wilson Hall]

BTDT.  My Ex was very good at spending three windfalls (two mine, one his).  Lesson learned - my inheritance from my father stayed in a separate bank account.  He also, in his will, specified that the money was not to go to spouses of his children, so that was pretty clear. It was a good chunk, but would have been gone in a few years if Ex had had access.
 
OP can certainly discuss how they as a family can treat this money, but the final decision is hers.

Interesting about the provision that spouses of the children were to get nothing. In a couple of situations I'm aware of, I suspect that the spouses of the children who stand to inherit may specifically be included as heirs simply because those spouses are more responsible with money than the kids are.

[RetiredAt63]

My Dad knew that both spouses were heavier spenders than his children.  However, this is actually a very common clause here (Ontario) due to family property laws.  It simply ensures that inheritances do not become part of the heirs' family money, so there are no issues about it.  It was very helpful to me when DXH and I split, DXH would have loved to be able to claim 1/2 of it but couldn't.

BTDT.  My Ex was very good at spending three windfalls (two mine, one his).  Lesson learned - my inheritance from my father stayed in a separate bank account.  He also, in his will, specified that the money was not to go to spouses of his children, so that was pretty clear. It was a good chunk, but would have been gone in a few years if Ex had had access.
 
OP can certainly discuss how they as a family can treat this money, but the final decision is hers.

Interesting about the provision that spouses of the children were to get nothing. In a couple of situations I'm aware of, I suspect that the spouses of the children who stand to inherit may specifically be included as heirs simply because those spouses are more responsible with money than the kids are.

[StockBeard]

What's nerve racking is that although 1 million might not be enough for a (non mustachian) family of 4 to reach financial independence, it gets them pretty damn close.
As a matter of fact I've been having the exact same discussion with friends of mine lately who think they'd need 10 million to be financially independent (and when you start talking of the 4% rule, you instantly see people finding excuses as to why that rule won't work for them)

Specifically, 1 million invested correctly has a pretty good chance of turning into 1.5 million within 5 years if they don't mess around. And that's a more reasonable value for financial independence for 4.

I mean, I think the husband is right, maybe she shouldn't quit "too soon", but it's definitely an amount of money worth discussing lifestyle changes. She could go part-time, or she could quit and he could keep working (if that works for them) which would still definitely work.

[nereo]

Other info: OP later clarifies that she has a degree from UC Berkeley and that after daycare expenses she takes home about $700.00 a month.

this right there is the reason that she can and should retire if that's what she wants to do.  $700/mo = $8400/yr.
$1MM would easily eclipse this.  Heck, she could just use a 1% WR and the family would be financially better off, and the 'stach would almost certainly grow.

I wish her well.

[tobitonic]

It's easy to say that partners should make the decision together until you're partnered with a dumbass like this husband.

Made my day.

But yes, I agree with the consensus that she could easily stay home with 40k/yr in dividends. Both parents could with some work, but even that aside, a free 40k/yr when her post daycare income is 8.4k/yr (setting aside the issue that the daycare fee belongs to both of them and looking at it from the lens of deciding whether it was financially worth it for the lesser paid spouse to work instead of stay at home) makes this clear as day...unless lifestyle inflation ($$$) or a lack of knowledge about investing are clouding the husband's judgment.