For millions of Americans, retirement has shifted from a synchronized event to a phased process. Instead of a marked date on the calendar for both partners, what increasingly happens is a discontinuous transition, a period in which one spouse has already left the workforce while the other is still clocking in, managing meetings, and trying to balance home, career, and financial expectations for this new stage.
This interval, sometimes a few months, sometimes many years, has a name in the financial world: staggered retirement. And although financial planners see it as a realistic and even healthy possibility, the period can also become a source of emotional strain and, especially, financial conflict, particularly when the couple is not aligned on what to expect.
The pressing question that emerges in this scenario is straightforward: how can couples keep retirement at different times from becoming a financial blind spot? Understanding the dynamics of this period requires examining habits, expectations, income, and the way we talk, or fail to talk, about money.
The unexpected impact of staggered retirement
There is a silent belief that surrounds many couples: that retirement, when it comes, will come for both at the same time. The romantic narrative of leaving work life together, enjoying long-awaited trips, and living a slower pace side by side still dominates the American imagination. The problem is that reality rarely follows that fantasy.
Research conducted by Ameriprise in 2024 shows that only 11% of couples retire simultaneously. The majority, 62%, end up choosing (or being pushed into) a staggered retirement of at least one year. Even so, 61% of couples who are still working believe they will leave their jobs nearly together.
This disconnect between expectation and reality opens room for frustrations. According to Cassandra Rupp, a financial planner at Vanguard, many couples “carry unspoken assumptions about how they will live and spend,” and these assumptions often emerge abruptly when the first partner finally crosses the finish line of working life.
The case of Jeffrey and Diane Holtaway, from Sewell, New Jersey, illustrates this transition well. He retired first, in 2017, at age 60. She remained employed to ensure the couple wouldn’t have to tap into savings immediately. They planned, talked, reorganized expenses, moved houses, and began closely controlling daily spending. Even so, when the new rhythm began, the shock was greater than expected.
The issue wasn’t the big bills, it was the sum of the small ones. Eating out, car repairs, gifts, occasional trips. Everything felt heavier. The day-to-day math changed, and the emotional landscape did too.
As Diane said, “we just couldn’t do the things we used to do.”
The emotional roots of financial conflict
Retirement isn’t just a change in income; it’s a change in identity. In a couple, one gains new time, new habits, new routines. The other faces traffic, goals, deadlines, and, in many cases, the emotional weight of shouldering a larger share of the expenses while their partner rests.
This imbalance produces silent tensions. According to Megan Ford, a financial therapist and director of the Center for Love and Money at the University of Georgia, many couples enter avoidance patterns, trying to steer around difficult conversations about budgeting, spending, and priorities.
Ameriprise’s research shows that 24% of couples don’t even agree on how much money will be necessary to live on in retirement. A quarter of them disagree on how much to spend on experiences like travel, hobbies, and leisure.
For the specialist, the root of conflict is usually a lack of concrete and emotional preparation. One spouse may feel they are covering the gap while the other spends more freely. Or the retired partner may fear using savings, creating a constant atmosphere of restraint.
This combination, she says, undermines both financial well-being and relationship health.
Financial planning: from realistic projections to emotional agreements
In the world of staggered retirement, financial planning isn’t just about numbers. It’s about creating a shared vision and making explicit what was once implicit.
For specialists, the first step is to define the scenario. The couple needs to answer essential questions: What do they imagine daily life will look like? How much do they want to travel? What is an acceptable standard of living? How will they handle unexpected situations, especially health-related ones, which become more frequent and more expensive over time?
Rupp recommends that the couple project full annual expenses, including medical costs and long-term care, which are often forgotten. Online simulations help, but a conversation guided by a financial planner is, for many, the turning point.
Another crucial point in staggered retirement is understanding income replacement. The traditional rule suggests replacing 75% to 85% of pre-retirement income, but Ford emphasizes that couples may need more, since they tend to live longer together and spend more on shared activities.
The math matters, but dialogue is indispensable.
When the fear of spending becomes an obstacle
One of the paradoxes of retirement is that many are afraid to spend, even when they can. This hesitation, often tied to guilt or a sense of moral duty, directly impacts the couple’s dynamics.
Marianne Oehser, a consultant at Next Chapter Lifestyle Advisors, says that excessive saving can deprive couples of essential experiences precisely during the period when they matter most.
The case of David and Karen Gerard, from Levittown, New York, shows the other side of the equation. She retired; he kept working. David encouraged her to spend more. Karen, raised in a family marked by the Great Depression, kept almost instinctive frugal habits coupons, fewer meals out, reduced shopping. It wasn’t fear. It was upbringing.
The couple found balance because, above all, there was respect for their differences. And there was a plan.
The golden rule: build a living agreement
The consensus among planners and therapists is clear: couples who function well during staggered retirement are those who speak openly about money and revisit plans frequently.
No single conversation that decides everything. No expecting conflicts to resolve themselves with time.
Ford recommends monthly financial meetings, preferably during pleasant moments like over dinner or on a walk. Conversations that aren’t limited to spreadsheets, but include expectations, concerns, and fears.
This regularity builds trust. And trust reduces the stress of the transition.
In the end, the challenge is learning to walk together, even at different paces
The Holtaways’ experience reflects this. After years of adjustments and negotiations, they now find greater financial and emotional stability. He took on some of the household tasks; she dedicated herself to the artisanal baking she had always wanted to explore. They found a new balance because they talked a lot, revisited plans, and didn’t let silent tensions accumulate.
Mrs. Holtaway is dedicating herself to the project she truly loves: selling her own baking products online. Mr. Holtaway works as a volunteer grief counselor, exercises, and meets with friends.
This is the core message for those about to experience staggered retirement: it isn’t enough to plan numbers. It’s necessary to plan expectations. And, above all, to understand that retirement doesn’t happen in a day, it happens over time.
Just like love, it requires adjustments, patience, and the willingness to revisit agreements to build, together, a new normal.
