(Closed) Would you sign a prenup?

posted 11 years ago in Money
  • poll: Would you sign a pre-nup if it were given to you before the wedding with no discussion whatsoever?

    HELL NO! I'd walk away!

    Yes! I would do anything to marry the man I love!

    other-explain below

  • Post # 92
    Member
    447 posts
    Helper bee

    @kay01:

    Oh…by the way Kay, I don’t mind a woman screwing over a guy and taking more than she theoretically should have if he cheats…lol  What I think is unfair is if they just don’t get along etc. and now she wants a lifestyle upgrade from her premarital state.  If he cheats, screw him…fair doesn’t apply anymore.

    In some states (not Cali) you can put fidelity clauses in there that affect things…lol

    Post # 93
    Member
    447 posts
    Helper bee

    Even though I just said I don’t care if a guy gets screwed if he cheats (which is true), as an example of the societie’s damaged mentality, Eva Longoria filed for spousal support.  How shameful?  She is a celebrity and has plenty of money from her Desperate Housewives but she doesn’t play basketball as well as Tony Parker but somehow she feels entitled.

    It is just the double standard mentality of society.

    Post # 94
    Member
    3134 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: August 2012

    I would sign one, mostly because I am much more financially stable/responsible than my SO.  He actually brought the topic up though and wants to have one in the future since he witnessed a divorce between his parents when he was younger.  If it ever came to that (which I don’t think signing a prenup automatically means that you’ll easily get a divorce) then hopefully we wouldn’t have to lawyer up, fight, etc.

    Post # 95
    Member
    1515 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: October 2012

    J brought it up before with me.  I was taken back by him saying that we should sign one, but I don’t think I will mind signing one.  His reason is because he will have his own business and feels it isn’t fair that half of it would go to me because we were married.  I can understand in a way.  I know we will be fine in the future, but whatever makes him feel better, then so be it.

    Post # 96
    Member
    2268 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: May 2011

    Reasons behind it would be the major game changer.

    Neither of us have jack crap so it wouldn’t be an issue for us.

    I can understand it for people with a LOT of family/personal assets in some circumstances. But in that case I think you’d expect it so you wouldn’t be very surprised.

    For example, my grandma signed one when she remarried. But she’s in her 70’s and her husband has a lot of complicated assets and investments and he has 2 grown children and grandkids. She didn’t expect everything to go to her if/when he dies.

    Hours before is just irresponsible though. So if he’s being irresponsible and dumb there’s no reason for me to take it seriously. I wouldn’t call off the wedding until we discussed it though.

    Post # 97
    Member
    3338 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: November 1999

    Logically if a party or parties entering in the marriage with a large financial asset that the other was not entitled to before, I think it makes sense.

    But separating about how you feel about that emotionally would be tough, no doubt.

    I think it would be a rare case a dude just sprung on you a prenup right before the wedding, but in a rational conversation, I would probably agree to it.  If you don’t believe in divorce, it would never become an issue anyways.

    Post # 98
    Member
    113 posts
    Blushing bee
    • Wedding: October 2010

    like most comments, 

    if he had a fortune/came from a rich prominent family and he had to protect that, I would understand and i’d sign it. 

     

     

    Post # 99
    Member
    447 posts
    Helper bee

    @DesireeAnne:

    Yup.  That is fair.  For a woman who had the same opportunities to study, work, develop her talents etc. and didn’t get pregnant early derailing her opportunities she should feel comfortable with what she has earned before the marriage.  That’s fair and what she is entitled to.  Should she marry into money…like finding a lottery ticket, good for her, enjoy.  But if it doesn’t work out and he never cheated, she should go back to her pre-wedding lifestyle.  If finding a guy to be dependent on is her thing, fine…she should find a new guy.

    What would be important is that if she was given the kids that her life shouldn’t be worse than it would have been on her own just because of the kids but she shouldn’t use the kids to increase her lifestyle. 

    I think if a woman has some talents and motivation and she marries a man with money, she shouldn’t just toss it all away.  A guy wouldn’t.  She may desire to take a break for a few years but she souldn’t abandon her skills completely IMO. If she does, she does so at her own risk. 

    If it is a woman who marries into some money who has some brains or talent but never got the chance to develop her skills or has an idea that she would like to develop (product, online business, real business, service), she should ask this rich guy if he will support her idea and go for hers.  Why not? 

    If she has no finished talent/success or untapped potential with motivation then she really should return to her old lifestyle until she finds a new guy to support her.

    Post # 100
    Member
    4107 posts
    Honey bee

    i chose “other” because i didnt like the way the “yes” option was worded. i find it sounds desperate. i wouldn’t “do anything”. in fact, there are probably lots of things i would not do!!

    i just have no problem with pre-nups BECAUSE i think it would be pointless. like i know we are never getting divorced. so if Fiance came to me with one, i would think “this is stupid and pointless, BUT it is so pointless and meaningless that it is not worth fighting about, so i will just sign it and let it collect dust for the rest of our lives!”.

    Post # 101
    Member
    447 posts
    Helper bee

    @dynamic_duo:

    That’s a good point.  If people were certain, they wouldn’t care about a prenup…I don’t just mean the last second thing…but a prenup in general.  The last second thing is obviously stupid.

    People are dreamy and don’t give it thought.  They will sit there and say until death but if the government made them sign a deal where if they divorce 3/4ths of their future earnings goes to the IRS, they wouldn’t do it…no way… but you mention until death…no problem…because they know nobody is holding them to that.

    Promises…

    Post # 102
    Member
    2336 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: May 2012

    @Socrates:

    So that leaves this as an attack weapon …unfortunately.

    I’m sorry you felt attacked with how I responded to the child support question.  I reread my post to see what I had written that had led to that impression, but wasn’t able to pinpoint it.  That was certainly not my intent, I just wanted to clarify some legal aspects and provide some facts so folks did not get confused.

    And now she wants a lifetime guarantee of those benefits even if they break.

    Actually, if you reread my post, she does not want that.  While it’s startling to give nothing even if they have kids and she quits her job, all she asked for was health insurance for a few years in that event.  She wanted zero if they divorced without kids (which I admit I did not explicitly state, so that might not have been obvious to you). 

    If it is a family business, she should not feel entitled.  We have to get rid of the “Girl, get yours” mentality.  If it were a guy, he would not be trying to mooch off a woman’s business and trying to get guarantees if he breaks up with her.

    Right now, he’s mooching off her to start other businesses, which is ridiculous in my opinion (though you’re right, he could be setting himself up for failure by accepting support in building these, though obviously not the family established one).  Then again, I don’t like moochers in general, so a moocher who is capable of not mooching but chooses not to is all the more worse.  And I wouldn’t call it an entitlement to the business either.  If it were a great job instead, same facts still applied, I’d still think that the pre-nup as written was not fair to both parties ex ante.  It’s just that folks rarely have people sign a prenup for a spendthrift with a great job who encourages his/her partner to quit a job to stay at home so the situation doesn’t come up.

    She may desire to take a break for a few years but she souldn’t abandon her skills completely IMO. If she does, she does so at her own risk.

    This is the crux of our disagreement, so we’ll have to agree to disagree.  I believe that if they both agree, the risk should be shared.  If they BOTH want kids, and they both AGREE that she ought to quit her job to take care of the kids, thus sacrificing her potential future career for them, then yes I do think it reasonable that s/he pay for spousal support for a limited time to allow her/him to get a job to support herself/himself, whether or not the support comes from a family business or a standard job.  I also believe this should apply to men and women equally.

    Now if I were her, I’d just refuse to quit my job and avoid the problem entirely.  But that’s not how they’ve talked about the future.  They’re both from a fairly religious backgrounds with traditional ideas of how to raise the family – that is, with mom at home.  Where both parties agree in advance how to raise the kids, I don’t see why one side should penalize the other for a decision made by both.  (Think of it this way, if this scenario does play out, it will be you the taxpayer who is paying for her health care.  That’s actually the policy reason behind the law.)

    As far as this personal situation goes, given their religious background, I believe they are looking at ~4 kids, not the American 2.  So you’re talking about ~13 years to get them all into kindergarten (5 years to kindergarten, 2-3 between each kid).  +5 is hard to get back into the workforce, approach 15 and you’ve lost major career development and have decayed skills.  So it’s not just a “break for a few years.”

    Post # 103
    Member
    447 posts
    Helper bee

    @kay01:

    Hi Kay,

    The internet is fraught with miscommunication.  I never felt attacked.  I enjoyed reading your post.  What I meant by that statement is that since the kids cannot be included in a prenup, they can be used to attack.  This would mean fighting for custody, winning child support and trying to establish the “standard” argument “The kids are used to this”.  Sorry for the confusion.

    Your friend’s case was interesting.  I just gave her a hard time because you said something like “It was totally unfair”…as if she was expecting a better deal.  lol  In actuality, I agree with the health insurance for a specified time.

    I understand where you are coming from with “If they BOTH agree”.  Your logic is sound.  With all the trickery that I’ve see of “sacraficed for him” and now he should pay, I’m put off by that kind of talk.  You made it sound better when you said “both”.  Sometimes people will make sacrafices…like moving to a new location for one person where there is really no direct benefit to that person (and they lose).  When there are benefits to both (e.g. kids, etc), I don’t like that word “sacrafice”. 

    I told you, since I’ve seen those cases where the lawyers say “He asked her to give up her career”, my policy would be “It’s up to you.”  If you want to do it fine.

    I see your point with the 4 kids.  That is a tricky one.  Homemaker is respectable.  I guess to me it would depend on what kind of career she was giving up.  I just don’t like that guilt tripping and acting like a victim.  I would advise him to let it be completely up to her but if not, he should at least let her make the decision and “support” and definitely should not “request”.  But that’s on him. 

    Thanks for sharing the story.

    Post # 104
    Member
    637 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: May 2011

    @Socrates: just want to throw in: i’ve never heard of staying home to take care of kids (whoever does it – husband or wife) being only “up to” one person. That is a huge decision – to quit your job to stay home – with huge implications that cannot be decided by one person alone. I would be livid if my Fiance and I had a conversation where we mutually decided the best decision for our children would be me quitting and staying home, and then something happened to our marriage, and I felt entitled to some assistance to help me get back on my feet professionally, and he said “that decision was up to you”. No. We both take on that risk together if I quit my job, as a team, and we both deal with the consequences together.

     

    Post # 105
    Member
    8375 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: June 2009

    I imagine the women who want to stay home let it be known very early they desire to be homemakers and the men are fully aware of this. Of my group of friends, I have known for years who felt the yearn to stay home. For some women, there is only that one option.

    Most men I know have said they’ve left it up to their wife to decide if she wants to continue to work. I would be terribly put off if my husband told me he wanted me to stay home.

    Post # 106
    Member
    3974 posts
    Honey bee
    • Wedding: February 2012

    @MissBoston: I agree. My SO and I have old fashioned views and we’ve decided that I would one day become a stay at home mother. It is important to him that he marries the type of woman who would be willing to stay home. We both believe it to be better for children to have at least one parent home. It’s something we have decided together, it isn’t just my decision.

    The topic ‘Would you sign a prenup?’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors