Prenuptial Agreements

[Macfistowannabe]

Would you get one, or have you gotten one?

Is it going into a marriage with the wrong attitude, or would it make you feel more secure?

 

[nbcrusader]

Depends on what you are looking for in marriage. With no-fault divorce, casual attitudes towards relationships and higher emphasis on individual careers - a prenuptial agreement seems like a proper way to document the "relationship".

I don't have one - but I tend to live what would be considered an old-fashion, outdated, traditional lifestyle.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Who wants to go into marriage thinking that way, but realistically it would prevent problems re money, material things, etc.

Some people say money issues are the # 1 cause of problems in a marriage, so sadly I guess prenups just fit in w/ all of that.

 

[U2democrat]

Pardon my humiliating ignorance...but what EXACTLY is a prenup? I hear about it all the time but I've never really taken advantage of figuring out what it is.

 

[nbcrusader]

Pardon my humiliating ignorance...but what EXACTLY is a prenup? I hear about it all the time but I've never really taken advantage of figuring out what it is.

It is essentially a contract that redefines the community property rights of the couple.

It may, for example, state that income earned during the marriage by one party would remain the income of that party in the event of a divorce.

 

[U2democrat]

Ah that's what I thought. Thanks for the enlightenment!

 

[jer2911]

we did not get one. I personally feel like it starts out a marriage on the wrong foot.

 

[BAW]

My feelings on the prenup issue go two ways.

If one (or both) of you are both coming into the marriage with substantial assets or things like a pension plan that you have paid into for a number of years before you met your soon to be spouse, a prenup might be a good idea. If you have been previously divorced and were taken to the cleaners or short changed by your former spouse, you might not want to let that happen again so a prenup would be good protection.

But if you are both young and just starting out in your careers, have no real assets to speak of and go into the marriage on equal footing, what do you need a prenup for? Just iron out the details long before you get married...will you both work, how will you split the bills, will one of you stay home to raise any kids you might have, etc.

That might not work for everyone and its just one woman's humble opinion...maybe ask a lawyer if you're still not sure.

 

[Monkey79]

No way.... I think it totally sets the wrong tone for the marriage from the start.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Quite a few of you do not favor them. If I'm not mistaken, the "wrong foot" or the "wrong tone" seem to hint that it influences divorce in some way, and the couple is probably not in it for a lifelong commitment.

Is this an accurate interpretation?

 

[BAW]

I think its because it feels very cynical to discuss divorce before you even get married. But I guess there are many styles of marriage...some are the "what's mine is yours" type and others are "whats your is yours and what's mine is mine" type. Its whatever works for you and your potential spouse.

I didn't have one and I would have been a little insulted if my husband had asked for one. I would wonder if didn't trust me or thought I was some kind of gold digger

 

[BVS]

I think the idea of prenups really came into effect when divorce lawyers were far reaching beyond their bounds.

I don't think it necessarily "influences" divorce.

But when you hear these ridiculous stories of spouses that are getting rewarded assets and money that were earned or bought before even meeting each other, taking ownership of companies they had nothing to do with, or winning future earnings post divorce it makes you think. I'm a perfect example of someone who went into marriage with every intent of making it for life, but you can't control what the other person feels or does. Luckily I left the marriage with exactly the same amount of assets I had prior to the marriage, none.

But I can see where if someone is worth millions they'd want to protect their ass. And sometimes it's not so much protecting your ass from your spouse, sometimes it's protecting your ass from their lawyer.

 

[Liesje]

Quite a few of you do not favor them. If I'm not mistaken, the "wrong foot" or the "wrong tone" seem to hint that it influences divorce in some way, and the couple is probably not in it for a lifelong commitment.

Is this an accurate interpretation?

For me it's b/c I see marriage as being about love, trust, and lifelong commitment. If you don't trust your spouse and aren't willing to share, then you shouldn't get married, IMO. When I get married, I hope to God I don't ever have a possession or asset that I think is so valuable to me I wouldn't want to share it with my spouse. I know there are different *types* of marriage or views on marriage, but if a couple wants to each keep their own stuff their own, that's kinda a shitty marriage if you ask me.

 

[Irvine511]

it's not about keeping stuff during marriage, it's someone not losing assets they had before marriage should the marriage end in divorce.

example. the girl who grew up across the street from me. her family is independently wealthy. she is getting married to a man her parents hardly know. they are pressuring her to get a prenup, because there is money at stake, and they don't know this guy so they are understandably nervous. it's not as if they won't be sharing the money whilst they are married, but should it end in divorce, he won't get half of the family money intended for her.

 

[melon]

Exactly. It only covers assets prior to the marriage. Any assets acquired *after* the marriage are up for grabs.

For those who are wealthy, I think it is a necessity. I'd hope that potential spouses wouldn't take offense.

Melon

 

[Liesje]

example. the girl who grew up across the street from me. her family is independently wealthy. she is getting married to a man her parents hardly know. they are pressuring her to get a prenup, because there is money at stake, and they don't know this guy so they are understandably nervous. it's not as if they won't be sharing the money whilst they are married, but should it end in divorce, he won't get half of the family money intended for her.

Personally, I still wouldn't do it. Marriage is about sharing. If they get married, he IS part of their family anyway.

 

[Irvine511]

is he still part of the family if there is a divorce? yes, if there are children, they are, but what about the divorced spouse?

that's more of a broader, philosophical question, i suppose.

 

[Liesje]

Yes, I think so.

 

[all_i_want]

hell yes!

ill probably marry after 30, and in case i divorce i dont want to give away all my accumulated wealth... unless i have 2 billion dollars.. then id give a few millions

 

[Saracene]

I think it's a perfectly sensible idea. I see no reason why practical and emotional can't be kept apart from each other.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

There are people out there who would be insulted if you wanted a prenup. I don't think they are over-emotional, or impractical, but they want to enter a lifelong commitment in which they can share their possessions with that significant other, and vice versa. I'm not completely against the idea of a prenup, seeing that around 50% of marriages sadly end in divorce, but I would respect the wishes of that significant other if she disliked the idea.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

is he still part of the family if there is a divorce? yes, if there are children, they are, but what about the divorced spouse?

that's more of a broader, philosophical question, i suppose.

This can be a confusing question, unless you arrange them in different degrees. My parents were both formerly married to different spouses before they joined forces, and I have never met my dad's ex-wife, nor my mom's ex-husband. No children were the result of either ex-marriage.

As a result, I don't feel like a family member to either of the exes, and it doesn''t bother me that I've never met them.

 

[BVS]

As a result, I don't feel like a family member to either of the exes, and it doesn''t bother me that I've never met them.

But would it bother you if one of them were now owners of one of your parents business which they had no part in? Or the ranch house one of your parents worked hard for and now you'll never get to see?

 

[Macfistowannabe]

But would it bother you if one of them were now owners of one of your parents business which they had no part in? Or the ranch house one of your parents worked hard for and now you'll never get to see?

As long as I've never heard of them, no it certainly would not. And if I did hear of them, maybe a little, but I'd get over it.

 

[indra]

I would want to be sure I would keep the assets I brought into any marriage, so yeah, I would want one. But then agan, I'm not very romantic.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Practically speaking they're a sound idea. Emotionally, we might be inclined to balk at them. For reasons others have already stated. If you have assets and the like which you'd like to protect, you need to consider the future and the possibilities of change. Too many divorced people say their spouses and even themselves are not the same person they were at time of divorce as when they entered the marriage. We can't always predict changes in those closest to us, but in cold clinical terms, if you have assets and there is a possibility the person you marry might change, or you yourself might change, then I guess it can be viewed as a type of 'insurance'.

Then on the other hand, it is ridiculously unfair to expect more at the end of a marriage than what you put in. Some people are like this though, and in those cases I have to ask why you'd want to marry someone who sees the world with $ signs. I dont mean you personally btw lol. Just in general.