How to help a financially self destructive person?
I learned this from a business book on managing people, but I think it applies equally well here.  You can't put in what God left out of people. I know several people with this mentality about money and you simply have to make your sculpture out of the clay you have.  In this case, however, it seems that ship has sailed, considering it is your ex and you aren't on speaking terms. That would make it even harder, and it is debatable about whether it is your prerogative to even try. Just focus on the kids and make it clear to your wife that she needs to be providing the basics (food, shelter, heat, etc.) and don't escalate that unless it becomes a danger to the kids.  In a non-judgmental way (towards your wife) I'd use it as an opportunity to teach your kids about financial responsibility and the dangers of overspending and get-rich quick schemes. It sounds like they have an example in their lives of the consequences of two very different ways of managing one's finances. You say you're not on speaking terms: so you do it via your lawyer. You're divorced: so IMO your obligations are: a) To your kids  b) Purely financial spousal support (if any) If she's irresponsible financially then maybe she isn't the best able to care for your children. Your lawyer ought to be able to tell you what the alternatives are (it's very state-specific so no general advice from the Internet, but if your lawyer can't do that then IMO you need a different lawyer who has more experience with divorce/custody cases). I'm afraid your best recourse may be legal. I don't know that internet is a necessity, but the court would frown upon anyone paying $4K for rent but not being able to afford to heat the water or turn the lights on. $48K a year net should be enough for her to at least keep the kids with these things.  I don't know that you can educate her. Her issue is very deep-seated and far beyond a good financial planning type session. You can't help people that don't want help, period. It just doesn't work, and you will waste your time and energy while making the other person mad. Both sides end up in the same place they started except now they are frustrated with each other. In a normal situation I would advise to stop enabling her by giving her money, but the court has already decided that part.  There is no reason that she can't provide for her children on US$50k per year. In all honesty it sounds like she has a mental health problem and needs to see a professional. You, as the ex-husband, are probably not the right person to tell her that, though. If you really want to help her and are still on good terms with some friends or family members she trusts you could ask them to help her get help. They probably see the same mess that you and your kids do, but might need a little encouragement to act. The other option is if you sued for custody, based on living conditions, the possibility of losing her children and the child support might provide a much needed incentive to clean up her act. You probably won't win over a couple of incidents of the power being turned off and you will be putting your kids in the uncomfortable situation of telling on their mother though. Back in the day, they had a highly effective solution for this type of crap, but it is frowned upon in modern society. The second-best solution would be to get your lawyer to put together a case that she is unfit to be around the children and that visitation rights should be revoked.  Unfortunately, this will most likely not solve her problems, and she will probably become far worse as she feels more alone, alienated, miserable, and embarrassed. "Wow.  Just ... wow. We all must start where we are, I guess.  The past is the past. There almost certainly isn't a cheap way to fix this.  You're already on the hook for $4k per month.  Your money is enabling her behavior.  You'd rather not enable her behavior, but the money is part of the consequences of your divorce, so into her bank account it goes. Those who control how much alimony your ex-wife receives might reach the conclusion she needs more.  That's not a hard conclusion for them to make.  It's not their money. The living conditions are hurting your kids, and that's unfortunate, but that's also part of the consequences of your divorce. If it's deemed that your kids are better off not visiting her, then you might be relieved of paying child support (since you're supporting them at that point) but you might still be supporting her until some trigger is met, which might be never.  (You know those details better than I do, of course.) If she's already lost her house, filed for bankruptcy, borrowed money from people that she hasn't paid back, and gets a check from you each month and still has utilities shut off, she'll continue to deteriorate financially until she hits rock bottom.  Then, and only then, will she see the need to fix her behavior. Now, the (possibly) million dollar question for you is, ""Where is rock bottom?"" Do what you can to make that happen sooner rather than later, because you'll likely be subsidizing her all the way down, and part of the way back up.  You've lost most of the leverage you once had to change her behavior, but try every way you can.  You might hit the jackpot." "I am no expert by any means in divorce situations, but it seems like you probably have more than enough evidence (if you can back up everything you outlined here) that the living conditions an her place are not suitable for kids.  This ought to be enough for you to gain sole custody of the kids.  Maybe you didn't want to keep their mother in the equation for their benefit, but right now it's not to their benefit for her to be in the equation. The honest truth is that you're not in a position to help her being divorced.  You can't force her to do anything as things stand now.  But if you take legal actions to gain sole custody you might be able to lay down some conditions under which she could regain partial custody of the kids.  This might be the ""scare"" approach you're looking for if she cares about her children."
"I think it's great that you want to contribute. Course Instructor You may want to take a look at becoming an instructor for a course like Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University. These are commonly offered through churches and other community venues for a fee. This may be a good fit if you want to focus on basic financial literacy, setting up and sticking to a budget, and getting their financial ""house"" in order. It may not be a good fit if you don't want to teach an existing curriculum, or if you find the tenets of the course too unpalatable. A significant number of the people in Dave's audience are close to or in the middle of a financial meltdown, and so his advice includes controversial ideas such as avoiding credit altogether, often because that's how they got into their current mess. Counselor If you want to run your own show, I know of several people who have built their own practice that is run along the lines of a counselor charging hourly rates, and they work with couples who are having money problems. Building a reputation and a network of referring counselors and professionals is key here, and definitely seems like it would require a full-time commitment. I would avoid ""credit counseling"" and the like. Most of these organizations are focused on restructuring credit card debt, not spending signficant time on behavioral change. You don't need a series 7, 63, 65 etc. or even a CFA. I've previously acquired a number of these and can confirm that they are investment credentials that are intended to help you get a job and/or get more business as a broker or conventional financial planner, i.e. salesperson of securities. The licensure process is necessary to protect consumers from advice that serves the investment sales force but is bad for the consumer, and because you must be licensed to provide investment advice. There is a class of fee-only financial planners, but they primarily deal with complex issues that allow them to make money, and often give away basic personal finance advice for free in the form of articles, podcasts, etc.  Charity For part-time or free work, in my area there are also several charity organizations that help people do their taxes and provide basic budgeting and personal finance instruction, but this is very localized and may vary quite a bit depending on where you live. However, if there are none near you, you can always start one! Journalism If you have an interest in writing, there are also people who work as journalists and write columns, books, or newsletters, and it is much easier now to publish and build a network online, either on your own, through a blog or contributing to a website. Speaker at Community events There are also many opportunities to speak to a specific community such as a church or social organization. For example, where I live there are local organizations for Spanish speaking, Polish speaking, elderly, young professional, young mother and retiree groups for example, all of who might be interested in your advice on issues that specifically address their needs. Good luck!" "Okay - but that's about gold as an investment in today's world, and during  an extremely unstable financial situation.  Many other types of investments could be used similarly. Those who advocate gold as a hedge don't advocate buying it during a crisis, they advocate keeping some as part of an investment strategy... but again, that's gold as gold, not gold as currency.  Leveraging your investments based on current financial situations is what investing is about.   Gold as a medium for currency is a totally different thing.   What you just described would be called ""arbitrage"" - in moving markets (or other situations I guess) looking for no-lose situations where you can trade things around and increase your net value doing it.    it helps stabilize markets - as people take advantage of this situation it counters the effect and self-corrects... think about it ;)" The money quote: &gt; When floodwaters cover our homes, we expect that FEMA workers with emergency checks and blankets will find us. There is no moral or substantive difference between a hundred-year flood and the near-destruction of the global financial system by speculators immune from consequence. But if you and your spouse both lose your jobs and assets because of an unprecedented economic cataclysm having nothing to do with you, you quickly discover that your society expects you and your children to live malnourished on the streets indefinitely. "In terms of how to make your decision, here are some considerations. Comprehensive insurance often covers other perils besides collision, including fire, theft, hail or other weather damage, additional liability coverage etc. It may be worth looking at your specific policy to see what is covered. No matter what you do, make sure you have some form of personal liability coverage in case you are sued (doesn't necessarily need to be through the auto policy). While it can make financial sense to drop comprehensive coverage once you can afford to self-insure against collision, this will only be the case if you are certain that you can set aside dedicated savings that you would only need to dip in to in the case of a collision or other major loss. For example, if you only have $5-$10,000 in the bank, and you happen to lose your job, and then the next month you happen to be hit in an accident and the car is totaled, could you afford to replace the car out of pocket? I would recommend looking at dropping comprehensive insurance as similar to a ""DNR"" (do not resuscitate) order for your car, i.e. under no circumstances would you choose repair the car were it totaled or damaged. For example, if your car's exterior were badly damaged in a hail storm (but still ran fine), would you pay $500 or more to repair it, or would you simply get a new car? Ultimately, this is going to be a judgement call based on how much financial risk you want to take on. Personally, I would continue to pay the extra $300 per year for now in order to insure a $6-8,000 asset (5% of the asset value) However, in the next few years the resale value of your car will continue to decline. If in a few years the car were worth $1,500, I would probably not pay the same $300 a year (or 20% of the asset's value). When you should make that choice depends on how many more years of service you expect to get from the car, which is a very localized question. Hope that helps!" "He's paying the interest and you're paying the principal. If you're making minimum monthly payments, you'll still be doing the same thing 25-30 years from now. I think Parker's advice was very, very good, but I'd like to add to it a little of my own. Whatever dollar amount your son is sending to you as payment, encourage him to continue doing that. Only instead of paying you, have him put that money into a savings plan of some kind. You mentioned that he's struggling now, yet able to come up with approximately (my best guess) $200/mo. I guarantee you that if he puts that $200/mo back into his pocket, he'll still be struggling every month yet have nothing to show for it. My suggestion changes nothing in his daily life, yet gives him $2400 at the end of every year.  I was in a somewhat similiar situation as your son, only to the tune of $13,000. About 20 years ago, I got a loan and bought a new truck in which to use to go back and forth to work every day. The first 5 months the payments to the bank went as planned. Then my wife announces that ""we're"" pregnant. So my parents figured it would be best to just pay off my loan to the bank, avoiding any further interest charges, and take that truck payment and put it away for a rainy day. At 33 y/o, with my first child on the way, I finally started saving some of my money. It was good advice on their part because the rainy days came! They never asked me to pay them back, however I did offer. I've been tucking away $300-400/mo in the bank every month since then because I just got into the habit. Good thing I did too. In the past 10 years I've had to bury both of my parents, one sister and two wives and I'll tell ya, one thing that was comforting was the fact that I had the money. The little truck I bought 20 years ago is now my son's. It has around 260,000 miles on it now. When he trades it in for a newer vehicle, I will probably loan him the money and have him make payments to me rather than the bank. I, too, am not one to pay interest if I can help it. If he defaults, he's my son. I just won't buy him another vehicle! Or maybe he'll get into the same habit of saving money the same way I did. Like JohnFx said, money loaned to family should be regarded as a gift, otherwise you'll end up losing your money AND your family member! Hope some of this helps you make your decision." "According to your numbers, you just stated that you spend approximately $1500 in discretionary expenditures per month, yet are unable to save. I fully realize that living in a big city is usually expensive, but on your (presumably after-tax) salary, I think you can easily save a substantial portion of your income. As others have already noted, enforcing saving of a significant portion of your discretionary income is the most obvious step.  It's easy to say, but I suspect that if you are like most people who have difficulty saving, the psychological impact of quitting your previous spending habits ""cold turkey"" is likely to be very harsh, all the more so if you have an active social life.  You may find yourself becoming depressed or resentful at ""having"" to save.  You may lose motivation to work as hard because you might think that you're putting away all this money for the distant future, whereas you are young now and want to enjoy life while you can. It is in this context, then, that I looked at your other financial obligations.  Paying $1300/month to your parents is a lot.  It's over 20% of your after-tax salary.  You do not specify the reasons for doing this other than a vague sense of familial duty, but my recommendation is to see if this could be reduced somewhat.  If you can bring it down to $1000/month, that $300 would go into your savings, and you would psychologically feel a lot better about putting, say, $600 of your own discretionary income into savings as well.  Now you have, all told, about $1000/month of savings without severely curtailing your extra expenditures. But I would start with that $1500/month of luxury spending first.  And yes, you do need to view it as luxury spending.  The proper frame of mind is to compare your financial situation to someone who is truly unable to save because their entire income is spent on actual necessities:  food and shelter; their effective tax rate is 0% because they earn too little; and they usually find themselves in debt because they cannot make ends meet.  Now look back at that $1500/month.  Can you honestly say that you cannot afford to cut that spending?" "I spend hours researching two comparable products to try to save $3. Me too! I have also argued for hours with customer support to get $5/month off a bill (that's $60/year!), and I feel guilty every time I eat out or do something remotely luxurious, like getting fries with my $1 McChicken. Geez, even when I play video games, I hate spending the in-game currency. For me, it's obsessive-compulsive traits that cause it, but please note that I'm not claiming @Eddie has them. Just speaking for myself here, but I hope it helps. I still struggle with my miserliness, but I can share what works for me and what doesn't. I don't think I'm valuing my time nearly as much as I should. Me neither, but knowing that doesn't help; it makes it worse. For me, putting a dollar amount on how much I value my time does not work because that just complicates the problem and amplifies how much time I spend solving that multi-variable optimization problem. Consider trying to convince Monk not to avoid germs in order to build antibodies; it just makes him think more about germs, raising anxiety and making easy decisions (use a handkerchief to touch doorknobs) into a hard decision (should I touch it or should I not?). It also amplifies the regret whenever you finally make a certain choice (""what if I did the calculation wrong?"" or ""what if I'm going to get sick tomorrow because I touched that doorknob?""). Making the problem more complicated isn't the solution. So how to make it simpler? Make the decision ahead of time! For me, budgets are the key to reducing the anxiety associated with financial decision making. Every six months or so, my wife and I spend hours deciding how much to spend per month on things. We can really take our time analyzing it because we only have to do it occasionally. Once we set $50/month for restaurants, I no longer have to feel like a loser every time we eat out -- similarly for discretionary spending and everything else. TBH, I'm not sure exactly why it works -- why I don't regret the dollar amounts we put on every budget -- but it really does help. I join my coworkers for lunch on Fridays because I already decided that was okay. At that point, I can focus my OC-tendencies on eating every last gram of organic matter on my plate. Without directly touching the ketchup bottle, of course. :) Again, just speaking for myself, but having budgets has done wonders for my stress level with respect to finances. For me, budgets are less about restricting my spending and more about permitting me to spend! It's not perfect, but it helps. (Not that it's relevant, but I reworded this answer about 20 times and only hit 'Post' with great effort to suppress the need to keep editing it! I'll be refreshing every 30 seconds for updates.)" The Avalanche method does not work because most people don't have enough money to make an avalanche.  If you somehow had a windfall that was greater or equal to your highest credit card balance, then by all means pay that one off.   However, most people do not have that kind of situation.  Instead they should use the debt snow ball method.  They only have regular income that is typically much smaller then the balances. Another part of your plan that is especially troubling is that you are continuing to utilize credit cards.  You need to cut them up, and stop using them.  First of course save $1000 for a small emergency fund, the pay them off smallest to largest.  Do a budget each and every month.  Work an extra job or three.  Any extra money that hubby brings in goes towards one of the credit cards. BTW you don't have a math problem you have a behavior problem.