posted
I think it is important to discuss as many things as possible before marriage. My husband and I did not get a prenup- we had nothing before hand and we both agreed that 50/50 makes sense.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by breyerchic04: JT do you keep count on the number of reasons you're not marrying each female hatracker? If so what number are we at? I don't do numbers.
Why only the females?
-o-
I too am looking forward to Seatarsprayan's reply to CT.
-o-
quote:Originally posted by Goody Scrivener: Very TomKat, frankly, but almost 5 years earlier.
What's it say about me that I didn't catch the reference at first, and wondered why you were bringing BannaOj into this?
-o-
Count me among those who aren't crazy about the idea of prenups.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anything two people want to agree to that doesn't hurt anyone else is fine by me, but I don't agree that prenups are necessarily a universally good idea.
Marriages are built largely on trust and, for some people, a prenup indicates a lack of confidence in either your partner or the relationship itself.
Trust is an individual and not always rational thing. For people that view a prenup as a demeaning of their confidence in their spouse or vice versa, justified or not, I think the preparation and even very existence of the prenup can cause harm.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:A prenup may be a sign that one is planning for failure.
Lacking a prenup may be a sign that one is not planning at all
In both cases... might be, might not be. You can plan for the future, talk through finances, career plans, child-raising, etc, without having a prenup too. I think that's why so many churches require marital counseling before they all you to marry there as well.
Posts: 57 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Marriages are built largely on trust and, for some people, a prenup indicates a lack of confidence in either your partner or the relationship itself.
Wrong.
Edit: the people who assume the latter are, that is.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think you can categorically say that is wrong. Some prenups are absolutely motivated by a lack of trust (see rivka's sage comment "if a wealth disparity is the main reason for a prenup, I think you're in trouble to start with").
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right, of course, but the generalized attitude that "a prenup indicates a lack of confidence in either your partner or the relationship itself" is silly. I mean, if I tell my partner, "I love you, I want to get married, and I want a prenup," am I the one being unconfident in my partner and relationship?
If that causes my partner to question my confidence in her and the relationship, well, I think that speaks pretty loudly about who has the confidence problem.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Marriages are built largely on trust and, for some people, a prenup indicates a lack of confidence in either your partner or the relationship itself.
Wrong.
Edit: the people who assume the latter are, that is.
We're dealing with human beings who's emotions have to be factored into the equation. I've experienced my share of unjustified negative emotions, and I'm sure most other people have as well.
All I'm saying is that for people who have a negative emotional response to the concept of a prenup, a prenup may be harmful.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:If that causes my partner to question my confidence in her and the relationship, well, I think that speaks pretty loudly about who has the confidence problem.
Sure does. That person is obviously experiencing some insecurity. Perhaps you can bring them around, perhaps you can't.
EDIT: And if you can't bring them around, is it worth giving up on marriage with that person?
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If a prenup is going to be such a stumbling block that it's going to ruin the marriage, how fragile is it already?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:EDIT: And if you can't bring them around, is it worth giving up on marriage with that person?
Is it worth not marrying someone who tells me they believe I'm not confident in our relationship while simultaneously demonstrating their utter lack of confidence?
posted
Like I said, it's not going to be the same for everyone. Me, I'm not a prenup kind of guy. Divorce, for me, would be such a disaster that even the loss of all of my assets would be a minor concern. A prenup would feel like getting insurance on my ten speed that would kick in in the event that my house burned to the ground. Sure, I'd get a brand new bike, but who cares?
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
MattP, you say that now, but imagine that you have to deal with a divorce AND being dirt poor. That's exactly why you need to keep your assets, a divorce is devastating enough, without also having to worry about being able to pay the rent, car payments (if you get to keep the car), buy food, etc.
What if you're so depressed by the divorce that you lose your job? I don't see how being completely destitute would help anything.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I find the idea of being in a relationship without which I feel the rest of my life would be that absolutely meaningless...um, frightening and stifling. I want to marry someone with whom I can share my life...but I don't want every aspect of my existence to revolve around him.
posted
I can't provide a real good answer as at the time I got married I was very young (probably too young) and was not really thinking ahead to much. An abundance of caution probably would have prevented me from getting married in the first place, nevermind prenups. 13 years later I'm very happy with how things have turned out.
I've seen a number of marriages fail and none of them would have likely done so more gracefully if a prenup were part of the deal. No one was left broke or a got a short enough end of the stick to really complain about.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Matt, you haven't seen exes turn nasty and bitter toward one another during a drawn-out divorce proceeding? I have. On several occasions. And the children usually suffer because the parents have a hard time being civil to one another.
quote:Originally posted by pH: Matt, you haven't seen exes turn nasty and bitter toward one another during a drawn-out divorce proceeding? I have. On several occasions. And the children usually suffer because the parents have a hard time being civil to one another.
-pH
I haven't, but I know my experiences don't translate to universals. I know some divorces are terrible and assets are a big deal, but the "bad" divorces I've seen have not been caused by money/asset issues. The anger was over pre-divorce infidelity or abuse. (and one where the husband decided that he was gay - yikes)
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Qaz: Divorce isn't something that takes a couple by surprise, against their will, like a lightning strike or a plane crash. It is something that at least one of the partners must choose.
True. However, if one makes that decision, the other is left with precious few options. Moreover, some of the factors that can lead to a divorce do take at least one half of the couple by surprise. An exceedingly incomplete list (based solely on divorces where I personally know at least one of the parties): drug addiction, gambling addiction, physical abuse, serious emotional abuse, repeated infidelity, physical abandonment, emotional and financial abandonment.
quote:Originally posted by Qaz: If you do a prenuptial agreement, you are choosing to leave the option to divorce open. My fiancee and I already made our decision that we will never divorce. *That* is our prenuptial agreement.
Actual statements made by my then-fiance:
Divorce is not an option.
When we have problems, we will work them out. If we can't do that ourselves, we'll talk to <person the two of us had agreed upon>.
Actual statements made by my then-husband 10 years ago, when I was upset and freaked out by the divorce of friends of ours:
Don't worry. That will never happen to us. We won't let it.
Actual statements made by my then-STBX five years ago:
This is too hard. I can't do this anymore. I'm moving out.
I know I said this would never happen, and I meant it at the time.
A prenuptial agreement like this one (which became common a couple years after I got married) not only would have made my divorce easier, I believe it might have helped it not happen at all. Having immediate financial consequences to moving out might have kept him from doing so. And if not, at least there would not have been over a year where I was not receiving consistent financial support.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote:Originally posted by Goody Scrivener: Very TomKat, frankly, but almost 5 years earlier.
What's it say about me that I didn't catch the reference at first, and wondered why you were bringing BannaOj into this? [Wink]
Wait, you mean TomKat means something besides Tom Davidson and Katharina allegedly being the same person?
I admit to not being the most romantic person ever. I want to plan for the future, even if it seems a little cold. I don't know if I'd have a prenuptial agreement, but I wouldn't rule it out. "It won't happen to me" tends to be a risky thing to say.
Tatiana, I like the idea that the agreement is as much for the protection of your spouse as it is for your protection. If I somehow transform myself into an evil overlord, then the last thing my current non-evil self would want, if I loved my hypothetical husband, would be to trap him in a miserable relationship.
Then too, marriage itself is a legally binding thing. It isn't just about the love and trust between the couple, though ideally it may be based on those things. If I wanted to leave the legal system out of it completely, I'd have a religious ceremony and skip the license. However, it often does make sense in a lot of ways to have a legally binding relationship, and it also makes sense to modify the standard contract with a prenuptial if it doesn't meet your needs.
I guess I don't understand the vehemence about it, though.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by breyerchic04: JT do you keep count on the number of reasons you're not marrying each female hatracker? If so what number are we at? I don't do numbers.
Why only the females?
With the males, I stop at reason #1 -- they have the wrong junk.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I realize why I'm averse to prenups. I think divorces should come with sacrifice. I think that if there is a highly unequal balance of assets going into the marriage, the poorer spouse should have claim to half. Divorcing and keeping ones assets strikes me as a case of having ones cake and eating it too. I'll fully admit that this isn't the most materialistic argument I've written, but at the heart, it's how this issue strikes me. There would have to be an extraordinary circumstance before I'd sign a prenup-- I imagine love is the oldest extraordinary circumstance in the world-- but I do know that if my marriage ended in divorce, she could have it all.
It's a deep issue because it involves the colliding of two worlds, the dissolution of a marriage, which is largely a matter of human artistry, and the dividing of assets, which is the epitome of worldly concern.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: but I do know that if my marriage ended in divorce, she could have it all.
To me, this attitude falls under the frightening and stifling one I previously mentioned...it seems close to the idea that if one's relationship ended, nothing else in the world would matter.
quote:If she has more money than you, does that mean you're fine with taking it all?
Me being me, money would be the least of my issues. I wouldn't ask for any. I'd be too busy trying to summon my will to get up in the morning.
quote:To me, this attitude falls under the frightening and stifling one I previously mentioned...it seems close to the idea that if one's relationship ended, nothing else in the world would matter.
It's not that nothing in the world would matter, but I think I'd make a morose and listless ex-husband.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pH: Qaz, you don't see how it could be a little irritating to read responses like, "Well, I'M never going to get divorced, so obviously signing a prenup is like deciding ahead of time that your marriage is going to fail. Just don't get divorced!"?
Compared to divorce, being a little irritated is very very small potatoes.
I'm not sure who it was that said that signing a prenup is like deciding ahead of time that your marriage is going to fail. It wasn't me.
I *will* say that signing a prenup involves deciding ahead of time that divorce is an option.
--
Many societies, including ours in the past and India's today (1% divorce rate), have been full of people for whom it was not an option. It is not a bizarre and untested idea. We can examine the marriages and divorces and decide for ourselves if divorce being an option made everyone happier or less happy.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:I *will* say that signing a prenup involves deciding ahead of time that divorce is an option.
Divorce is an option. You can stick your fingers in your ears and say, "La la la, I can't hear you!" as often and as loudly as you like and you won't change that. It's romantic to think that, but completely naive.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
NOT divorcing is not always an option. What do you do if your spouse decides on his/her own that the marriage is over? What about in cases of abuse or infidelity? Just saying "divorce isn't an option" isn't enough, as several other people have pointed out.
posted
To keep it simple, let's assume that the legal default is that when a couple divorce all their assets are split equally between them. I think there are at least three factors that contribute to whether this default state is seen generally as "fair".
1. The wealth disparity between the spouses when they get married.
2. The length of time the marriage has lasted when the parties get a divorce.
3. The circumstances surrounding the divorce.
These factors all affect eachother to a varying degree. Thus it might seem unfair if a poor man takes half his exwife's wealth after a year long marriage, although less so if she's the one that unprovoked initiates the divorce. In my view, a good prenup should adress these factors and ameliorate the default state in such ways that it accords with the prospective couple's views of fairness.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think most people feel that prenups are not a bad idea, moneywise, but asking for one is more than a little awkward.
Why not make prenups mandatory for all couples applying for a marriage license, killing the need to actually ask for one?
Then, if a couple doesn't really need or want one, they can sign the paper stating that they want to split things 50-50 in the case of the divorce.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why not make prenups mandatory for all couples applying for a marriage license, killing the need to actually ask for one?
Because I think it's unrealistic to expect everyone to get a lawyer before getting married, and it's really, really necessary for parties to understand the legal ramifications of a prenup if we are going to give the prenup legal effect.
quote:Then, if a couple doesn't really need or want one, they can sign the paper stating that they want to split things 50-50 in the case of the divorce.
The standard in most states is not 50-50 but a fact-based examination that delves into many issues. It would be a major shift to go to a 50-50 division.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether or not to get a prenuptial is the sort of thing that should probably be worked out in pre-martial counseling, along with mundane but important issues like how money will be handled. I can't see it being any more awkward than asking about joint or separate bank accounts.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Divorce is an option. You can stick your fingers in your ears and say, "La la la, I can't hear you!" as often and as loudly as you like and you won't change that. It's romantic to think that, but completely naive.
It may seem that repeating assertions and calling names will convince people, but I don't think it often does.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do keep in mind that while it takes effort on both sides to make a relationship work, it only takes one person's decision to end things. I am not the first person in this thread to say that.
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz: I think most people feel that prenups are not a bad idea, moneywise, but asking for one is more than a little awkward.
I think you're probably not ready for marriage if you're not asking a prenup because it's "a little awkward." It's like saying, "Oh, I didn't ask my partner to get tested before we had sex because it made me uncomfortable."
Posts: 866 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
