It's official!

This is a rather interesting arrangement so I'll try to be as detailed as possible.

I can't give up legal rights to my child that I birth. I'd still be responsible for it no matter what. I can't even give it up for adoption without the father's permission so legally it was a non-starter.

What we decided to do was to tackle the inequality and bias of the family courts in a more direct way. One way men keep custody of their children in custody battles is simply having enough money to take the woman to court if it is a contested custody battle. The woman doesn't need money. She pretty much gets custody by default except in very exceptional cases where she is declared unfit to be a mother. Which is EXTREMELY rare. It is the man who needs to have a lawyer and who needs to fight.

So given this reality what we did was that I agreed to heavily reduce my monthly allowance that he gives me.

How we previously had it set up was that instead of him spending money on me directly, he provides me an allowance which is my spending, savings and investment money. He even pays for my accountant and financial advisor. It's all my money. The money gets funneled every month into an investment, CD, and checking account under only my control.

But now a chunk of that money that he gives me is instead going into a special fund that only he controls. In the event that he does need to fight me for custody (or any other legal defense against me) that money will go towards his court costs and lawyer fees. If the child reaches the age of 18 and I never take him to court, I'll receive that money back, with interest.

Our prior arrangement made it so that after 10 years of being with him I would have enough funds to retire and maintain my current standard of living for at least 30 years. So once I got to 30 (I entered into this agreement with him when I was 20), I'd have a huge chunk of money even if I left. After that he planned to severally reduce how much he gave me because by then I wouldn't need it. This put control of my retirement in our hands instead of the hands of the state.

Now with this new plan that "retirement year" is the 15th year instead of the 10th year. So if I turn 35 and I'm still with him I still have the same amount of money I would have had at 30. Then when the child reaches 18, assuming I don't take him to court, I ALSO get back all that money that was put into his "defense fund."

Basically, we are combating the inequalities of the family court with "my money." In the end it's all about money.

I don't really know if this would be feezible if he only made, like...50k a year. He makes 6 figures. But that's the arrangement we figured out that works. So we did it.