spookie Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 From my understanding, assets and liabilities u acquire before marriage, are not subject to contention in the case of divorce. So a prenup is meant to hash out the earnings an debt acquired after. Personally, I wouldn't sign one, and not because I would expect to gain in the event of divorce. I don't see the point of entering marriage feeling like I boil be prepared for a split.
threebyfate Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 From my understanding, assets and liabilities u acquire before marriage, are not subject to contention in the case of divorce. So a prenup is meant to hash out the earnings an debt acquired after. Personally, I wouldn't sign one, and not because I would expect to gain in the event of divorce. I don't see the point of entering marriage feeling like I boil be prepared for a split.Same reason why people buy car, medical and house insurance where there's a lesser chance of a car accident, getting terminally ill or being robbed, than divorce. 2
carhill Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Spookie, it's not always that clear-cut, especially with a large disparity in pre-marital assets and complexities of business, real estate, inheritance, co-mingling, transmuting and a host of other potentials. I went through it and what was to be the greatest cost was the forensic accounting and legal fees for a contested D. I could give dozens of examples of individual issues that have to be legally processed and adjudicated or settled upon. It's just not simple, if the parties don't agree. I crunched the numbers and wrote a check for a substantial chunk of my pre-marital net worth, generally about 50% of the projected costs of protracted litigation including the projected adjudicated result. As an example, talking with my lawyer for an hour cost more than filing for divorce at the courthouse. It all adds up. A pre-nup costs money too, no doubt. If it becomes contested, that's a canary. Going in, one might think 'you take yours and I'll take mine' but, when one pours their heart and soul into a marital partnership, especially a long one, the lines of what is yours and mine blurs, psychologically. Complex subject. 1
veggirl Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Heck yeah I would sign one. I wouldn't be offended in the slightest. So WHAT if signing one "isn't romantic"? LOTS of parts of marriage aren't romantic! Will those be ignored, swept under the rug, as well? Life isn't always romantic. I'd be scared of marrying someone who was so immature or naive that they based future security / protection on what is and is not romantic! 1
threebyfate Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Marriage isn't just romance. It's a legally binding agreement that can cost you an arm and a leg. While it's easy for people who have no assets to say "well no, it ruins the romance" since they have nothing to lose and much to gain from being "romantic", I highly, highly suggest that people with assets ensure they get a pre-nup. But if you have nothing to protect, a pre-nup is a waste of money. Must admit it makes me giggle a bit when male rightests get all self-righteous about protecting their $5K or upside down mortgage from gold-digging women.
Author Nicomis Posted July 7, 2012 Author Posted July 7, 2012 Marriage isn't just romance. It's a legally binding agreement that can cost you an arm and a leg. While it's easy for people who have no assets to say "well no, it ruins the romance" since they have nothing to lose and much to gain from being "romantic", I highly, highly suggest that people with assets ensure they get a pre-nup. But if you have nothing to protect, a pre-nup is a waste of money. Must admit it makes me giggle a bit when male rightests get all self-righteous about protecting their $5K or upside down mortgage from gold-digging women. Seems a bit extravagant for such a small amount, however I suppose it's just about not letting that bitch take your stuff. I know a guy who spent $10k just to make sure his whore ex wife didn't get $300 a month for one year. Now that's hate, and I don't blame him.
threebyfate Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Seems a bit extravagant for such a small amount, however I suppose it's just about not letting that bitch take your stuff. I know a guy who spent $10k just to make sure his whore ex wife didn't get $300 a month for one year. Now that's hate, and I don't blame him.I think he's an idiot. If I were in his shoes, I'd set up a no-load mufu account with the full $3600 in it with a $300 AWD to her bank account. This way, if the mufu earns anything, it goes to me at the end of the year and I don't need to look at or manage the account until the year's over and then, solely to either add any remaining assets into my own portfolio or collapse the account by redeeming the fund.
irin Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 when i become a Millionaire *sigh :bunny: ill make my future husband sign one!
123321 Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Would you ladies ask for a prenup, or merely acquiesce, or even agree, to one?
Silly_Girl Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Would you ladies ask for a prenup, or merely acquiesce, or even agree, to one? My boyfriend and I haven't been together long but there were 2 things I wanted to get straight so he could move on if he were unhappy about them: 1. I want more kids but can't guarantee I'll go through with it should the situation arise 2. I must have a pre-nup to cohabit/marry again and if it's not forthcoming I'll remain single
Author Nicomis Posted July 7, 2012 Author Posted July 7, 2012 My boyfriend and I haven't been together long but there were 2 things I wanted to get straight so he could move on if he were unhappy about them: 1. I want more kids but can't guarantee I'll go through with it should the situation arise 2. I must have a pre-nup to cohabit/marry again and if it's not forthcoming I'll remain single Not a Silly Girl, a Smart Girl. :-) 1
Janesays Posted July 8, 2012 Posted July 8, 2012 I'm usually the one with more assets/money in the relationship. No, I wouldn't sign a pre-nup. Well, after roughly 8 years of marriage, my ex husband stole all of my assets, savings, retirement money, etc and left me for his mistress. After a year long battle in court, I managed to retain a meager 1/3 of what I lost. Less....if you count the astronomical lawyer fees. I'm still trying to come to terms with my destroyed future nest egg. With that said, I DID learn a very important lesson. Namely, before you tie the knot, it's best you be absolutely SURE you understand the core character of the person you marry. I always knew my ex was kind of a prick. He just never was a prick TO ME, so I foolishly believed he never would be. But poor character is poor character. Some might say I should have made him sign a prenup. The reality is that I should have never married him. I say if you're thinking pre nup, then there's a little voice inside your head telling you that you shouldn't trust this person 100%. And if that is the case, then pre nup is not the answer. Not marrying them is.
carhill Posted July 8, 2012 Posted July 8, 2012 I say if you're thinking pre nup, then there's a little voice inside your head telling you that you shouldn't trust this person 100%. And if that is the case, then pre nup is not the answer. Not marrying them is. I'll co-sign this, qualifying it with pre-nup negotiations, along with PMC, being a great way of 'un-masking' someone who is otherwise in costume. People aren't always what they seem. If no canaries arise, that's an answer. If they all keel over, that. Such processes are a great method of assessing the core character of both parties.
Silly_Girl Posted July 8, 2012 Posted July 8, 2012 I say if you're thinking pre nup, then there's a little voice inside your head telling you that you shouldn't trust this person 100%. And if that is the case, then pre nup is not the answer. Not marrying them is. No. The little voice in my head says never to trust ANY person a solid 100%. But I can't live my life expecting every person to turn in to my ex, so I'll take risks with my heart, but protect my assets at the same time.
threebyfate Posted July 8, 2012 Posted July 8, 2012 Well, after roughly 8 years of marriage, my ex husband stole all of my assets, savings, retirement money, etc and left me for his mistress. After a year long battle in court, I managed to retain a meager 1/3 of what I lost. Less....if you count the astronomical lawyer fees. I'm still trying to come to terms with my destroyed future nest egg. With that said, I DID learn a very important lesson. Namely, before you tie the knot, it's best you be absolutely SURE you understand the core character of the person you marry. I always knew my ex was kind of a prick. He just never was a prick TO ME, so I foolishly believed he never would be. But poor character is poor character. Some might say I should have made him sign a prenup. The reality is that I should have never married him. I say if you're thinking pre nup, then there's a little voice inside your head telling you that you shouldn't trust this person 100%. And if that is the case, then pre nup is not the answer. Not marrying them is.Unless you can mind read, no one can ever know core characteristics to the tune of 100%. It's delusional to believe that anyone can judge others to the degree of guaranteed relationship success. So, prepare for the worst and hope for the best, is how to hedge for the unexpected. Don't forget that people change over time, where their feelings and needs can change too, and once someone's no longer invested and fueling their marriage, a different side of the person can appear, one that's driven solely by self-interest.
zengirl Posted July 11, 2012 Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) How many of you would honestly sign a pre-nup that would give him all that he had and contributed, and you all that you had and contributed. This would include making his retirement, and equity in any property already in his possession off limits to you, as well as no alimony for either party. Of course child support is separate, but lets say your not going to have kids. How many of you would marry the man you "love" if he handed you this? I would and did sign a prenup (actually suggested it), but I would not sign THIS prenup for a variety of reasons. One being that when I went into my marriage, my husband and I both agreed to prioritize his career over mine. Therefore, I am aware I will be making monetary and career sacrifices for him - necessary since we'd each do better in different areas and also because we can do better as a team by making one career/income primary and the other career/income secondary. Granted, a lot of that will be a bit down the road, but if sacrifices are made by one partner, they shouldn't be put at a disadvantage after a split. Most people I know don't make equal financial sacrifices in a marriage, in terms of their career (among the upper-middle class; I would say it's different among those just scraping by where every penny matters). If you had a setup where both parties are keeping tally of 'what's theirs' that strictly, there'd be no incentive to financially sacrifice or be the partner who does more of the domestic duties. Everyone would want to be as primary an earner as he/she could be and would see the domestic work as a chore. So, a lot of it depends on the setup of your marriage and your household, I'd say. My own prenup protects pre-marital assets (sometimes those are protected anyway but not always) and dictates how much of our income is made 'joint' with various tiers for various periods over the course of 10 years. Then, it expires completely and it's all "ours." It also expires completely if we have kids. Hubby didn't really care for a prenup at all, but he saw the sense in hammering out some kind of financial plan, which is really more what ours is. Alimony, however, is a non-issue. I'd be happy to sign away rights to alimony, though if my husband does create his own business and I contribute, I would expect shares anyway. (ETA: The only case where alimony should be awarded is if both partners agree one should stop working OR one partner has smashing financial success, partially due to the support of the other, which could easily be outlined in a contract or post-nup in those situations.) It would just be the matter of assets earned in the marriage, which were as a result of the 'team' rather than each of us as individuals, as our financial gains are the result of both of us working together, not each of us working separately. Edited July 11, 2012 by zengirl
sweetjasmine Posted July 11, 2012 Posted July 11, 2012 We're not drafting one. In our case, it's a complete waste of time and money. If he were to insist, I would do it, but it'd be so pointless that it'd make me wonder why he was insisting. If either of us had significant assets or if one of us planned to give up a career for the other, then it would make sense.
Just_A_Poster Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 I'm usually the one with more assets/money in the relationship. No, I wouldn't sign a pre-nup. Quite funny how the guys on this site - who are constantly crying women are after their little wallets - have never CONSIDERED that a lot of women are doing better financially than men these days. Just maybe WOMEN might need to protect THEIR assets with a pre-nup from their underemployed husbands.
RiverRunning Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 I would not sign a pre-nup. I think it's insulting. However, I have talked at length with my boyfriend. I have too much pride to ask for anything other than child support. I don't want his retirement (I think it's BS when my friends' mothers are getting their ex-husband's pensions and the like 20 years after the divorce) or anything else. I would rather file for bankruptcy and completely start off alone, even if he cheated on me, even if he became a complete jerk to me, than to ever siphon off of him after the divorce. Granted, I realize that a lot of women say that to men, and then wind up taking them for everything they're worth.
carhill Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 A pre-nup merely puts one's wishes into writing in a legally recognizable form. It's an action which supports words. Healthy. No different than a will, power of attorney, trust, or any other legal instrument. It clarifies and leaves little to no ambiguity. As people change, so does the instrument, being updated throughout life. Quite funny how the guys on this site - who are constantly crying women are after their little wallets - have never CONSIDERED that a lot of women are doing better financially than men these days. Just maybe WOMEN might need to protect THEIR assets with a pre-nup from their underemployed husbands I support this wholeheartedly and have advised female friends exactly that, citing my own experiences in divorce without a pre-nup as an example. They're smart if they look into it as an option, IMO.
tryingtofindmyway24 Posted August 6, 2012 Posted August 6, 2012 I agree a pre nup is insulting no I would not sign one.
Radu Posted August 6, 2012 Posted August 6, 2012 Quite funny how the guys on this site - who are constantly crying women are after their little wallets - have never CONSIDERED that a lot of women are doing better financially than men these days. Just maybe WOMEN might need to protect THEIR assets with a pre-nup from their underemployed husbands. I actually advised female friends to get a prenup now that many women outearn their husbands. I do agree that i'm a hypocrite though, as i would say that 'i consider it insulting' to sign on if it suited me.
123321 Posted August 6, 2012 Posted August 6, 2012 Quite funny how the guys on this site - who are constantly crying women are after their little wallets - have never CONSIDERED that a lot of women are doing better financially than men these days. Just maybe WOMEN might need to protect THEIR assets with a pre-nup from their underemployed husbands. Man: "I would like a prenup" Woman: "Well women makes as much or more now you know?" Woman: "Men get paid more for the same work" Man:"..."
Silly_Girl Posted August 7, 2012 Posted August 7, 2012 I'll be having a pre-nup. I've worked my nuts off and my son has had to make countless sacrifices as a result. Whatever I have today belongs to him, regardless of whether I have more kids. Even though my ex is going hell for leather to take as much as he can. And my boyfriend will get to keep 100% of his 6 figure inheritance when it comes. Why is a pre-nup insulting? I'm totally lost on that point. 1
LFH Posted August 7, 2012 Posted August 7, 2012 If I was ever in a position where I wanted to get married, HELL YES I'd be wanting a prenup. I'd be suggesting it, not waiting for him to do so. I've worked hard for what have and partnering with someone should never leave either party feeling as if their hard work ended up being detrimental to them in the event it doesn't work out. It doesn't make it unromantic, it doesn't mean they love you less, it means that they are not afraid to stand up for themselves and also that they have financial skills of their own. I'd be skeptical of anyone that DIDN'T want or agree to a prenup these days. I'd assume they already knew that they had no intention of participating fully. Of course, my prenup would stipulate that anything we did TOGETHER would be dissolved accordingly as well. Any successes that he was instrumental in would of course be taken into consideration, I think that would be appropriate on both sides. 2
Recommended Posts