Recent decisions of Ghana’s Supreme Court have significantly narrowed the legal scope of marital property. In Ayishetu Abdul Kadiri v. Abdul Dwumemah and Mrs. Abena Pokua v. Yaw Kwakye, the Court affirmed that marriage does not merge spouses into a single economic unit. Each spouse retains a constitutional right to acquire and own property independently during marriage, and property acquired during marriage is no longer presumed to be marital property subject to equal sharing upon dissolution.
From a financial wellness and gender equity perspective, however, the implications are unsettling, particularly in societies where women are socially conditioned to perform the majority of unpaid care and domestic labor.
The Hidden Subsidy Women Provide to Marriage
The article Of Sippy Cups powerfully illustrates what the law now risks overlooking: the economic value of time. Using relatable narratives, it shows how caregiving decisions, often framed as “family choices” translate into lost income, stalled careers, diminished retirement savings, and long-term financial vulnerability for women.
Are women who step back from paid work to care for children “non-contributors” to family wealth? They are, in effect, subsidizing their partner’s earning capacity by absorbing unpaid labor that enables the other spouse to work longer hours, pursue promotions, and accumulate assets. Yet this contribution is rarely documented, quantified, or contractually protected.
A woman with one child earns 28% less than a woman without children across her career, not because of reduced competence, but because unpaid labor drains time, energy, and opportunity. Over decades, this compounds into lower retirement income and higher poverty rates for older women, an outcome that does not mirror men’s experience of parenthood.
When Law and Social Reality Diverge
The Supreme Court’s rejection of a blanket presumption that property acquired during marriage is marital property places a heavier evidentiary burden on the spouse claiming an interest. In theory, courts may still recognize non-financial contributions. In practice, however, women who have not retained income, title documents, or explicit agreements may find themselves exposed. This is where legal doctrine collides with lived reality.
Most marriages are not negotiated like commercial partnerships. Couples rarely assign monetary values to caregiving, career sacrifices, or foregone promotions. Women, in particular, are socialized to view such discussions as unromantic, distrustful, or unnecessary. The result is an invisible ledger, years of unpaid contributions that may count emotionally, but not legally. This invisibility becomes devastating during divorce, when unpaid labor is reframed as “no contribution,” and years of sacrifice translate into zero economic security.
Why This Is a Financial Wellness Issue, Not Just a Family Law Issue
This jurisprudential shift demands a reframing of financial literacy for women. Financial wellness cannot be reduced to budgeting, savings, or entrepreneurship alone. It must include:
- Understanding how unpaid labor affects lifetime earnings
- Recognizing marriage as an economic arrangement with legal consequences
- Proactively negotiating financial protections before vulnerability arises
Without intentional intervention, the new legal clarity risks producing gendered harm: marriages that appear equitable in real time but unravel into profound inequality at dissolution.
What Must Change
To mitigate these risks, several intentional steps are necessary:
- Early Financial Conversations: Couples must be encouraged to discuss caregiving roles, career trade-offs, and long-term financial consequences openly and early.
- Written Agreements: Antenuptial and postnuptial agreements should no longer be stigmatized. They are tools for transparency, not mistrust.
- Valuing Unpaid Work: Policymakers and courts must continue developing frameworks that meaningfully recognize non-monetary contributions, particularly where one spouse’s earning power was enabled by the other’s unpaid labor.
- Targeted Financial Education for Women: Women must be equipped with practical knowledge about retirement planning, asset ownership, documentation, and the legal meaning of “contribution” in marriage.
Closing Reflection
The Supreme Court has spoken clearly on the law. What remains unclear—and urgent—is whether society will adapt fast enough to protect those whose labor has long been essential, invisible, and uncompensated. If marriage is no longer presumed to be an economic partnership, then women must be empowered to negotiate, because love may be priceless, but time, labor, and opportunity always have a cost.
