• My husband and I are new parents, and parenthood has changed our marriage.
• We found ourselves missing each other and wanted a way to communicate the way we used to.
• We started to implement 'office hours,' a weekly ritual where we have important conversations.

My husband and I have been married for three years and in October of this year, we welcomed our first baby together. As a new parent, the sleepless nights and endless diaper changes were expected, but the way my relationship with my husband transformed caught me off guard. Those long, meandering conversations we used to have over wine slowly disappeared, replaced by hurried exchanges about whose turn it was to do the 3 a.m. feeding or whether we had enough diapers to last the weekend.

Two months into parenthood, I found myself missing my husband despite living under the same roof. We were great at co-parenting, but somewhere along the way, we stopped being partners. The little disagreements we used to resolve quickly started festering, and our date nights became nonexistent.

That's when we stumbled upon the concept of "office hours" — though we initially didn't call it that. It started one Sunday when we both reached our breaking point after a particularly rough week. My husband suggested we get out of the house while his mom watched our son. We ended up at our local pub, and for the first time in weeks, we really talked.

We started keeping regular 'office hours'

That interaction put our marriage into perspective. We discussed everything we'd been putting off: our different approaches to sleep training, how to handle our finances between a new house purchase and a newborn, and even our future family vacations. It felt like coming up for air after being underwater for too long.

Now, every Sunday, we have our sacred two-hour window. We rotate between venues — sometimes it's a cozy corner of our neighborhood coffee shop, other times it's that new cocktail bar we've been meaning to try, and occasionally, when childcare falls through, it's just us in our living room with a pot of coffee when the baby goes down for a nap.

We treat these windows of time like actual office hours, complete with a running agenda we update in a shared Google document. Throughout the week, we add items we need to discuss: "Figure out holiday plans," "Discuss budgeting," or sometimes more delicate topics like "Talk about Tuesday's argument about work-life balance." Instead of trying to squeeze important conversations between our exhausted days, we know we have a dedicated space to truly hear each other out.

This weekly ritual has helped us have breakthroughs

The beauty of our office hours lies in how we structure this time. We start with the practical stuff — scheduling doctor's appointments, planning weekend activities, or discussing household budgets. But as we settle in, the conversation naturally flows into deeper territory. We've had breakthrough moments about our parenting fears, honest discussions about how our careers might change, and even difficult conversations about how we're both adapting to our new identities as parents.

Sometimes we cry, often we laugh, and occasionally we sit in comfortable silence, just enjoying being together without a baby monitor between us. It's become our weekly reset button, helping us remember that before we were Mom and Dad, we were two people madly in love who chose to build a life together.

Office hours haven't solved all our challenges — we still have our moments of frustration and exhaustion, but it has given us a framework to handle the complexities of marriage and parenthood with more grace and understanding.

This weekly ritual has become our marriage's lifeline. It's taught us that maintaining our relationship requires the same intentionality we bring to parenting. We've learned that scheduling time for our marriage isn't unromantic — it's a testament to how much we value what we have. Plus, when we're more connected as a couple, we're better parents. Our son, though too young to understand, benefits from having parents who are modeling the kind of partnership we hope he'll seek one day.

• I spent 17 months traveling with my partner while trying to stick to a budget of about $50 a day.
• My budget kept me on track for the first three months, in part because Peru felt affordable.
• I definitely spent more in countries known for being expensive to visit, like Japan and Singapore.

After saving up for years, my partner and I spent 17 months traveling around the world.

We started our trip in Peru and traveled north to Mexico before heading to Asia.

Since my partner is an accountant, we thought it would be useful to track every expense along the way. My initial budget was $1,500 a month or roughly $50 a day. He had the same budget, but we kept our money separate.

Here's what it was like exploring multiple countries while trying to manage my spending.

I stayed under budget for only the first 3 months of the trip

We spent the first two months in Peru, where I spent $1,370.29 in July and $1,179.96 in August.

Of all the countries we visited, I found Peru had some of the lowest prices for things like food and accommodations.

Our real key to staying under budget the first few months, though, was traveling at a slow pace. We took long bus journeys instead of quick, pricey flights and got deals on accommodations for staying longer. We also frequently cooked for ourselves and didn't book any expensive tours or activities.

I also stayed under budget in September, which we spent in Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia. I spent $1,325.07, with a daily average of $33.35 in Peru and $45.60 in Ecuador.

Colombia was more expensive for me at an average of $57 a day, but we spent only a few days there at the end of the month.

I didn't stay under budget any other months, but some countries still felt affordable to me

While exploring Central America, I didn't go over my monthly budget of $1,500 by too much. One month I spent $1,646, and another $1,888.

My daily spend was below $50 in El Salvador ($38.70) and Costa Rica ($33.09).

To be fair, though, my Costa Rica budget is skewed because my parents visited and paid for our accommodation for 10 days as our joint Christmas and birthday presents. Without their gift, I would've spent way more.

I thought El Salvador, on the other hand, felt extremely affordable, but I spent only 12 days there. I wish I'd stayed longer — both for my wallet and because I enjoyed the people, scenery, and food (pupusas forever!).

I also went over my daily budget — but only slightly — while visiting Colombia ($57), Honduras ($58.41), Nicaragua ($53.43), Guatemala ($62.72), and Vietnam ($54.23).

Looking back, I think I could've stayed under budget in those places if I'd tried harder or reorganized my itinerary.

Cutting out pricey experiences like the motorbiking trip in Vietnam or the overnight volcano hike in Guatemala would've lowered my expenses — but those felt like once-in-a-lifetime opportunities I couldn't pass up.

I also could've saved a significant amount by booking cheaper accommodations like hostel dorms, but the longer we traveled the more we opted for more comfortable (often pricier) stays like Airbnbs or private hostel rooms.

Splitting accomodation costs between the two of us helped — I couldn't have justified the upgrades as a solo traveler — but we rarely chose the cheapest options.

Some countries surprised me by how expensive they felt

In March, I spent $3,076.75 across Belize and Mexico — double my monthly budget.

I splurged on some experiences, like a snorkel tour in Belize and a mezcal tasting in Oaxaca, but the average prices for just about everything were higher than I expected.

Though I overspent, I still refrained from certain activities, like a $125 cave tour in Belize, because I wanted to try to stay close to my budget. Looking back, I wish I'd just spent the money.

In Indonesia, I spent $109.96 a day, which might seem high for a country that has a reputation for affordability, though I spent five days on its island of Sumatra on orangutan trekking tours.

My flights, transport, and tours were expensive for that short amount of time, but it was one of my most memorable experiences.

I knew in advance that my budget would be too tight for some countries

Before I left, I knew I'd likely exceed my budget in some countries that are known for being expensive to visit.

My average daily spend in Panama was $98.38. My food and accommodations there were on the pricey side, and I also splurged on a five-day sailboat trip from Colombia to get there. (The alternative was an equally expensive flight, which was how I justified it.)

I also knew Singapore would be expensive, so I limited myself to six days there across two separate layovers. I stayed in hostel dorms or used credit-card points for hotels and mostly did free activities. My spending in Singapore still came out to $95.74 a day.

Finally, the most expensive country I visited was also my favorite: Japan. I spent an average of $121.79 a day, or $3,288.28 across 27 days — aka more than double my monthly budget.

Though I dipped more into my savings than I'd have liked, budgeting made this travel dream possible

Traveling for this long was incredible, and it wouldn't have been possible without my budget. Daily and monthly spending goals helped me keep my spending in check.

Setting a conservative budget, having savings separate from the money I'd set aside for this trip, and earning some cash along the way meant I didn't stress too much when I went over budget.

Looking back, I could've rearranged my itinerary to spend more time in countries where I spent less, but ultimately I don't have any significant regrets.

In fact, my advice would be to splurge on bucket-list activities (within reason) — I'll never forget seeing wild orangutans in Indonesia or learning to make sushi in Japan.

Money can come back, but memories are forever.

• 3,800 North Koreans have been killed or wounded fighting alongside Russia, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said.
• But Ukraine's president told the Lex Fridman podcast that hundreds of thousands more could arrive.
• The estimate came amid a discussion of the danger to Europe if the US leaves NATO.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a podcast interview released Sunday that 3,800 North Korean soldiers had been killed or wounded in Russia's Kursk region to date.

Zelenskyy's figure suggests that a third of the North Korean troops brought over to fight alongside Russia have been taken out of action.

"12,000 has arrived. Today, 3,800 killed or wounded," he told podcaster Lex Fridman, but he cautioned that North Korea could send many more, giving a figure as high as half a million troops.

Estimates of North Korean casualties have varied since intelligence agencies reported in October that it was sending troops to help Russian President Vladimir Putin defend territory seized by Ukraine in the summer.

In late December, the White House estimated that more than 1,000 North Koreans had been killed or wounded in the space of a single week, amid mass dismounted attacks.

And in his nightly address on Saturday, Zelenskyy said that the Russian army had lost "up to a battalion of infantry, including North Korean soldiers and Russian paratroopers," in fighting in the village of Makhnovka in Kursk.

Concerns for Europe

Zelenskyy offered the latest casualty figures as part of a broader argument about the dangers to Europe if the US retreats from NATO.

President-elect Donald Trump has long been critical of NATO and the defense spending of some of its members, leading to concerns that he could slash support for the alliance or even walk away.

Zelenskyy said that if Trump decides to leave NATO once back in office, "Putin will destroy Europe."

He also argued that European countries are much less willing and able to raise massive armies compared to an autocracy like North Korea.

While Ukraine has around 980,000 military personnel, the militaries of its European allies are a fraction of the size, Zelenskyy said.

"Can Europe bring people together? No," he said. "Will Europe be able to build an army consisting of two to three million people? No, Europe will not want to do this."

Dmytro Ponomarenko, Ukraine's ambassador to South Korea, told Voice of America in November that the number of North Korean troops aiding Russia could soon reach 15,000, with troops rotated out every two to three months.

That could mean about 100,000 North Korean soldiers serving in Russia within a year, he added.