As recently as the 1970s, a bank could refuse to issue a credit card to a woman without her husband’s signature. It didn’t matter if she earned more than he did. In the eyes of the law, a woman’s money was often her husband’s money.
The fight for financial independence wasn’t settled in the 1920s with the right to vote. The real economic battles were fought much later, even during the lifetimes of the women reading this now.
The era of the “head and master”
For decades, state laws gave husbands unilateral control over family property. These were known as “head and master” laws. In some states, a husband could mortgage the family home or sell shared property without his wife’s consent.
This wasn’t a relic of the 19th century. In 1974, a husband in Louisiana took out a mortgage on the family home without telling his wife, then defaulted. When the bank tried to foreclose, she challenged it. The legal battle made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1981 ruling of Kirchberg v. Feenstra, the court finally declared that such laws were unconstitutional. Until that ruling, a woman’s financial security in many places depended entirely on her husband’s goodwill.
The credit card revolution
Before 1974, credit discrimination was standard banking procedure. Single women had trouble getting loans because lenders assumed they would get married, have children, and quit their jobs. Married women were often told their income didn’t count toward a mortgage because it was temporary.
This changed with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974. It made it illegal for creditors to discriminate on the basis of sex or marital status. If you got your first credit card in your own name in the late 70s, you were part of the first generation of women to legally command their own financial destiny without a male chaperone.
The pregnancy penalty
Getting a job was one thing; keeping it was another. Until the late 1970s, employers could legally fire a woman for getting pregnant. It was a common practice known as the “marriage bar” or pregnancy discrimination, effectively forcing women out of the workforce the moment they started a family.
The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 amended the Civil Rights Act to prohibit sex discrimination on the basis of pregnancy. This was a critical financial victory. It meant women could no longer be systematically stripped of their seniority, retirement benefits, and earning power simply because they became mothers.
Retirement equity finally arrives
Even pension laws were stacked against women. For years, widows often found themselves destitute because their husbands had signed away “survivor benefits” without their knowledge to get a slightly higher monthly payout while they were alive.
The Retirement Equity Act of 1984 stopped this. It required spousal consent for any waiver of survivor benefits. It also lowered the age for pension participation and improved access for women who took breaks from the workforce to raise children.
From permission slips to power
This history isn’t just trivia. It sets the stage for a massive shift happening right now. The very generation of women who were once required to have a husband’s signature to spend money is now poised to inherit a massive share of it.
We are currently witnessing the largest transfer of wealth in history. An estimated 84 trillion dollars is projected to change hands through 2045. As baby boomers pass on their wealth, women are expected to control nearly $30 trillion in financial assets by the end of the decade.
For the first time, the gatekeepers of American wealth are the same women who were once locked out of the bank. You have the tools your mothers didn’t. The laws have changed, and now, so has the balance of power.
If you and your spouse have over $100,000 in savings, you both need to benefit from financial security. It may be time to get some advice from a pro. SmartAsset offers a free service that matches you to a vetted, fiduciary advisor in less than 5 minutes.
Read the full article here
