threebyfate Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 But when someone with no assets to their name screams "I want a prenup" to me that shows more than likely they aren't in it for the long haul.Worse yet, they're fiscally irresponsible wasting cash on legal fees and not grounded in any semblance of reality.
aerogurl87 Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I just wish I was born a 100 years ago. People were far less materialistic and money obssesed, they slept with one partner whom they later married, and marriages lasted for life. Sigh. Well people back then didn't sleep with one person and you can look at historical stories about royal courts to see that. But people back then also married for practical reasons so it was less of an option to get a divorce. Love is a fleeting emotion, at least the love we have today (aka butterflies). You need practicality plus a drive to make a marriage work through the reasonable good and bad times to keep a marriage going. Most people don't go into marriage with that attitude today though.
Woggle Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Personally, only accpetable reasons for divorce are: infidelity and physical or emotional abuse. I am sick of people who post on here and say things like: "I feel no spark anymore"... or "We just grew apart"... or "I can't stop thinking about my co-worker".. There is a large percantage of people that divorce because of boredom and "grass is greener" syndrome. I wish more women thought like you. Let's be honest and say that most of the people posting these threads are women. There are men here and there but this whole I am bored so I am leaving you mentality mainly comes from women. Men who want prenups are not treating marriage as disposable but protecting themselves from women who look at it that way.
carhill Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Assuming most of the women here have professional degrees, would you consider your degree (MS, PhD, MBA, JD, MD) an asset? How much is that piece of paper worth? It ain't dirt. It ain't a bank account. It ain't a house. If you earned it before you married, does your partner get a piece of it just because he marries you? Interesting thought, eh? Say that degree results in a private practice, started before you're married, but not really 'worth' much at the time. What then? Does he get a piece of that too, for 'supporting' you physically and emotionally during your marriage? More food for thought. Where do I sign? Don't count on men being chivalrous any longer. Those days are done.
sweetjasmine Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Personally, only accpetable reasons for divorce are: infidelity and physical or emotional abuse. I am sick of people who post on here and say things like: "I feel no spark anymore"... or "We just grew apart"... or "I can't stop thinking about my co-worker".. There is a large percantage of people that divorce because of boredom and "grass is greener" syndrome. People get married for incredibly stupid reasons, so it goes without saying that they'll also get divorced for stupid reasons. That being said, I'd never agree that things used to be better when divorce wasn't an option. And I personally wouldn't feel comfortable limiting myself to "divorce only if there's infidelity or abuse." If you were absolutely miserable and hated your spouse, would you still stay? My SO's Italian Catholic grandma played the wife role until WWII rolled around, and then she had to go out and become a Rosie the Riveter type. After the war, she had to go back and resume her roles of wife and mother, but it made her miserable and resentful. She and her husband grew to seriously despise each other over time, to the point where he slept in the bathtub on a regular basis because he didn't want to be in the same room as her. But they didn't get divorced because that would've been wrong. I don't think that's a particularly nice way to live.
aerogurl87 Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Assuming most of the women here have professional degrees, would you consider your degree (MS, PhD, MBA, JD, MD) an asset? How much is that piece of paper worth? It ain't dirt. It ain't a bank account. It ain't a house. If you earned it before you married, does your partner get a piece of it just because he marries you? Interesting thought, eh? Say that degree results in a private practice, started before you're married, but not really 'worth' much at the time. What then? Does he get a piece of that too, for 'supporting' you physically and emotionally during your marriage? More food for thought. Where do I sign? Don't count on men being chivalrous any longer. Those days are done. Well carhill if you want my honest opinion a degree means nothing if you don't have a job that pays the bills. It's like those serial students who have like 10 degrees and no job whatsoever. In those cases a degree means nothing. Now if you're starting up a business when you first get married and your partner is helping you pay most of the bills and being there for you emotionally then actually I think they may be entitled to some of your assets. If they're bringing in the bacon when you first start out, then yeah they're putting work into helping you acheive your dream. And even if you don't think they're entitled to anything then go sign a post-nup. Those are available as well.
sweetjasmine Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Assuming most of the women here have professional degrees, would you consider your degree (MS, PhD, MBA, JD, MD) an asset? How much is that piece of paper worth? It ain't dirt. It ain't a bank account. It ain't a house. If you earned it before you married, does your partner get a piece of it just because he marries you? Interesting thought, eh? Say that degree results in a private practice, started before you're married, but not really 'worth' much at the time. What then? Does he get a piece of that too, for 'supporting' you physically and emotionally during your marriage? More food for thought. Where do I sign? Don't count on men being chivalrous any longer. Those days are done. lol, my MA isn't worth much. If he wants it, he can have it.
carhill Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Impoverished professionals and perpetual students. I never knew I think, once an acrimonious spouse dismantles your business during a divorce action, the clarity of such matters will be enlightening. I've seen it happen. Everyone's lives are impacted, including those of employees. That was the impetus for my comments to sadintexas. In my case, I had been single for 20+ years and a business owner for 15+ years when I got married. A well-structured pre-nup would have saved me the expense of Plan B and of impoverishing the business to sour the milk and make it less ripe for attack. I would advise any woman or man to take a hard look at their true net worth (including those sheepskins) before signing that marriage license. Even if you're not rich, it can mean the difference between a comfortable life post-divorce and one in the gutter. I've seen that too. Not pretty. BTW, aerogirl, you described my stbx's dynamic perfectly. When we got married, her business was in its infancy and I helped her pay down pre-marital debts (from her last divorce) and supported her endevours because I had a far greater net worth and liquid assets. In the end, if I wanted to, and were willing to spend the legal fees, I could've asserted that position legally. All the number crunching was part of Plan B. So, if I was vague prior, I'll assert again that I would in no way be insulted if asked to sign a pre-nup. I value what someone I love has built for themselves in their life. At my age, that perspective is even more pronounced, since less time remains to recover from economic reversals. Die broke, for sure, if that's what you want, but live long, comfortably and with a smile on your face
Taramere Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I think the fact that people regard prenups as a case of one person (the spouse with more assets) protecting themselves against the presumed cash-lust of the other is the main reason for people feeling strongly against these agreements. Not surprisingly...and I've no doubt that in a lot of cases that (the wealthier spouse wanting to guard themselves against any gold-digging) is exactly what's in play when people want a prenup. However, having seen plenty of examples of the mess, expense and acrimony people run into when they split up with a partner and haven't a clue where to begin as far as establishing what the matrimonial property is, and divvying it up goes, I do think that a prenup can be a way of agreeing "whatever happens, we don't want to ever end up like one of those couples."
lino Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 (edited) I'm not sure how common pre-nups are in my country or even how they work here. I guess it's different to how it is in the USA. None of the married couples I know have that sort of agreement (as far as I know anyway!). I don't know if I'd consider one, I guess if one day I'm lucky enough to have a woman want to marry me I'll look into it more then Oh and in the very unlikely event that a rich woman would want to marry me, I wouldn't be insulted at all if she asked me to sign a pre-nup. I'm not interested in a girl for money, not in the slightest. Anyone that'd feel insulted if asked to sign one is clearly interested in only one thing about their partner! Edited March 11, 2010 by lino added more to my post.
homersheineken Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I'm sorry but for me it does have to do with trust and respect. And as I said before, it has the possibilty to set the tone of the relationship that draws a clear dividing line between two people that are suppose to become a team. You can interpret it that way, but it's incorrect. You think every action a guy does though is a front and insult to you, so I'm not surprised. It draws a line? You don't need a pre-nup to draw lines in a relationship. Every relationship has lines. Ideally that "team" stays together, but in the real world, they don't. Marriage is more than romance.
homersheineken Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Because they think they need protecting. MOST people don't. Unless you're making tons and tons of money by yourself DURING your marriage, there's just no need for one. Already reneging on your argument? First nobody needs it, now some do? It doesn't matter the amount of money or assets. If there is a divorce the still have to be separated. In fact with a smaller amount of assets, it's even more important you're covered since you have less and each dollar you don't get is worth more than if you are extravagantly wealthy.
homersheineken Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I just wish I was born a 100 years ago. People were far less materialistic and money obssesed, they slept with one partner whom they later married, and marriages lasted for life. Sigh. Your concept of a single life partner is false and was pretty rare then too... People also died 30 years earlier, had a much greater propensity to spousal violence and women were treated as second class citizens. Misogyny lives folks...
troggleputty Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 A little game theory, folks... If a person doesn't think a divorce will ever happen, then they should have absolutely no problem signing a pre-nup. To such a person, a pre-nup is an irrelevant document. The only reason they're signing it is to provide some peace of mind to a nervous partner. So, why not? On the other hand...a person who rejects a request to sign a pre-nup is saying...what, exactly? They're saying that they believe that signing the pre-nup will put them at some kind of disadvantage. Signing a pre-nup is an indication that the relationship is weak? No, if the thought of signing a pre-nup gives someone the willies, then not signing is a bad sign. This is similar to the DNA test threads. It's interesting how people who don't want to be practical (i.e. oppose DNA tests and oppose pre-nups) always seem to use emotional blackmail (ie if you take the test/make me sign the pre nup "it means you don't wuv me"). If you don't believe in prenups, then why get married at all? After all, both are just a piece of paper.
Mr White Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 A little game theory, folks... If a person doesn't think a divorce will ever happen, then they should have absolutely no problem signing a pre-nup. To such a person, a pre-nup is an irrelevant document. The only reason they're signing it is to provide some peace of mind to a nervous partner. So, why not? On the other hand...a person who rejects a request to sign a pre-nup is saying...what, exactly? They're saying that they believe that signing the pre-nup will put them at some kind of disadvantage. Signing a pre-nup is an indication that the relationship is weak? No, if the thought of signing a pre-nup gives someone the willies, then not signing is a bad sign. This is similar to the DNA test threads. It's interesting how people who don't want to be practical (i.e. oppose DNA tests and oppose pre-nups) always seem to use emotional blackmail (ie if you take the test/make me sign the pre nup "it means you don't wuv me"). If you don't believe in prenups, then why get married at all? After all, both are just a piece of paper. This deserves a bump and an extension: It is indeed hilarious to observe how the *very same* posters (i can name them) who are perfectly capable of rationally discussing a controversial subject and accepting the need of a pre-nup (i.e. a situation what benefits them and provides "peace of mind") in spite of the inevitable touchiness of the subject, instantly switch their approach on a dime and resort to emotional blackmail and crazy assumptions when the subjects changes to a situation that is irrelevant to them (although it would provide "peace of mind" to another person). Nice work (but don't insult our intelligence by believing that we won't notice...)
Barky Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Any man who marries without a prenup these days is a complete moron. Unless he's marrying a woman far richer than himself, eh? Then that man would be a genius.
Woggle Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Unless he's marrying a woman far richer than himself, eh? Then that man would be a genius. For sure. I applaud K-Fed for miliking Britney for all she is worth.
amymarieca Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Prenups won't save anyone from paying spousal support, if the ex is a SAHM. But it can limit the amount of the payments, as long as the amount is reasonable. Spousal support for Ontario, is calculated based on gross or net income but is less than 50% of either. I was actually agreeing with someone else who said the same thing.
threebyfate Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I was actually agreeing with someone else who said the same thing. We have different points. Your father isn't being taken to the cleaners with spousal support, as he's paying less than the 50% and the amount is only $1800, which isn't much to live on, on a monthly basis. Keep in mind that this is taxable income for your mother. A prenup won't save him from making a reasonable payment of $1800/mo.
Green Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Does having a pre-nup make you more likely to get a divorce? Who knows, I doubt it. I don't want to give all my money to a law firm because I'm arguing over 40k worth of assets or what ever it is. Seriously you can't use a pre-nup to get out of paying child suport... You can get out of Alimony... so yeah I would use one. I think a nasty divorce could only serve to destroy a family.
threebyfate Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Does having a pre-nup make you more likely to get a divorce? Who knows, I doubt it. I don't want to give all my money to a law firm because I'm arguing over 40k worth of assets or what ever it is. Seriously you can't use a pre-nup to get out of paying child suport... You can get out of Alimony... so yeah I would use one. I think a nasty divorce could only serve to destroy a family.No, you can't use it to get out of alimony.
Star Gazer Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 No, you can't use it to get out of alimony. Uh, yes you can. That is one of THE main points of having one.
threebyfate Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Uh, yes you can. That is one of THE main points of having one.No you can't. It has to be within what the court deems to be reasonable, including splitting of marital assets. Take for example a 25 year marriage, where she's been a SAHM the entire time, giving up her working potential, including educational advancement, for the benefit of raising children. Say all assets of any value, like marital home, are considered separate assets belonging to the man through the prenup and the prenup stipulates no alimony. This prenup WILL be overturned by the courts, as it will be considered unconscionable.
carhill Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 One relevant citation wrt Cali law and prenuptials and alimony: Also, California's version of the uniform [pre-marital agreement] act omitted a direct statement on the issue of whether the parties to a prenuptial agreement may limit spousal support (also called "alimony") in a subsequent divorce. In the case of Pendleton v. Fineman, S.Ct. Cali. 8/21/00, the Supreme Court of California held that the validity of waivers of spousal support in prenuptial agreements was left to the courts by the legislature and, furthermore, that such agreements are not automatically void as against public policy. The bottom line is that waivers of spousal support are legal in California; however, they are closely reviewed by the courts to ensure that neither side obtained an unfair advantage over the other. If you desire additional assurance that your agreement will be enforced by the courts on the issue alimony in California, we recommend that both parties have the agreement reviewed by separate attorneys prior to signing. This appears to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so YMMV. Being married under 10 years, keeping the spouse employed, or having them die or get re-married seem to be the most efficacious aspects of minimizing or avoiding spousal support. My stbx was sure to petition the court to waive spousal support for carhill, harkening back to not marrying carhill until her last run of alimony ran out. Boy, does time and experience teach one things
Star Gazer Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 No you can't. It has to be within what the court deems to be reasonable, including splitting of marital assets. Are you an attorney? Thanks, Carhill. Beat me to it.
Recommended Posts