Prenup - I prepare for marriage, he prepares for divorce

[smackie9]

That is the whole idea of a prenup.....to make sure there is an understanding of what will be divided, alimony, child support, inheritance, pension, lottery winnings, personal property, etc. It's to make (if it happens) the separation fair for both and very cost effective keeping the lawyers out of it.


I'm on the guys side of this one. Being married shouldn't be viewed an entitlement to half IMO. That's why it is wise to have separate bank accounts and one joint account for bills, and expenses to be paid fairly. My husband makes more than I do but all expenses are split down the middle.

**Funny that I'm in this discussion.....it's our 24th anniversary today lol.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

Congrats Smackie!

[smackie9]

Thanks.....24 years happily unmarried lol

[HeartIsAching]

That is the whole idea of a prenup.....to make sure there is an understanding of what will be divided, alimony, child support, inheritance, pension, lottery winnings, personal property, etc. It's to make (if it happens) the separation fair for both and very cost effective keeping the lawyers out of it.


I'm on the guys side of this one. Being married shouldn't be viewed an entitlement to half IMO. That's why it is wise to have separate bank accounts and one joint account for bills, and expenses to be paid fairly. My husband makes more than I do but all expenses are split down the middle.

**Funny that I'm in this discussion.....it's our 24th anniversary today lol.

On the flip side - my wife and I have only one bank account: joint. Money goes in, money goes out. We don't pay attention to who contributes more, we just pay bills. She manages our funds. When I want to make a large-ish purchase, I call he rand ask if we can afford it. If she says 'no', then it's "Ok, thanks". Usually she says yes.

But we have a true symbiotic partnership. She's my other half, and vice-versa... but we didn't need the government to approve that for us... though we did need the government to allow us to make life-or-death decisions for each other, and thank god we did; needed it a mere two months after we got married.

[Rowen]

Sign it. If you had anything to lose, wouldn't you want to protect yourself?
And remember- it will never be used unless you divorce. So, if you're planning on not divorcing, why are you worrying about it?

[BackUpOrGetStng]

Thanks.....24 years happily unmarried lol

Lol. ****in Canada.

[vashti]

I think smackie9 is dead on. It's easy for the person who has fewer assets and who makes less money to say, "Well, I gave a lot to the relationship, too, so I deserve at least half," even when that person didn't make nearly the same amount of money as his/her partner did and didn't have nearly as much to show for a lifetime of work.

It's very simple: A prenup protects everyone. OP, if he comes into the relationship with significantly more assets than you do, he gets to keep those assets if you divorce. If he makes, for example, three-quarters of the money in the relationship, then he deserves three-quarters of the money if you divorce.

Marriage *is* a legal contract. It should be treated as such. If you have any problem with signing a prenup that gives back to each individual party what he or she earned over the course of the relationship, my bet is you don't really want a mutual relationship; you want someone to completely take care of you financially.

And no, you don't get "paid" for washing dishes and doing laundry. Marriage is a legally binding contract. It is not your employer.

The assumption (in California) is that marriage is a relationship based on equality, rather than proportion. I find it odd that one would marry someone they didn't feel was their equal in the first place. Also, money is one of the least meaningful assets one can contribute.

[HDBadger]

Also, money is one of the least meaningful assets one can contribute.

The laws in Connecticut (and most states) disagree.

And if money is one of the least important assets one can contribute, then how do you explain so many women running off with way more than 50 percent, even when they didn't earn nearly that much?

I'll say it again: Once you involve the state in marriage, it absolutely does become about money and assets.

The OP's man is smart to protect what he has, because he has so much more than her, and she isn't entitled to it.

[vashti]

And if money is one of the least important assets one can contribute, then how do you explain so many women running off with way more than 50 percent, even when they didn't earn nearly that much?

If a woman is running off with more than 50% in a community property state, it's because she has custody of the kids. And again, whatever he brings into a marriage is considered his sole and separate property. The only portion she would have a claim to would be that which was earned DURING the marriage.

And I disagree that the state of Connecticut (or anywhere) finds money to be the most valuable asset. It's just that it is the only one that can be divided equally...

[Wakeup]

I think smackie9 is dead on. It's easy for the person who has fewer assets and who makes less money to say, "Well, I gave a lot to the relationship, too, so I deserve at least half," even when that person didn't make nearly the same amount of money as his/her partner did and didn't have nearly as much to show for a lifetime of work.

It's very simple: A prenup protects everyone. OP, if he comes into the relationship with significantly more assets than you do, he gets to keep those assets if you divorce. If he makes, for example, three-quarters of the money in the relationship, then he deserves three-quarters of the money if you divorce.

Marriage *is* a legal contract. It should be treated as such. If you have any problem with signing a prenup that gives back to each individual party what he or she earned over the course of the relationship, my bet is you don't really want a mutual relationship; you want someone to completely take care of you financially.

And no, you don't get "paid" for washing dishes and doing laundry. Marriage is a legally binding contract. It is not your employer.

This is one of the favourite whines I hear from men who haven't taken into account just what their partner has contributed with their "lesser" income. When you think about all the groceries, their contribution to the bills and mortgage, all the gifts bought for his side of the family as well as your own, her share of entertainment, medical benefits, etc etc etc. Then "half of everything" isn't so hard to accept. Now, if you married a trophy wife that does nothing to contribute but rather just spends then that's your fault for doing it without protecting yourself.

how do you explain so many women running off with way more than 50 percent, even when they didn't earn nearly that much?

see paragraph about the woman's contributions even though she didn't make as much as her counterpart.
I'd like to see some stats on "women running off with way more than 50 percent." While keeping in mind what Vashti noted regarding child support.


Anyway: If you own a home and are going to be shacking up or marrying someone then its in your own best interests to sell that property and buy a new one together. Or, buy a new one together and keep your own home and rent it out. Protect yourselves. Prenups are put in place for both parties and that's why its important to have your own legal councel and not be using your partners team to negotiate for you.

[Wakeup]

If you're not a gold digger planning to take his money, then sign it. It's that simple.

The label would only apply depending on what is in the prenup and how her own lawyers counter.

[m3rry]

If you marry in France, you WILL be represented. You'll be married under French law and should you divorce, it would also be under French law.

Get your own attorney to read the prenup an suggest changes for you - a French lawyer. Sign nothing until you think it's fair.

Thanks for your thoughts, but coming from Philippines where there is no divorce, I will still not be divorced even if I am in France. The legalities can get complicated, I supposed, but in this matter I don't think French lawyers can help me. But you're right, i shouldn't sign anything until its sure, which means cancelling the wedding, indefinitely to infinity maybe.

[m3rry]

Is there any evidence to back this up?

I see the high rate of divorce as evidence enough, if it is an option, then people will take it.

[m3rry]

Congrats Smackie9 and thanks for your input. Don't you find it fair though that he earns more but you pay equal with expenses?

[m3rry]

Why does a prenup mean divorce is more likely? Sounds to me like he's being sensible especially given his own parents divorce and you' re living in 'happily ever after land'.

Prenup is basically groundworks for divorce, is it not?