Prenuptial Agreements. Anyone have one? Anyone who would consider one if they married?

[DapperButch]

With the recent passing of same-sex marriage in many states, getting married, is no longer "getting married". People can take your shit now!

I was just wondering what people's thinking was about prenups. Do you have one? Would you have one? Do you have any future inherited property you would lose, money, other things of value to you that you want to make sure that you will still have after you divorce?

Here is the first article I found on the subject:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/prenuptial-agreements-what-law-allows-30283.html

If I married my partner, I would want a prenup. I would want one due to my future inheritance. My partner and I have talked about it and it doesn't matter to her. I think we should have one for her sake, as well. Although she says she would be comfortable with much/most of her money going to me when she passes as she knows I will pass it onto her son, it is important to me that she designate a certain percentage to him (whatever she decides upon), that would be "his" upon her death (or at whatever age she thinks would be appropriate for him). It would just make me feel better for some reason.

Any money we make after getting married I would have no problem with splitting. It is what I am coming into the relationship with and will get from my family upon their deaths (ok, so my mother's death), that I am concerned about.

How do others feel? As I said earlier, if you had something/things that you don't want to chance losing in the divorce, would you tell your partner you would like a prenup? How would you feel if your partner wanted one?

[Kent]

No, I would not want a prenuptial agreement before marriage. I will only marry once and I will not be contemplating divorce before the marriage. It will be for the rest of my life and/or hers. I would want to leave everything I own to her if something were to happen to me. I would want to make sure that she would be taken care of in the event of my death and I'd want to have a life insurance policy in case of such an event.

Marriage is a very serious relationship and should be taken as such. If I have doubts before I marry her, then she is not the woman for me. If there is a need for a prenuptial agreement then there would be no marriage for me.

Just my two cents...

[*Anya*]

My partner and I have talked at length about money.

I never really had any money to speak of till my current job but it is so soul-crushing, I am looking for another job. If I change jobs, I will be back in the same general salary ball-park I always was.

My surgeries and hospital stays put me in debt that I am still climbing out from under. :|

My GF is a regional director and makes way more than I do and always has. She spent a short time after college working as a PE teacher and then went into the transportation industry for a corporation; a primarily male industry.

I still don't have a lot of money to speak of. She does.

She got soaked when her 21 year relationship ended. They were domestic partners but had no pre-nup.

I know a lot of people think a pre-nup is awful, untrusting and unromantic. I personally think it is wise. I don't think that I have a right to expect any of the money or property that she had when we got together. I have daughters and grandchildren. If I die, I want them to get what is fair.

She had nieces and nephews that she wants to do the same.

All cards on the table, no surprises before the I do's. A lot is not going to be easy to talk about. My welfare years were grim and they were some years that should have been good earning years but were spent in poverty instead

She needs to know all of it. Just a couple more secret shames around bad money choices during my time living on poverty lane. Even though it was long ago-it still has repercussions today....

Yeah Kanye, we want pre-nup, we want pre-nup!

Everything nice and kosher. It protects both of us.

[blush]

It's interesting to me how a marriage, or the end of one, can come down to protecting money. There are many "assets" in a marriage, money is the only tangible thing we can control when the bottom falls out. So, a lot of lawyers are making a lot of money selling marriage insurance in the form of pre-nups.

Bottom line for me is I need to trust my partner enough NOT to screw me over if things go bad. Otherwise, I don't need to get married. Marriage doesn't have a net.

I am a firm believer in air-tight wills, power of attorney, etc...that is where I'll spend my lawyer money.

[DapperButch]

No, I would not want a prenuptial agreement before marriage. I will only marry once and I will not be contemplating divorce before the marriage. It will be for the rest of my life and/or hers. I would want to leave everything I own to her if something were to happen to me. I would want to make sure that she would be taken care of in the event of my death and I'd want to have a life insurance policy in case of such an event.

Marriage is a very serious relationship and should be taken as such. If I have doubts before I marry her, then she is not the woman for me. If there is a need for a prenuptial agreement then there would be no marriage for me.

Just my two cents...

Hey, Kent, just to clarify, I am talking about two separate issues in the prenup. Money that happens at the time of divorce, and my partner's money in relation to her son at her time of death. I am not saying my partner would not get all of the money I have at the time of my death (including any money I received from my mother upon HER death).
---------------------

To clarify our position a bit more, neither of us our actually coming in to the relationship with a large amount of our own money (well, I am coming in with some retirement money). My partner is coming into the relationship with some money she received at her father's death. I will be getting some money at the time of my mother's death (most likely). So, for us, it is about protecting money that we received through our respective parents (her's now, mine later).

There is certainly no reason why we can't split the money we received from our parents when we divorce even if we have a prenup in place, but I can't think of a reason why that would make sense to either one of us to do that.

Currently, my partner and I do not share money. We do not share a residence. We would not do those things until we did marry. Perhaps if we were already sharing expenses it would feel different.

-------------------

To roll back to the original point though, and to be clear the above is not seen as me attempting to backpeddle, if we did come into the relationship with radically different amounts of money (see Anya's post), I assume I would still want a prenup. It would make things nice and clean at the time of divorce and I do feel that people should leave with the money they entered the relationship with. A prenup ensures that emotions don't come into play when it comes to the biggest stressor at the time of every divorce, the splitting of assets. For me a prenup has nothing to do with trust, it has to do with making things clean and easy. It has nothing to do with not trusting my partner.

[Kobi]

I am a realist and a pragmatist. I am also 57 years old. I would insist on a prenup for both parties.

The reason, for me, is to protect premarital assets, to shield each other from premarital debt, and to protect any foreseeable future monies that are unconnected to the marriage.

To me, at my age, it just makes sense. We each have made decisions and financial plans for ourselves and our future well before the marriage. Positive or negative, we each have to live with the consequences.

In addition, at my age, my earning capacity is time limited. To have to assume someone else's debts is just illogical, and to have to rebuild a nest egg is self defeating.

Dapper, I am also confused about why you are lumping the distribution of assets after the death of a partner with a prenup. They are totally separate issues in my head, each with their own legal instrument and purpose.

[DapperButch]

I am a realist and a pragmatist. I am also 57 years old. I would insist on a prenup for both parties.

The reason, for me, is to protect premarital assets, to shield each other from premarital debt, and to protect any foreseeable future monies that are unconnected to the marriage.

To me, at my age, it just makes sense. We each have made decisions and financial plans for ourselves and our future well before the marriage. Positive or negative, we each have to live with the consequences.

In addition, at my age, my earning capacity is time limited. To have to assume someone else's debts is just illogical, and to have to rebuild a nest egg is self defeating.

Dapper, I am also confused about why you are lumping the distribution of assets after the death of a partner with a prenup. They are totally separate issues in my head, each with their own legal instrument and purpose.




Prenups can actually include assets after death as well. However, I made things confusing by mentioning that (which I noticed by reading Kent's post), so I was clearing that up for Kent and essentially saying to ignore that part of my post.

However, yes we will have a wills, power of attorny, etc.

[Kelt]

I am in the same camp with Dapper and Kobi.

I think a prenup is essential for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that it would encourage, actually force, a frank and open communication about money with all cards on the table. And, like Dapper, I am in the situation of probably having a substantial inheritance in my future. I don't do my planning around that, but the potential is there. I am also finding that age has a big and immediate way of ripping the blinders off.

The specific reasons for having it have already been articulated quite well. I have not been researching this as I have no current need for it. But I did read the the document that was linked to in the OP, and it raised a question in my mind.

This part:
"Encourage" divorce. At one time, many courts viewed any prenup specifying how things would be divided up in case the couple splits as void and unenforceable because it promoted divorce. The modern approach allows such agreements, but judges in some states still take a hard look at them. If the agreement appears to offer a financial incentive for divorce to one party, it may be set aside.

It made me run some scenarios through my mind, and I found this disturbing. In the "what if" department I was wondering about this. What if you were married to a person and they had a sudden behavioral change? E.g. Your partner develops a penchant for heavy gambling, or another habit that rapidly incurs huge amount of debt for which you would be liable. This makes it seem that if you were to seek divorce because the person became something other than what you initially married, a judge could view this as trying to preserve your own assets, (and that would probably be part of it), and could overwrite the prenup. Curious.

In some ways I think that gay couples in general have not had to deal with some of these hard decisions by default of circumstances. On the other hand, I suppose it would be no different than straight couples, some people will go in fully responsible, and some will not. (Acknowledging that different people define "responsibility" differently). In any event, it is a new discussion within our community and I think an interesting one.

Thanks for the great thread Dapper!

[QueenofSmirks]

My sentiments run along the lines of what blush had to say about it. I think anyone concerned about protecting their assets from the person they are about to marry should rethink marriage. This isn't coming from a "marriage is love, love should be romantic" place, because I'm much more practical than that. Marriage in this country is a legal contract, essentially, and yes, legal contracts often involve assets. But to put protections in place up front -- to me that just says "I don't trust this person."

Edited to add: If protecting assets is a major concern, maybe the "benefits" of marriage don't outweigh the potential pitfalls.

Another thought: Someone mentioned that a prenup would force a frank discussion about finances. Living together doesn't automatically equate to the sharing of assets, pooling of funds, etc. These types of discussions should be had *anyway* -*before* deciding to live together and especially before considering getting married to each other. If you need a prenup to force a discussion, then it seems strange to me that marriage would even be a consideration.

[Kelt]

<snip>
Another thought: Someone mentioned that a prenup would force a frank discussion about finances. Living together doesn't automatically equate to the sharing of assets, pooling of funds, etc. These types of discussions should be had *anyway* -*before* deciding to live together and especially before considering getting married to each other. If you need a prenup to force a discussion, then it seems strange to me that marriage would even be a consideration.

I quite agree with this sentiment. My comment was based on observations of what has happened to couples I have known in the past who had clearly not had such a discussion with each other prior to becoming involved with each other in such a way that their finances were enmeshed. Unentangling became a huge problem. Myself included, in my youth.

I believe that getting involved in a relationship that would include legally binding commitments without being fully informed would be irresponsible.

My understanding of the conversation is that we're discussing "in the event of divorce". I would not knowingly get into a relationship that I thought would come to an end, but sometimes surprises happen.

[blush]

My sentiments run along the lines of what blush had to say about it. I think anyone concerned about protecting their assets from the person they are about to marry should rethink marriage. This isn't coming from a "marriage is love, love should be romantic" place, because I'm much more practical than that. Marriage in this country is a legal contract, essentially, and yes, legal contracts often involve assets. But to put protections in place up front -- to me that just says "I don't trust this person."

Edited to add: If protecting assets is a major concern, maybe the "benefits" of marriage don't outweigh the potential pitfalls.

Another thought: Someone mentioned that a prenup would force a frank discussion about finances. Living together doesn't automatically equate to the sharing of assets, pooling of funds, etc. These types of discussions should be had *anyway* -*before* deciding to live together and especially before considering getting married to each other. If you need a prenup to force a discussion, then it seems strange to me that marriage would even be a consideration.


I'm practical too. I've also been through a divorce without a pre-nup. It was fine. We're both decent human beings, and we didn't try to screw each other over. Any contract can be battled out in court. If someone wants to screw you over, a pre-nup isn't going to stop them. It just gives them another contract to fight over.

[QueenofSmirks]

I would not knowingly get into a relationship that I thought would come to an end, but sometimes surprises happen.

I think this is true for most people - not all, but most. And I'm in agreement - "forever" doesn't always mean forever. Things happen.

[deb_U_taunt]

I would request a pre-nup. Realist here.

At work I see daily people in stealing from family. Its also family and friends putting bugs in ears to TAKE what you can. People can be greedy and sometimes its not about the money, but revenge. Maybe, I am jaded due to my job.

I am not young and I have a 401k, IRAs and savings. I am not in a position to start over. I have worked very hard for what I have.

Don't see this as I am unwilling to share, it means if hy or she finds someone new or wants to move on, I don't want to be the one supporting their retirement.

[*Anya*]

My perspective:

Pre-nup to ensure that what each of us brought into the marriage is protected (assets and respective liabilities).

Starting fresh, so-to-speak, as a married couple.

Then, 50/50 on all assets and liabilities incurred as a loving partnership, once married.

Divorce happens.

No one plans it, expects it or wants it when they get married (OK, maybe some do-I don't).

50% of marriages in this country end that way.

Maybe stats for non-straight people will be different.

That remains to be seen.

[Novelafemme]

As usual, I can agree (to a degree) with both sides...and then there's the four-five more other sides, and I can understand those perspectives as well. ;)

As with Blush, I have been through a divorce as well. We went through a mediated divorce proceeding and it was very clean and smooth. But...and this is the caveat, neither of us came in to or left the marriage with a large some of money (or anywhere even close).

I cringe a bit when someone goes after "their half" of the other persons retirement or other personal assets. But then again, each scenario is unique and these types of personal contracts are typically heavily loaded in the emotion department.

I am just guessing here, but I don't think many of us on this site are multi-millionares. If I were, and I met someone at this stage in my life (40) who had very little financial resources they themselves were bringing into the relationship, I would think it prudent to protect myself, from a fiscal perspective.

People change when money becomes a deciding factor.

[Kent]

Hey, Kent, just to clarify, I am talking about two separate issues in the prenup. Money that happens at the time of divorce, and my partner's money in relation to her son at her time of death. I am not saying my partner would not get all of the money I have at the time of my death (including any money I received from my mother upon HER death).
---------------------

To clarify our position a bit more, neither of us our actually coming in to the relationship with a large amount of our own money (well, I am coming in with some retirement money). My partner is coming into the relationship with some money she received at her father's death. I will be getting some money at the time of my mother's death (most likely). So, for us, it is about protecting money that we received through our respective parents (her's now, mine later).

There is certainly no reason why we can't split the money we received from our parents when we divorce even if we have a prenup in place, but I can't think of a reason why that would make sense to either one of us to do that.

Currently, my partner and I do not share money. We do not share a residence. We would not do those things until we did marry. Perhaps if we were already sharing expenses it would feel different.

-------------------

To roll back to the original point though, and to be clear the above is not seen as me attempting to backpeddle, if we did come into the relationship with radically different amounts of money (see Anya's post), I assume I would still want a prenup. It would make things nice and clean at the time of divorce and I do feel that people should leave with the money they entered the relationship with. A prenup ensures that emotions don't come into play when it comes to the biggest stressor at the time of every divorce, the splitting of assets. For me a prenup has nothing to do with trust, it has to do with making things clean and easy. It has nothing to do with not trusting my partner.


Dapper, there's nothing wrong with the way you feel about the topic. But, just to clarify my feelings: if money is that important to someone, I doubt that I'll be marrying her. To me marriage is a sacred bond between two people who love each other til death do they part, money or no money. Money does not figure into my equation for marriage in any shape or form. Love is all that I want and need from a woman. Money is not important to me. Love is all it's about for me.

[Chancie]

It has been almost 20 years since the commitment ceremony where my ex and I celebrated our love in front of 135 friends and family. My best friend sang, When I Fall in Love, as we walked in hand in hand; my mother told a story she wrote for us; our respective sisters read poetry; and we danced with our fathers to Dinah Washington. I wore a dress that was made for me, with a satin bodice with embroidery and pearls, and tulle sleeves and a full skirt. My ex wore a cream colored suit with tails and Kenneth Cole boots.

I usually say, She fell out of love with me, but we were both unhappy and our breakup was ugly. I was financially dependent on her because I was in school. We had made an agreement that when I graduated, she would quit the job she hated, although she made a lot money. But, she hired a lawyer, which meant I had to hire a lawyer, and she fought me on every detail of the dissolution of our shared assets. Six thousand dollars later, I was in debt, without a job, with no place to live.

When we first met, I took an HIV test, and she cried when it was negative. Now I'll have you for the rest of my life, she said, but when our relationship ended, she would have kicked me out of the house we bought together.

[CherylNYC]

This thread caught my eye because I've been commenting to friends lately that the possibility of full and equal marriage seemed so far away for so long, and the reality that it will actually become available to us any day now came so quickly, that we as a community haven't even settled on the words we would use to refer to our legally wed partners, much less acclimated our minds to the messy reality that the state and the courts would become involved in the possible disintegration of our previously unrecognised relationships. I'm in no danger of marriage at this time, but many of my friends are or will be married.

For those who feel that a pre-nup wouldn't be relevant to them because marriage is forever, please consider what happened between my friends W and G. They're both professionals though G was the bigger earner. G had spent her working life building her assets which were considerable by the time she married W who had been far less concerned with her personal finances. They were married in a state that recognises marriage equality. G felt that her marriage was a sacred and permanent trust. Period.

W left the marriage after seven years. They hired lawyers. G gave W half her life savings in the divorce. Both women are my friends, and no one has suggested that W was a gold digger. The marriage simply failed, and W happened to leave the relationship in a far better financial position than she was in when she entered it. After a bitter period W and G are now friends again, thankfully.

There are way too many variables when it comes to personal relationships. This is a purely theoretical question to a single person without many assets such as myself, but relationships sometimes fail, and losing property/assets that you worked hard to accrue to someone who has left you would certainly be a bitter pill for me.

[sierragirrl]

I have gone thru a divorce the house was bought before we married the stocks were there before I came into the picture.
I took nothing when I left besides what was mine going into the marriage.
the only thing I took that was made during that time was a child.
I was a housewife and did not work but I did feel it wasn't fair to try to take what wasn't mine.to this day he still owns the house,his stocks,& 401k..

me I own a car and that's it.
I do however have his respect and I am lucky enough that he is one of the rocks in my life.
gold digger I am not

I would hope that If I ever did get married again the same respect would be there

[The_Lady_Snow]

I'm going to spend all the little bit of money I have on me, my adventures, my slave, my mini trips, my road trips, my Leather, my causes, my toys, and on HK stuff... Everyone else is on their own!!!


That said, no need fo' a pre nup.....

[imperfect_cupcake]

Dapper, there's nothing wrong with the way you feel about the topic. But, just to clarify my feelings: if money is that important to someone, I doubt that I'll be marrying her. To me marriage is a sacred bond between two people who love each other til death do they part, money or no money. Money does not figure into my equation for marriage in any shape or form. Love is all that I want and need from a woman. Money is not important to me. Love is all it's about for me.

Money iis not important to me either. I also have nothing. I don't care about material goods. I really don't. I've moved around too much to see them as anything but a pain in the ass. I never wanted a morgage or to stay put.

I married someone who felt about those things exactly the same as I did. Exactly. It was fantastic. We never fought about money, not once.

And then forever fucked off with someone from work because her father died and she lost herself. Everything changed, very *VERY* suddenly. I didn't have a single doubt about her, not one. Not ever. And I don't trust people. But she chose someone who makes £100,000 a year with a house and to have kids with. As in she will be giving birth. She never wanted to have kids and the thought of giving birth wierded her self-concepts out.

Her father dying changed everything. everything everything everything.

When the divorce was in process I got a letter off of her telling me she saw our marriage as a business transaction.

you could have knocked me over with a feather. This was my anti-capitolist, socialist, die hard unionist, loving partner that proposed to me in a tree in Hamstead heath with a glass ring because we couldn't afford a silver one.

A business transaction.

Our wedding was in the snow in amsterdam during a full lunar eclipse on the longest night of the year.

A business transaction. that's all it meant to her now.

Invasion of the bodysnatchers.

We both had debts, not stuff. But my mom is not well and the gal I was dating at the time said "push that through asap before she gets her arsehole hands on your mom's inheritance"

I was given the option to file for 12 years of alimony because of desertion. Leaving me with all the bills etc.

I had left the country. what the hell did I care. But I thought about taking those 12 years of alimony to make her understand just what the fuck she did.

My dad told me no. let her go and make your own money, like you always have. So I signed the opportunity away.

Never ever think that people cannot suddenly change. I just learned that one.

Would I have a prenup next time? I have no idea. I don't have anything. I have 9 bags of stuff and 20 boxes and a student debt. That will change when I get my inheritance but we'll see. I'm not interested in anyone else's money. I've had people offer me the moon, and very wealthy people. It never impressed me and frankly rather put me off.

But who knows. But I do know that people can change on a dime.

[Blade]

I don't think anyone is contemplating divorce when they get married. I do believe it is in the best interest of both parties to create a pre-nup.

Rest assured, in a majority of the cases the person you marry, is not the same person you are divorcing. You can trust, but you can't predict how someone will behave when they are faced with dividing assets that were actually acquired before marriage, let alone the ones acquired during the marriage.

I was faced with sharing not only my 401k, but my company retirement as well. Also if my ex died before my retirement, then I would have owed the same percentage to the heirs monthly, when I began to draw from it. Heirs could have meant the next spouse. Umm yes this would have PISSED me off. You cheat on me and I'm going to end up paying the person you cheated with, for the rest of my life. WTF is that? This didn't pan out like this but for a while I thought it was going to, and it could have.

Count me in for a prenuptial agreement on the next marriage. Yes there will be another one, someday. I ain't scared.

[Rockinonahigh]

Yes I would have a prenup in a heart beat,I would protect my asetts plus whatever my son stands to inherit from me.I would also make shure whatever we accumalated dureing a marrige (if I ever did it again) that she would be taken care of finiancly in case of my passing or agree to an ammount of settlement prior to divorce.Getting married again is not high on my list of things.

[thedivahrrrself]

I think the issue of trust is a straw man here. EVERYONE trusts the person they marry when they marry them, but life can throw serious curve balls that fuck up even the best of relationships. A perfectly wonderful person can become an addict, for instance, and destroy the relationship 15 years down the line.

No one wants to think about divorce before marriage, but Anya is right. It happens about half the time. Not all of that is because people married an asshole. Most of the time it's two normal people who were (or maybe still are) very much in love, but they can't make it work for whatever reason. None of us can see the future.

As for me, I won't be pondering marriage any time in the near future, so I don't know exactly what I would do, but I do think it's prudent for both parties to at least consider a pre-nup, particularly if anyone comes into the relationship with a child.

[always2late]

I have no plans on getting married again. But, for those who are considering marriage, a pre-nup is not unreasonable. As other posters have stated, no one enters into a marriage thinking it will end in divorce, but it does happen.

My ex an I had a domestic partnership, entered into with the best of intentions. I would never have believed that the person I started our partnership with was the same person that appeared at the end. At the time of our split, I couldn't afford a divorce (it still rankles me that in NJ I wasn't afforded all the benefits of marriage...but had to pay the full cost of divorce). Anyway, I wasn't able to afford the divorce until a few years after our actual split. By that time, my ex had begun using drugs and was not the same person I'd known. Luckily, I had no assets or any money to speak of...because I know that in the state she was in, she would have tried to get whatever she could to support her habit.

We all want to believe a marriage will last forever, and that we can trust our partner completely...but things can, and do, happen. Life holds no guarantees.

[QueenofSmirks]

A lot of issues being raised here can be addressed through other means - wills, beneficiary designations, trusts, etc.

[Ciaran]

I would not get married without some form of pre-nuptial agreement. This would be a pre-requisite for marriage and I'd want this regardless of whether my prospective spouse was (much) wealthier than I am.


For me, it's not about adding up the $$$ and seeing who is bringing more assets into the marriage. Rather, it's about ensuring assets are ring-fenced which preserves a sufficient level of independence so that I have the choice to exit the marriage at any stage, should I wish to do so.


I feel the same way about joint bank accounts i.e. I would be happy to have a joint bank account for general household bills etc. However, the feeling of actually having joint bank accounts where both partners credit their wages too and manage finances on a totally joint basis would fill me with absolute horror.


Some may possibly say that, with my attitude, I should never consider marriage. They would be welcome to their views. However, there's no one size fits all version of a perfect long-term relationship.

[Gráinne]

I too would be concerned about maintaining my financial independence in any future marriage, especially as those finances will be paying for college (well, part of it anyway) and retirement. Plus, I also have an inheritance coming and want that separate from joint funds. I've made the mistake of getting my finances too enmeshed with someone else's, and it's expensive and ugly to untangle.

For me, anyway, it wouldn't be about difference in wealth but difference in responsibility.

I have seen too many good marriages fall apart seemingly overnight, and former lovers go absolutely crazy over dividing money and things. I was fortunately spared all that, but never again will I consider marriage without some kind of agreement.

[sofimichi]

My fiance and I both come from families which have been divorced. We have both seen our parents fight for money and goods and we don't want anything like that.
We are planning on having a prenup. Truth is, we aren't Kanye West or Warren Buffet, and we don't want to be. But if something happened in the future which would make us have money, and if something were to happen in which we couldn't fix it, and just had to separate, I want her to have everything she came into the marriage with. Should we ever split up, I would hope that the person with the most income would be generous enough to help the other person.
We aren't wealthy (at. all.) but we think that being happy and safe is something no money can buy. And if the prenup makes us both feel safe, so be it.
:hk19:

[Jane Bond]

I am a realist and a pragmatist. I am also 57 years old. I would insist on a prenup for both parties.

The reason, for me, is to protect premarital assets, to shield each other from premarital debt, and to protect any foreseeable future monies that are unconnected to the marriage.

To me, at my age, it just makes sense. We each have made decisions and financial plans for ourselves and our future well before the marriage. Positive or negative, we each have to live with the consequences.

In addition, at my age, my earning capacity is time limited. To have to assume someone else's debts is just illogical, and to have to rebuild a nest egg is self defeating.

Dapper, I am also confused about why you are lumping the distribution of assets after the death of a partner with a prenup. They are totally separate issues in my head, each with their own legal instrument and purpose.





I wouldn't get married again, but if a miracle happened and I wanted to give it another go, the prenup would be more water tight than a frog's ass.

[Jane Bond]

But who knows. But I do know that people can change on a dime.

Mine changed on a dime, then the witch wanted 9 cents change from me. Sorry for what you went through, my dear, but it may help you to know you'll likely meet a woman far superior to the rat you married.
The way I see it, any woman would be better than the ex wife.

(f)

[imperfect_cupcake]

No. Not "any" woman would be better than my ex. There have been far, far worse.
And when we got together she was a VERY different person. Someone who treated me incredibly well, better than any one ever had, and genuinely loved me like mad. She was kind, protective, intellectual, and funny.
She was my best friend.

But the point is, she changed after going through trauma.

And that can happen to anyone.

So, now that I'm making good coin and I have an inheritance, pre-nup. And living either in seperate places or with stipulations that ensure I keep my independence and private space.

I'm deeply romantic and very caring. But I'm not a mug and I'm no ones nurse maid/cleaner either.

[kittygrrl]

I have nothing against the idea of a prenup. I realize some people wouldn't get married without one and frankly they shouldn't. Personally if you can't trust me with your assets, why in the world would you want to marry me or visa versa? You don't need legal paper to live together.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Because I may trust who the person is as they are, but shit happens to people. And sometimes trauma, or severe injuries, or unknown/unforeseen shit can change people into people you no longer recognize. I've seen it happen. Stuff you'd never guess would ever happen to someone, happens. And it changes someone. And suddenly they are gone. And then the person they are now with convinces them to take half of what's yours. You have no idea.

It's not about trust. It's about not being naive that life doesn't do surprising things that change us. I've watched nervous break downs, brain cancer, deaths, new and sudden addictions, midlife crisis etc these are all things that have deeply changed people I know and put them through divorces.

[kittygrrl]

Because I may trust who the person is as they are, but shit happens to people. And sometimes trauma, or severe injuries, or unknown/unforeseen shit can change people into people you no longer recognize. I've seen it happen. Stuff you'd never guess would ever happen to someone, happens. And it changes someone. And suddenly they are gone. And then the person they are now with convinces them to take half of what's yours. You have no idea.

It's not about trust. It's about not being naive that life doesn't do surprising things that change us. I've watched nervous break downs, brain cancer, deaths, new and sudden addictions, midlife crisis etc these are all things that have deeply changed people I know and put them through divorces.

Granted, Cupcake and if previous experience makes you doubtful you should do whatever you need to do. But if it's just a legal license to fuck, why would it be needed in the first place? If you view marriage as a business arrangement, I don't see the value in entering into one. Have an exclusive relationship and enjoy each other as needed without the entanglements marriage involves. Far simpler and enjoyable if you want the benefits without the risk and responsibilities.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Part of this entire conversation is borne of marriage coming to us only recently.

We have spent so many years in relationships that were not seen as valid; where it was actually not in our best interests to combine money due to how easy it was to slide into and out of being together, that IMO most of us are not sure how to do "ours".

My grandparents, parents, sister....they never gave a thought to combining resources and building a life together. In their world, pre-nups were for the wealthy combining family fortunes, or one person being very wealthy and one not so much. In their world money was combined, houses were jointly bought and plans were made for the future.

We have the type of financial arrangement that we are comfortable with...we combine everything. If this relationship ends, I want it to be messy and hard to get out of! I know that sounds odd, but we both promised forever...and I wouldn't have married her if I thought she would walk away.

The only concession I made to having had a child before coming into the relationship, was to have my 401k divided 50/50 between Amy and Kasey should I pass away before she turned 21. I made my way in life, and my daughter can do the same.

[jools66]

even though its not romantic, i think in this day and age its a wise thing to have a pre-nup.
We never like to think that when we get married it will end in divorce, but some things are just out of our control.
i got married years ago, wasnt true to who i was (as in gay) and i left the relationship with nothin bc i wanted it that way.
i was the one who hurt him, and for me personally, i went into it with nothing much money wise.
i just wanted a clean break, with no tangles.
but if i was ever to get married again, i think i would lean more towards getting a prenup.
simply bc my own money circumstances have changed.

[Nattih]

Short answer: Nope.

Long answer: Hell nope.

I realize this will largely kill my ability to marry and I 100% accept that. The idea that I am already a liability to my future wife? Can't deal with.

[Jesse]

I have to agree with imperfect_cupcake, people do change. Sometimes it's for the better, sometimes, through no fault of the person it's for the worse.

Were I to ever marry I would want a prenup. I prefer to see it as a means of the two of us taking care of one another and being responsible financially for the sake of both of our futures. It may have to have a lottery clause too. ;)

I also will not share a banking account. There was a time years ago (30) when a girlfriend and I shared a bank account and I paid for that the hard way. It took me 6 months to pay all of the bounced check fees and bills that got behind because she walked the day after we put the checks in the mail for the monthly bills, and she cleaned out the bank on her way out and everything bounced. Lesson learned.

Also I think most of us go into a committed relationship with the thought in mind that it will be forever, and well, sadly it doesn't always work out that way.

[DapperButch]

Were I to ever marry I would want a prenup. I prefer to see it as a means of the two of us taking care of one another and being responsible financially for the sake of both of our futures. It may have to have a lottery clause too. ;)


Exactly. That is how I was seeing it when I wrote the first post. I saw/see it as a way to protect my wife and also as a way to make things easy and less stressful if we ended. I would actually see it as me being a good husband and doing something "for us", by initiating the process for the two of us.

I think that it is also easy for people who dont have any family assets to say that they would never consider it, as there is not a reason for them to consider it in the first place. It has nothing to do with the money you make as a couple, it has to do with money that you had before the person ever existed in your world. Or, at least for me, that is what I would want in a pre-nup. Not the money we make as a couple.

[Katniss]

Not to sound too jaded about it but frankly there is love and there is the business of life. I have auto and home insurance in case the unthinkable happens and Mother Nature decides those trees in the back yard are coming down on my stuff. I may hope and trust it won't happen but if it does I like to know what to expect while I go about picking up the pieces. I feel the same way about organ donation and end of life decisions. I want to have the hard conversations now while happy and smiling, not standing in the E.R. feeling scared and pressured. To me a pre-nup fits right in there with the first two life items. I am 100% for a pre-nup because I love clarity and a pre-nup provides that for me. I have been married before and we did not have a pre-nup however we were young, dewy-eyed in love and with no kids. Now I am older and the kiddo is 13. Priorities have shifted and while I find it almost laughable that I would get married again (never say never I suppose) I would want to make sure she is taken care of going forward. Especially if something were to happen before she was 18.

I won't reiterate what some of the other posters have said about aging, care issues, etc. as I do agree with all of those. What I do want to emphasize is I truly believe a pre-nup protects both parties regardless of whether their assets are equally matched going in or not. All it takes is one terrible accident and one partner is deceased, one incapacitated and now a guardian of the incapacitated is contesting the will of the deceased and leaving kids from a previous marriage cut out. I've seen that happen and it was ugly. A pre-nup (the deceased owned a business that the other spouse was not involved with at all) would have prevented that from happening. I also know the incapacitated spouse loved those kids and would never have wanted that to happen. But as she was incapacitated mentally she had no say. Not only was it ugly to resolve it was also expensive.

As an aside I do think it will be interesting in ten or so years to compare the divorce statistics of gay couples with those of straight couples. I'd like to think after years and years of fighting for the right to marry that our divorce stats will be lower, but sadly I am not banking on it.

Katniss~~ (As granny used to say, "Trust the preacher but have the ushers count the collection.")

[imperfect_cupcake]

Granted, Cupcake and if previous experience makes you doubtful you should do whatever you need to do. But if it's just a legal license to fuck, why would it be needed in the first place? If you view marriage as a business arrangement, I don't see the value in entering into one. Have an exclusive relationship and enjoy each other as needed without the entanglements marriage involves. Far simpler and enjoyable if you want the benefits without the risk and responsibilities.

I'm not quite catching you. I can fuck whomever I want. Hell, I can fuck three people at the same time. Not sure what fucking has to do with it...

Where I live is common law domestic partnerships. That means if you file your taxes as a couple, and you live together for two years, regardless of going through a ceremony or not, in the eyes of the law you are married. That means they can rack up debts for you, take half your stuff, make decisions about your health if you are sick and in hospital and make claims for child support. Amongst other things.

So before moving in with someone here, it's very wise to sign a legal document making things very clear. My mum and her common law partner were deeply in love with each other. My mum didn't want to get married again. But since they lived together 80% of the time and they both had families from previous marriages, they drew up contracts.

Good thing too because he died very suddenly and his family was right there waiting to take half of mums stuff as his. Which they could have done if it wasn't for paper work done up.

Life is far more complicated with unseen or unrealized angles outside your own box.

[ProfPacker]

I agree with Dapper and cupcake, I think no matter how we feel at the moment or we imagine a "love to be" marriage is a legal contract that protects only certain benefits. We all do not know what life will bring us. It is not a matter of trusting or not trusting one another. There are other people and circumstances that spouses or partners entered into prior to the marriage, their are things and people that we might need to protect and be responsible for prior and even during the marriage.

[Nattih]

Personally if you can't trust me with your assets, why in the world would you want to marry me or visa versa? You don't need legal paper to live together.

No matter how I toss it around, I agree with this sentiment. If either of us feels iffy about going all in with regard to love, finances, combined households, raising children, etc then we can just remain an unmarried couple. that is a good way to protect yourself from me and any of my nefarious ways that you may think are hidden and laying in wait.

But if you are saying you want to get married, to *me* that means all in. All the way in the ring. 0 limbs outside.

I do own a business that I alone am investing in and I do have land that I will inherit, but the way I see it...there are so many worse things I can and will lose during the breakdown of a marriage that are dear.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Because in many places even if you don't get married you get considered common law married anyway?

Laws are different all over the planet ;)

[Shystonefem]

No matter how I toss it around, I agree with this sentiment. If either of us feels iffy about going all in with regard to love, finances, combined households, raising children, etc then we can just remain an unmarried couple. that is a good way to protect yourself from me and any of my nefarious ways that you may think are hidden and laying in wait.

But if you are saying you want to get married, to *me* that means all in. All the way in the ring. 0 limbs outside.

I do own a business that I alone am investing in and I do have land that I will inherit, but the way I see it...there are so many worse things I can and will lose during the breakdown of a marriage that are dear.

The breakdown of a marriage is always hard. I wish we had a prenuptial agreement in place. Even when someone is in a serious relationship where joint property is involved.

I am usually the one to walk away from everything but there are only so many times you can start over.

In addition, I would not want my or the other person's family members to try to swoop up everything if one of the parents pass.

I would want to sign a prenuptial with the other person as much as I would like them to sign one with me.

[MsTinkerbelly]

We both had property, 401k's, bank accounts and I had an upcoming inheritance...in fact I inherited from both my grandmother and my mother. We were married without a pre-nup, and we went into it with eyes wide open and everything in us has gone into the for better or worse part.

I still stand behind the school of thought that says when you plan for the end, it will come.

[Angeltoes]

Hell yeah, no one can have my beanie baby collection, my giant hello kitty, my vegan recipe books, my vinyl collection. .. I don't care how cute you are. You can't have them!

[homoe]

Hell yeah, no one can have my beanie baby collection, my giant hello kitty, my vegan recipe books, my vinyl collection. .. I don't care how cute you are. You can't have them!

Angel, careful, there are gold diggers out there just waiting to pounce!

[easygoingfemme]

Hell yeah, no one can have my beanie baby collection, my giant hello kitty, my vegan recipe books, my vinyl collection. .. I don't care how cute you are. You can't have them!

The vinyl collection! See I was thinking that I didn't really have a reason for a pre-nup. But yeah, need to protect my vinyl! Good looking out. Guess I'd need one.

[kittygrrl]

I have to agree with imperfect_cupcake, people do change. Sometimes it's for the better, sometimes, through no fault of the person it's for the worse.

Were I to ever marry I would want a prenup. I prefer to see it as a means of the two of us taking care of one another and being responsible financially for the sake of both of our futures. It may have to have a lottery clause too. ;)

I also will not share a banking account. There was a time years ago (30) when a girlfriend and I shared a bank account and I paid for that the hard way. It took me 6 months to pay all of the bounced check fees and bills that got behind because she walked the day after we put the checks in the mail for the monthly bills, and she cleaned out the bank on her way out and everything bounced. Lesson learned.

Also I think most of us go into a committed relationship with the thought in mind that it will be forever, and well, sadly it doesn't always work out that way.

Agreed, people sometimes do change, but usually not their basic ethics, if they seem to maybe you didn't know them quite that well or in the lush of new love you look the other way. It happens, we want to think of the person we are in love in the very best of terms..for those who can't deal with the risk, I can see a prenup is a good solution but I still understand the need for a marriage license. But I am stubborn that way :P

[imperfect_cupcake]

Maybe you haven't dealt with what I have. And it *certainly* wasn't the flush of new love.
I've changed quite a bit in the last two years.
I've had friends that last over 25, and 30 years. I've watched them change deeply. That we are still friends are only because I grew up with them.

People change their ethics. A lot. What my ethics were 10 years ago are not the same as they are now after living in a different continent and going through severve poverty, a break down and a divorce.
My life has taught me people change in big fat huge ways, right through their core if life hits them hard enough.
So, I have to disagree.

[Katniss]

I suppose I look at pre-nups a bit differently than some of the other posters here. To me a pre-nup would be honoring a commitment I made before I met my future spouse. My daughter is 13 and as soon as I became pregnant with her I made a commitment. (Goodbye Diet Coke and and crappy eating for 9 months). Part of that commitment is to see to her financial well-being at least until she is an adult. I have every intention of paying for her college. I worked my way through college by waiting tables, working at the student cafeteria and holding a work-study position. All at the same time. Because of this I had to decline some research opportunities that had no or little pay. To this day I have very few regrets however having to bypass the opportunity to study wild dolphins off the coast is at the top of the list. I want her to be able to take the opportunities that arise and make the most of them. Like it or not money helps in this regard. When I was married I put my spouse through school. He didn't have to work at all and was a full-time student. I have also helped finance cars, pay off debts, etc. I have no regrets about this nor am I bitter. But I was younger. I'm 49 now and the "Katniss Scholarship Program for Wayward Adults" is closed. If I were to marry again (insert maniacal laughter here) I would not leave the new spouse out in the cold, but my financial past (401K, real estate holdings, etc.) is spoken for.

I also have 2 friends who were together (before the legalization of gay marriage) for 12 years. Long story short there was cheating and an eventual end to the relationship. After the dust had settled and they were on speaking terms again they had the dilemma of what to do with a beach house they co-owned. Neither could afford to buy the other out (prices had skyrocketed), and neither wanted to sell. They came up with a truce where they both still co-own the property and alternate weekends and holidays on who gets use. In their wills they have each left the other with their share of the house. They also agreed in a notarized document that should either marry then that person would have a pre-nup regarding the beach house not being communal property. This makes sense to me because the pre-nup has nothing to do with trust or lack thereof in a new spouse, and everything to do with honoring a previous commitment to someone they had at one time cared for a great deal. While a will can accomplish distribution of property a pre-nup is added insurance.

It's interesting to read the different responses. I suppose my greatest hope is that those contemplating marriage at some point sit down and have discussions about finances, debt, financial planning, etc. If a pre-nup makes the couple feel safe and cared for then I don't think anyone else should believe that marriage is less trusting or loving or "all in" than a couple that eschews a pre-nup.

Katniss~~

[TL1]

It's sad that this is in fact a necessity. At the beginning everything is all lalala great and that person would never do anything to hurt you in such a way. WRong.... By the end That person you thought you knew no longer exists and they just want to take from you. Besides what's the harm in it? If you're not wanting to ef someone over then there's no reason not to.

[imperfect_cupcake]

If a pre-nup makes the couple feel safe and cared for then I don't think anyone else should believe that marriage is less trusting or loving or "all in" than a couple that eschews a pre-nup.

Thank you.

I don't think that people who don't do prenup are foolish. Tinkerbelly's reasons are fantastic for her.

And anyone saying that me asking for a pre-nup is because I don't trust partners or its all business or I am self destructing a relationship can sit and spin.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Thank you.

I don't think that people who don't do prenup are foolish. Tinkerbelly's reasons are fantastic for her.

And anyone saying that me asking for a pre-nup is because I don't trust partners or its all business or I am self destructing a relationship can sit and spin.

I only ever say what works for me, and try to give the thought that went into the decision.

Your experience (general your) may vary, and is just as valid for you.

I'm not a judge of anyone but myself. :rrose:

[DapperButch]

Exactly. That is how I was seeing it when I wrote the first post. I saw/see it as a way to protect my wife and also as a way to make things easy and less stressful if we ended. I would actually see it as me being a good husband and doing something "for us", by initiating the process for the two of us.



If a pre-nup makes the couple feel safe and cared for then I don't think anyone else should believe that marriage is less trusting or loving or "all in" than a couple that eschews a pre-nup.

Katniss~~

Exactly. That is where I was going with my post.

[clay]

My sentments exactly!

It is interesting to read all the differing views, and no one view is "right" or "wrong"...it is all part of our diversity/adversity!!!

Thanks, K!!!:rrose:





I suppose I look at pre-nups a bit differently than some of the other posters here. To me a pre-nup would be honoring a commitment I made before I met my future spouse. My daughter is 13 and as soon as I became pregnant with her I made a commitment. (Goodbye Diet Coke and and crappy eating for 9 months). Part of that commitment is to see to her financial well-being at least until she is an adult. I have every intention of paying for her college. I worked my way through college by waiting tables, working at the student cafeteria and holding a work-study position. All at the same time. Because of this I had to decline some research opportunities that had no or little pay. To this day I have very few regrets however having to bypass the opportunity to study wild dolphins off the coast is at the top of the list. I want her to be able to take the opportunities that arise and make the most of them. Like it or not money helps in this regard. When I was married I put my spouse through school. He didn't have to work at all and was a full-time student. I have also helped finance cars, pay off debts, etc. I have no regrets about this nor am I bitter. But I was younger. I'm 49 now and the "Katniss Scholarship Program for Wayward Adults" is closed. If I were to marry again (insert maniacal laughter here) I would not leave the new spouse out in the cold, but my financial past (401K, real estate holdings, etc.) is spoken for.

I also have 2 friends who were together (before the legalization of gay marriage) for 12 years. Long story short there was cheating and an eventual end to the relationship. After the dust had settled and they were on speaking terms again they had the dilemma of what to do with a beach house they co-owned. Neither could afford to buy the other out (prices had skyrocketed), and neither wanted to sell. They came up with a truce where they both still co-own the property and alternate weekends and holidays on who gets use. In their wills they have each left the other with their share of the house. They also agreed in a notarized document that should either marry then that person would have a pre-nup regarding the beach house not being communal property. This makes sense to me because the pre-nup has nothing to do with trust or lack thereof in a new spouse, and everything to do with honoring a previous commitment to someone they had at one time cared for a great deal. While a will can accomplish distribution of property a pre-nup is added insurance.

It's interesting to read the different responses. I suppose my greatest hope is that those contemplating marriage at some point sit down and have discussions about finances, debt, financial planning, etc. If a pre-nup makes the couple feel safe and cared for then I don't think anyone else should believe that marriage is less trusting or loving or "all in" than a couple that eschews a pre-nup.

Katniss~~

[JDeere]

I am going to make up a pre nup if I ever get married, just in case.

If she won't sign it then it's not meant to be.

[flapdoodle]

we are legally married
no prenup here.
I never understood the purpose.
... I protect myself via my will and my deed, I made sure j gets everything and likewise.

i knew the score going in, sure, she might change...and so might I...

i trust her, bottom line

[kittygrrl]

we are legally married
no prenup here.
I never understood the purpose.
... I protect myself via my will and my deed, I made sure j gets everything and likewise.

i knew the score going in, sure, she might change...and so might I...

i trust her, bottom line

Love this...and it's true..if you believe the person you are loving has good bones..then trust you're going to be ok go all in or go home :) (so to speak)

[Orema]

I think it's a good idea. It's not a statement on someone's feelings or intentions (which is what I thought when I was once a young bride), it's a safeguard for the rough times. I wouldn't get married without one.

[storyspinner70]

If either of us had substantial assets of any kind, or we were doing something businessy together, there would definitely be a pre-nup. The best, most caring person in the world can turn into a petty bitch when things go bad - even if it's just for a little while. Human nature is far from a settled, obvious thing. Trust them; love them; but be smart enough that if the end should happen to come, it's as smooth and simple as possible - there's already likely to be drama and pain already, you sure don't need more over who gets the antique chifferobe and Minx the cat.

[JDeere]

I had another discussion with my folks, they said if I get married that I better get a pre nup.

I found out my sister's new husband signed one before they got married, it upset him but he signed it.

I think they are a good thing to have just in case problems arise and things go really sour, so yeah I plan on having a pre nup written out whenever time comes.

[kittygrrl]

pre-nups..I think if you are rich enough or are worrying about your riches and your judgement it's probably a good idea..it's foolish to enter a marriage when you're not sure what you are getting into, better live together and figure it out..it's basically insurance and I don't have a problem with people who want or need it..just not something I would be happy with.

[clay]

I would not ask for one personally. I am not into material wealth & could care less about $$. I would be respectful of what she may have & as to my own, would be shared equally. That is just how I roll.

It is all about having that trust & confidence in my chosen partner. Therefore, when I choose to marry, it will be 50/50 on my part.

[DapperButch]

If either of us had substantial assets of any kind, or we were doing something businessy together, there would definitely be a pre-nup. The best, most caring person in the world can turn into a petty bitch when things go bad - even if it's just for a little while. Human nature is far from a settled, obvious thing. Trust them; love them; but be smart enough that if the end should happen to come, it's as smooth and simple as possible - there's already likely to be drama and pain already, you sure don't need more over who gets the antique chifferobe and Minx the cat.

Exactly. And my question was if one would get a pre nup if they had substantial money to lose. Money you had coming into the marriage. If one doesn't have any assets than it is easy to say, no pre nup. I don't have much, but I spent 20 years skipping vacations and holding onto a car for 17 years in order to put money away for retirement. I would, and have, told partners who have had more than me, that a pre nup is the way for them to go...whether they married me, or someone else. I would hate to see them, or anyone get "cleaned out", which happens.

It doesn't me that you don't love your partner or expect to be with them forever. You can't foresee the future and people break up for all sorts of reasons.

[*Anya*]

I have a different point of view.

At one time, I would have said, "No way". If you love someone you trust them.

I have seen both sides now- hey, isn't that a lyric from a song? Joni Mitchell maybe?

Anyway: some cautionary tales. People that you would not expect in a million years to become mercenary, money-grabbers, can totally surprise you; after the love dies or family, even with a will.

My recent ex dealt with it twice. The first time after a 20-year break-up and a domestic partnership. Her ex fought for a bigger piece of the pie and my ex had to get and pay for an attorney. Never did she expect this.

Then she had to deal with one of her sisters getting an attorney saying my ex did not divide all money equally. Ex had an attorney handle the will issues and a CPA handled the money, including a forensic accounting! It is probably still going on and the taxi meter still runs for the attorney she had to hire.

My long-term ex had her brother named the executor of her parents will. They had big bucks. He took her to court repeatedly trying to get the terms of the will changed, up to and including stating the parents were not in their right mind when they wrote the will! It went on for years and still may be, for all I know.

I don't have a lot but I want to make sure my daughters get their share. If I am fortunate enough to find love again-yes I would do a pre-nup and I would be happy to sign one for the new love.

Getting married or a domestic partnership is a business arrangement. Two hearts come together as one, but also two financial situations come together as one.

I was much more naive when I was younger but I have seen much and am personally a little more cautious than I used to be.

I still think that everyone should be good, fair and just but I know now that not everyone is.

[kittygrrl]

Anya, I agree. Sometimes when you leave a relationship the other person is not fair or nice and can be greedy. In my personal experience at the end of two long established relationships I did walk away from property, bank accounts, houses etc and felt totally fine about it because quibbling about it was less important then my freedom. Having grown older I understand the need for security but I guess I am not built that way exactly..it's not to say I don't appreciate comfort and security, I do. In a relationship you take care of each other and should provide for each other as much as possible and if you are both accumulating wealth together, each should realize their responsibility in being fair and/or providing for the security of their partner if they should perish..re..gardless of custom..it's just the right thing to do..but if you don't have confidence your partner will do the right thing in every circumstance then a pre nup might be the answer...but it wouldn't be mine.

[Kätzchen]

I was just here, the other day, reading alternate points of view, mostly because I already have personal baggage around the social right of Marriage; but more out of concern for prenuptial legal instrument development and implementation.

That said, and of course not every state in our country develops and implements or will uphold legal agreements, especially if political upheaval up ends time held rulings concerning prenuptial instruments, but I view prenuptial instruments as a way to protect your spouse in the event of untimely death or any other life altering circumstances.

For example, I wondered if an prenuptial instrument could be used to enforce any legal action taken by creditors or certain parties who believe that they're entitled to an share of the deceased member's estate.

In my mind, breakups and/or untimely circumstances of death equal troubling issues to deal with, during a what most likely is already a very painful situation.

[CherylNYC]

...For example, I wondered if an prenuptial instrument could be used to enforce any legal action taken by creditors or certain parties who believe that they're entitled to an share of the deceased member's estate.

In my mind, breakups and/or untimely circumstances of death equal troubling issues to deal with, during a what most likely is already a very painful situation.

This is an important consideration, especially because legal marriage equality didn't magically erase bigotry. My personal experience losing my partner and then my girlfriend, the former to an accident and the latter to illness, made me aware of just how petty and vicious people can become. A sudden death of a loved one can bring out the worst in people. Lot's of different kinds of people. You would never know that a friend/sibling/parent could react this way until they do. When people die, with or without a will, people with previously hidden bigotry around the validity of our relationships can and will seek redress in court. Nothing prevents a person from getting a lawyer and making a play for the assets of the deceased. Nothing prevents a bigoted judge from ruling from their viewpoint, either. A prenup is one more way to ensure that everyone's wishes will be respected at every stage of our relationship/life/death. My personal experience with the suddenly hostile family of my suddenly deceased partner was edifying in that regard.

I was also just having this discussion with a friend about prenups protecting heritable assets. She said she didn't own anything, but when I mentioned that she had elder parents who own a home she sat up and took notice. Her boyfriend who she may end up marrying is in the same position. Yes, they should get a prenup!

I own great tools, a car and some motorcycles. They aren't quite valuable enough for most people to get excited about, but the tiny house I bought in a slum so dangerous that it had national notoriety at the time is now a valuable NYC property. I still don't even have a will! I think about it and then I get depressed that I don't have a proper beneficiary. Everything else seems more important the minute I come up against that moment of sadness around losing my partner, and she died nearly fourteen years ago. I just can't seem to make myself buckle down to it.

Don't be like me.

[Deborah*]

Absolutely I'd consider one.

Deborah

[Tuff Stuff]

No, we didn't sign one.If something happens she knows it is all hers,i want nothing from her end.There's something about me that really doesn't give a damn about material stuff.She can have the house,the vehicles ect.I would move out and start new some place else.

[butchgeek]

Knowing what I know now, I will. I went into marriage thinking that it was forever. I did not expect that it would end with the infidelity of my ex after 15 years. I also did not expect the level of dishonesty, manipulation, frankly money-grubbing that ensued. I have a learned a great deal, and would rather have this conversation, as awkward as it may be, when a future relationship starts to get serious, to protect both of us from the unexpected.

[*Anya*]

It really is shocking when it happens and made me doubt myself so much (19-years) that I could be so blind and trusting.

I just have to accept I was in my 20's and just not burned often enough to become less trusting.

Totally vulnerable is not smart but wearing emotional armor isn't either.

A pre-nup is business and when you unite legally, there is love (better be) but one has to protect their assets (no matter how small) and whatever you want left for your children (if any).

The legal fight, if there is one, is costly and emotionally damaging.

My recent ex spent a fortune fighting her ex domestic partner just so she could "win" because she was so pissed her partner of 20-years (no infidelity) wanted out. The partner took less to just to end it.

That should have been a clue for me but it took me a couple of years to figure out the other side of the equation.


Knowing what I know now, I will. I went into marriage thinking that it was forever. I did not expect that it would end with the infidelity of my ex after 15 years. I also did not expect the level of dishonesty, manipulation, frankly money-grubbing that ensued. I have a learned a great deal, and would rather have this conversation, as awkward as it may be, when a future relationship starts to get serious, to protect both of us from the unexpected.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Part of this entire conversation is borne of marriage coming to us only recently.

We have spent so many years in relationships that were not seen as valid; where it was actually not in our best interests to combine money due to how easy it was to slide into and out of being together, that IMO most of us are not sure how to do "ours".

My grandparents, parents, sister....they never gave a thought to combining resources and building a life together. In their world, pre-nups were for the wealthy combining family fortunes, or one person being very wealthy and one not so much. In their world money was combined, houses were jointly bought and plans were made for the future.

We have the type of financial arrangement that we are comfortable with...we combine everything. If this relationship ends, I want it to be messy and hard to get out of! I know that sounds odd, but we both promised forever...and I wouldn't have married her if I thought she would walk away.

The only concession I made to having had a child before coming into the relationship, was to have my 401k divided 50/50 between Amy and Kasey should I pass away before she turned 21. I made my way in life, and my daughter can do the same.

Still works for me.:goodluck:

[Mel C.]

I've changed my mind on the subject of a prenup. Years ago I would have said that I don't want to enter a relationship that involved a prenup but that was when I was younger and didn't have much in the way of assets. It was also before a domestic partnership and subsequent break-up. Despite having an amicable split, I did spend time thinking about how hard I worked to obtain my assets and that there wasn't a 50/50 input financially so why would there be a 50/50 split when the relationship ended? Today I feel a prenup is necessary. I'd make some assurances that my partner-to-be would walk away with more than she had before the marriage, but not some guarantee to half my assets.

[DapperButch]

I've changed my mind on the subject of a prenup. Years ago I would have said that I don't want to enter a relationship that involved a prenup but that was when I was younger and didn't have much in the way of assets. It was also before a domestic partnership and subsequent break-up. Despite having an amicable split, I did spend time thinking about how hard I worked to obtain my assets and that there wasn't a 50/50 input financially so why would there be a 50/50 split when the relationship ended? Today I feel a prenup is necessary. I'd make some assurances that my partner-to-be would walk away with more than she had before the marriage, but not some guarantee to half my assets.

I think that it is pretty common that the people who don't have much in the way of assets say no to pre-nups while those people who have spent years of sacrifice putting away money for retirement are more open/prefer to have a pre-nup. I am in the second group.

With that said, I can VERY MUCH see myself making sure my ex-partner was "ok" financially when the relationship ended. I am well aware that the majority of Americans do not prepare for retirement, even when they are able to. They will unnecessarily buy a 50 inch TV or a new car, before they will put money into their 401k/403b. It is just the way people operate in this country.

I just bought my second TV. You heard that right. Second TV. I am 47 years old. I only bought one a new one so that I can watch Amazon and Netflix on my television, instead of my computer. My TV wasn't even HD. My microwave is literally 25 years old as of this past August. :| If it ain't broke...

I put money away so that I can retire on time. I don't want to lose that ability because a marriage I am in ended. Why in the world should I risk that?

[JDeere]

I still stick with my original statement, I will do a pre nup, but it wont be me the one who will be making the decision to sign it, my partner will, IF and that's a huge IF I ever get married.

[Esme nha Maire]

I agree with Dapper. Me and my ex were both poor, and are both fundamentally caring types, and fundamentally trusted each other - and still do. However, it was obvious after a while that our relationship was unusually calm and trusting compared to most that we knew. And we didn;t get married - wasn;t allowed back when we first got together.

If I get a partner now, yes, I'd be talking about financial arrangements before marriage simply because I cannot cope with the notion of lawyers etc in an antagonistic situation. Better to have things cut and dried beforehand. Even if I married someone fabulously wealthy (hah!), I wouldn't expect more than enough to see me comfy for the next few years. I also wouldnl't expect any gifts to me to have to be given back. Similarly, I'm barely getting by now - if anyone tried suing me for funds, well, there wouldnt be much point in my trying to carry on, it;d be more struggle than I could cope with.

So yes, a prenup is sensible IMO.