Is it wrong or 'jerk-ish' of me to ask my girlfriend for a pre-nup if we got married?

[ironpony]

Actually, I have been doing a lot of thinking about it. My gf does not have top pay me back and our money is OUR money, together. She is my hopefully future wife, not a roommate.

 

I am not expecting her to pay me back for the wedding. I just got defensive towards her in haste, cause of the prenup issue with her. But I don't really expect her to pay me back. I don't expect a wife to split everything down the middle. I even just helped my gf pay her dental bills when she couldn't afford to, just recently, and I want to be generous.

 

I still want her to sign one though, cause of the reasons I was recommended to get one by others on here, as well as others I know in real life.

 

So I will do ask her for one for those reasons. I just have a hard time with it, since it will break both t.our hearts since it will break hers and mine as well.

Edited May 15, 2016 by ironpony

[ironpony]

Well she read my email while she was on my computer (not that she snuck on, I let her borrow it while I was out and my gmail must have been open, when she went to log into hers), and saw that I had made an appointment with a lawyer, cause the email title headline had the word prenup in, when the lawyer emailed me back.

 

So she says I went behind her back with the lawyer thing, since I did not tell her, but I told her that the reason I didn't tell her I was going to talk to one, was because I wanted to find out what the laws are first, on the whole thing, cause it might not have even made a difference, with the assets I have. I just wanted to see what the options were legally first before telling her.

 

But she says I went behind her back, and she is now very upset. I told her that we should go over the options together and will pay for whole thing. I told her we will only sign if he agree to each other's terms and come up with OUR own plan, but if not then she doesn't have to sign.

 

So she said that if she signs any prenup, no matter what the options she will not have kids with me and will get her tubes tide now. Those are her terms. She and I wanted to have kids in the future, in the marriage, but now she does not cause of the prenup and will get her tubes tide she said. But she says that she is okay, and everything is fine and seems calmed down and okay with the whole thing, accept for the one new term of hers.

 

So what is the next move, or what do you make of this? How should I respond?

Edited May 15, 2016 by ironpony

[elaine567]

From day one she made it clear she does not want a prenup and no matter how much you twist and turn to try to make it acceptable to her, she obviously hasn't changed her mind.

Looking at it from her POV, she is right.

It is NOT in her best interests to sign a prenup, she will no doubt fare batter under the State laws in the event of a divorce.

 

NOW she has also reiterated her first stance, it is not a "new term" at all, you mentioned it in your first post here.

Signing the pre-nup means no children.

This is apparently non-negotiable and so all you can do is accept her terms or walk away.

I think it would be unwise to get her to sign the pre-nup and marry her, in the hope she would change her mind later regarding having children.

Entering marriage under false pretences is never a good idea and could back-fire spectacularly on you if your intention is to still have children with her.

She holds the cards to her fertility and even if she didn't get her tubes tied she could still use other methods of birth control to ensure she never has any children if that is her intent.

Not a great start to any marriage.

[ironpony]

But even if this is her term, she is not happy with it right?

 

I mean she even if I accept the fact that she doesn't want children, say hypothetically, she will still not be satisfied in the marriage, and could resent me for later likely, right? Aside from how I feel, will she be happy with her new term? She said she would, but would she?

[elaine567]

But even if this is her term, she is not happy with it right?

 

I mean she even if I accept the fact that she doesn't want children, say hypothetically, she will still not be satisfied in the marriage, and could resent me for later likely, right? Aside from how I feel, will she be happy with her new term? She said she would, but would she?

 

I do not think she would be happy.

If you do force it and get her to sign the pre-nup, then she would most likely resent you, even if she did agree to have kids with you later and that is not guaranteed.

I am guessing, her intention here is NOT to go down that route, her intention is for you to give up the idea of the pre-nup altogether.

Edited May 15, 2016 by elaine567

[Cherryz]

I see where you may be coming from.

And what she mean.

Pre nup do sound like you have no trust in this marriage thing 100%.

Is it that you are annoyed or not at peace that she not the type of person as you are driven and have stable financial? Or is it just that she is not stable now?

 

As a women you have to be much more smart about your moves your whole life. Since you are the one with the

womb,who can get pregnant and we see everyday a lot of examples of men leaving women struggling alone with the kids.

So you may think much more as a women what you gain out of signing a pre nup once

you would have kids also with this man.

And if things dont work out,he leave you nothing after going true all those 9 months and giving bird to his kids and so on.

 

And if the men do his part or no, it will always fall on the women's shoulder.

So i think your girl is right on that part.

 

But i see also that maybe you guys inlove but not compatible?

Maybe you need someone who stand same as you financially etc. so it could be more

of a fair discussion to have.

bECAUSE im afraid this money thing will continue further true whole marriage if

she is not same driven as you or you more serious about income then her.

Or not willing to compromise on it.

 

Why does she not have stable finance?

She not handle money well ? or its just she cant find her good job.?

[oldshirt]

Why the rush???? Why are you feeling so much time pressure here?

 

 

Listen, there are more red flags here than Tianamen Square.

 

 

I think the real question you should be asking yourself here is if you should be discussing marriage AT ALLwith this woman.

 

 

There are some serious warning flags here. The fact she is in her 30s and has $50 to her name shows a pattern of questionable financial responsibility and competence.

 

 

The fact that she reacted so strongly at the mention of a pre-nup shows that she likely has some very serious alternative agendas for this marriage (ie she is needing a cash cow and someone to support and take care of her as she is not capable of taking care of herself)

 

 

The fact that you two have extremely different levels of financial assets and financial philosophies and extremely different levels of financial responsibility and practices is a red flag in and of it'self, but when you couple that with her extreme reaction to the suggestion of a prenup, it shows her motives are much more financial than what she is letting on.

 

 

A huge bright red flag just flapping in the wind is her extortion on not having kids with a red flag in place. This is a red flag on many different levels. It shows that she will use fertility and childbearing as a means to manipulate and extort to get her way. What kind of person does that!!!

 

 

People either want children or they don't. It's not an extortion tool.

 

 

If someone does not want children, that is fine and that is their life choice. If someone does not want to marry you and have a family with you, that is also a reasonable choice. But to use that as a bargaining chip to extort the terms of the marriage to me is quite shocking. I don't know why others have not found it equally shocking and concerning.

 

 

I also find the fact that she is taking out loans for the wedding is highly suspect. Starting a new marriage out with personal debt is an absolutely terrible move.

 

 

And what I really find disturbing is the time pressure and the rush that you are feeling to move this engagement forward. This needs to be very mindful and methodical and you need to be crossing "I"s and dotting "T"s and not rushing into legally binding complex legal and financial obligations.

 

 

You really need to step back and reevaluate this very consciously and mindfully.

 

 

And the basic question you need to be asking is why you are feeling the pressure to marry this woman AT ALL. If it is because she is warm and cuddly and gives great BJs, Then why can't you continue to date her on Sat nights and work through these other issues.

 

 

She may be great in bed but that does not qualify one to be a good marriage partner or marriage material.

 

 

You are displaying a level of naivette' and gullibility here that is very concerning. I don't think you have thought through all of this stuff very thoroughly or have a grasp of what levels of risk you are undertaking here.

 

 

I think at bare minimum you need to consult your own family law attorney WITHOUT HER PRESENT and go over all of you financial and legal risks, benefits, options etc and get a clear picture of what all is at stake here.

 

 

You have considerable financial assets and resources and she has none. It is that imbalance that prenups are designed for. If she is reacting this vehemenantly over you protecting your financial assets from her, there is a reason for that. It is in your interests that you find out what that reason is before moving forward.

 

 

Don't let good BJs be the reason you are feeling the pressure to act on this quickly.

[elaine567]

There are some serious warning flags here. The fact she is in her 30s and has $50 to her name shows a pattern of questionable financial responsibility and competence.

 

I agree there are definitely warning flags here but to be completely fair to the woman, she has been spending any money she does have, on her sick father's medical bills.

[NTV]

Well she read my email while she was on my computer (not that she snuck on, I let her borrow it while I was out and my gmail must have been open, when she went to log into hers), and saw that I had made an appointment with a lawyer, cause the email title headline had the word prenup in, when the lawyer emailed me back.

 

So she says I went behind her back with the lawyer thing, since I did not tell her, but I told her that the reason I didn't tell her I was going to talk to one, was because I wanted to find out what the laws are first, on the whole thing, cause it might not have even made a difference, with the assets I have. I just wanted to see what the options were legally first before telling her.

 

But she says I went behind her back, and she is now very upset. I told her that we should go over the options together and will pay for whole thing. I told her we will only sign if he agree to each other's terms and come up with OUR own plan, but if not then she doesn't have to sign.

 

So she said that if she signs any prenup, no matter what the options she will not have kids with me and will get her tubes tide now. Those are her terms. She and I wanted to have kids in the future, in the marriage, but now she does not cause of the prenup and will get her tubes tide she said. But she says that she is okay, and everything is fine and seems calmed down and okay with the whole thing, accept for the one new term of hers.

 

So what is the next move, or what do you make of this? How should I respond?

 

Dude, run. For the love all all things holy and blessed in this world, please find a woman than truly loves you. What you have here is a person so cold hearted and manipulative that it's hard for me to imagine she isn't the villain in a horror movie.

 

If she will get tube tied to manipulate you into not going through with prenuptial she can easily plan your death for insurance. Cold is cold. She is saying that the prenuptial takes away her reason for marrying you so she will tie her tube and take away yours. Di you understand that?

 

Running is your best option.

[oldshirt]

But even if this is her term, she is not happy with it right?

 

I mean she even if I accept the fact that she doesn't want children, say hypothetically, she will still not be satisfied in the marriage, and could resent me for later likely, right? Aside from how I feel, will she be happy with her new term? She said she would, but would she?

 

I think this whole children thing is HEYYYYUUUUUUUUUUGE red flag.

 

 

My personal philosophy is that marriage is for the legal and financial protections of raising children and to provide certain legal and financial protections for the children.

 

 

If a couple does not want to produce or raise children, then why get married at all??? In the absence of children it makes much more sense to not marry at all.

 

 

I see this as her using her fertility as extortion and as a bargaining chip to get you to drop the prenup.

 

 

If she had stated from the outset that she does not want children under any circumstances, that is fair. The most fundamental right we have as living beings is the right to chose whether we want to reproduce or not. If she doesn't want children, that is her sacred right.

 

 

And if she does want children, then that want does not just go away. The desire to have children would be there whether there was a prenup or not.

 

 

But to say that there will be no children if there is a prenup is purely and wholely manipulation and extortion, without question and without doubt.

 

 

This is the writing on the wall. This is proof positive that her intentions and her agendas for the marriage go way beyond that she loves and wants to be with you.

 

 

This shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that her intentions and agendas for the marriage include unrestricted access to your financial assets and resources and that she is willing to use extreme methods and manipulations to get it.

 

 

I think that prenups for marriages that include a significant imbalance in financial resources and financial potential are a no-brainer.

 

 

But I think your best interests here is not with the prenup but for running for the hills and not being involved with this woman at all.

[d0nnivain]

So what is the next move, or what do you make of this? How should I respond?

 

 

Keep the appointment with the lawyer. While there ask the lawyer for the copy of the case or law in your state that says prenups don't have any bearing on children. Go home. Give that to your GF. Then tell her if she doesn't start acting like a reasonable intelligent person that you are not going to marry her.

 

 

You can't get married under these threats. You just can't. And if you do, when she takes for all you're worth because she is so irresponsible, uninformed and unreasonable it will be your fault for failing to guard against the downside.

[d0nnivain]

I agree there are definitely warning flags here but to be completely fair to the woman, she has been spending any money she does have, on her sick father's medical bills.

 

 

 

Yet another indication that she is bad with money. Since she has no money to voluntarily assume the debt of another is poor choice. In most developed countries . . . and Canada where OP lives has socialized medicine paid for by the State, what is there for her to pay for? This gets worse & worse.

 

 

BTW OP, I'd break out the big guns when you talk to her again. Fight emotional fire (threats to get tubes tied) with emotional fire. I'd point blank remind her that her sick father isn't getting better & wouldn't it be a shame that her unreasonable attitude may prevent this marriage so her father won't be able to die in peace knowing she's being taken care of by you.

 

 

Yes I am fully aware that my suggestion above is not all that constructive but sometimes with some people like your GF, you have to virtually hit them in the face with a proverbial 2x4.

[oldshirt]

I agree there are definitely warning flags here but to be completely fair to the woman, she has been spending any money she does have, on her sick father's medical bills.

 

 

 

Do we have any kind of proof of that or any kind of documentation or tangible evidence to support that claim?

 

 

A woman who vomits (a physiological reaction) at the mention of prenup, and a 30something woman who threatens to have children in a marriage with a prenup, is capable of saying anything and using any means to achieve a goal.

 

 

Do we have any evidence other than her word that this is the case?

 

 

There may be some cultural differences at play here, but in the United States, children are not financially responsible for the medical bills and expenses of their parents.

 

 

When the parents financial resources are exhausted, they go on Title 19 and Medicare and Welfare etc etc. Their children are not held personally accountable for their medical expenses.

[CarrieT]

If she is 39, there are no "few years left" for her to even be able to conceive.

 

I think this is all becoming moot and ultimately there will be no marriage and no children and no prenup.

[elaine567]

Do we have any kind of proof of that or any kind of documentation or tangible evidence to support that claim?

Who knows? Just going on what the OP has posted here.

In addition

Is the same ex who cleaned her out now lending her money? Or is it a different one who is now subsidising her?

[oldshirt]

Okay then. Should I not bother to get a pre-nup then if that is the case, and I don't have a business or a house yet?

 

Also my gf does work a lot. The reason why she doesn't have any money, is because her ex common law, cleaned her dry when she left him, she says, and she spent money that she had to pay her dad's medical bills since he is in ill health.

 

OK so common law means they weren't married.

 

 

How did he "clean her out" if she was the one that left?

 

 

I guess I haven't caught where you live, but in most developed western countries, children are not liable for their parents medical expenses.

 

 

If you are insisting on being with this woman, I think you need to do a leeeeeeettle bit more investigating and digging into this person's background.

 

 

Take some of that money you were going to put into a marital home and get independent investigator to look into her background and her financial background. I think you are going to find a bit different picture than what she has been painting for you.

[BlueIris]

I agree that her money management and dependency are problems, but separate problems.

 

Keep the appointment with the lawyer. While there ask the lawyer for the copy of the case or law in your state that says prenups don't have any bearing on children. Go home. Give that to your GF. Then tell her if she doesn't start acting like a reasonable intelligent person that you are not going to marry her.

 

You can't get married under these threats. You just can't. And if you do, when she takes for all you're worth because she is so irresponsible, uninformed and unreasonable it will be your fault for failing to guard against the downside.

 

I think that this is unfair. They are each giving ultimatums:

He’s saying, “I want a prenup if we get married.”

She’s saying, “I won’t sign a prenup.”

 

What prenup? What terms? She’s supposed to say, “yeah, I’ll sign whatever you put in front of me”?

 

It’s OP’s responsibility to get this ball rolling, get educated by a local attorney and get his terms framed before negotiation can even begin.

 

It’s also unfair to condemn her for considering not having children together if there is this undefined prenup.

 

In my state, a prenup can include terms that allow parties to keep the income and the assets acquired during the marriage separate in the event of divorce. (OP, that’s why you NEED to define your terms and know what YOUR jurisdiction allows.) I’ve seen cases of 10+ year marriages with kids and a stay at home mom, and the prenup provided for H to keep the assets he acquired during the marriage separate or provided for lump sum or set property settlements.

 

In one case, the stay at home mom of the two children of the marriage got nothing but child support and a QDRO- zero property settlement and it was a community property state. You bet she should have worked throughout the marriage. She should not have had kids and sacrificed or impaired her ability to acquire her own separate assets.

 

When he got remarried he presented a similar prenup to his fiancé and she signed it (against advice of her counsel), but they were not going to have children and she was going to continue working.

[d0nnivain]

BlueIris

 

The "ultimatum" I am suggesting is that she have a discussion with him about it without threats, without pouting etc. She needs to educate herself. She also needs to agree to read the document & have her own lawyer look at it.

 

If in the end after she calms down & gets advice from counsel she still says it's not for her, fine. At that point, OP has to make a decision.

 

But right now, her attitude is untenable. All I'm really advocating is they both need education about the law and they need improved communication. If they marry now, I doubt they'll make it 6 months

[NTV]

BlueIris... do I know you ? Lol

 

The reaction to the prenup is only one piece of the puzzle. .. There are a whole bunch of other pieces that point to him being taken advantage of here. See the stuff about the ex or her emotional manipulation etc.

 

You're right of course about the baby/prenup being a tit-for-tat reaction.

[BlueIris]

BlueIris

 

The "ultimatum" I am suggesting is that she have a discussion with him about it without threats, without pouting etc. She needs to educate herself. She also needs to agree to read the document & have her own lawyer look at it.

 

If in the end after she calms down & gets advice from counsel she still says it's not for her, fine. At that point, OP has to make a decision. or negotiate.

 

But right now, her attitude is untenable. All I'm really advocating is they both need education about the law and they need improved communication. If they marry now, I doubt they'll make it 6 months

 

Agreed that these TWO can't communicate yet.

 

Popular conceptions of prenups are that they are rigid one-sided protections for the wealthier party and they are perceived as ultimatums, take-it-or-leave-it prerequisites to the marriage. Most people don't realize that prenups can be unenforceable if they are so imbalanced and presented on a take it or leave it basis, and that they can provide terms that protect BOTH parties- and should. For instance, lots of prenups include annuities and life insurance policies for the non-earner, graduated property rights for certain number of years of marriage, the birth of children, disability, etc.

 

He's the one who wants a contract so he'd better put one together.

 

I'd advise her to just wait to see what he proposes and whether he presents it on a take it or leave it basis.

 

If I were in her position and my fiancé was talking about some theoretical prenup I wouldn't vomit-- but I'd probably laugh at him as he talked about some ephemeral dream document. But I know what a prenup can include (darn near anything where I live), how to balance rights and obligations, and how to negotiate an agreement. She doesn't. If I were in her position, I'd just be annoyed that he was talking about something in a void and not doing anything to resolve this theoretical problem.

[BlueIris]

BlueIris... do I know you ? Lol

 

The reaction to the prenup is only one piece of the puzzle. .. There are a whole bunch of other pieces that point to him being taken advantage of here. See the stuff about the ex or her emotional manipulation etc.

 

You're right of course about the baby/prenup being a tit-for-tat reaction.

 

Maybe you do know me. I can't believe your new bride agreed to that prenup!

 

Don't view it as tit-for-tat. Never view contract negotiation as personal and emotional. It's negotiation- proposing terms, listening to each other, making compromises for reasonable positions and reaching mutually workable solutions.

 

Personally, I agree with you that she should earn and manage money better. But there are still a lot of people who have traditional marriages with a stay at home wife or mother, so if they both agree that that's the type of marriage they want, so be it. Believe me, in my dreamy fantasies, there are times I wish I had a husband who played the role of the traditional wife-- taking care of my home, of me, the chores, not having demands of work intruding on our relationship.

[NTV]

Right but she went to her ex be for money when he didn't give her what she asked for... what are your thoughts on that?

[BlueIris]

Right but she went to her ex be for money when he didn't give her what she asked for... what are your thoughts on that?

 

But all of that is about her money management, not about a prenup. That might be why he’s hesitated to address the prenup. I don’t know.

[NTV]

But all of that is about her money management, not about a prenup. That might be why he’s hesitated to address the prenup. I don’t know.

 

No, I don't see it that way because she borrowed from an ex. If it had been anyone else I'd agree with you but just because it was an ex...

[oldshirt]

 

 

She’s saying, “I won’t sign a prenup.”

 

 

 

It’s also unfair to condemn her for considering not having children together if there is this undefined prenup.

 

 

admittedly I have not read every single post, but I have not seen where she has said she won't sign it. What I have read so far states that she has told him if they do a prenup, that she won't have children with him.

 

 

It's a huge matter of context here.

 

 

She is in her right to refuse a prenup if she does not agree with it and it is in her right to chose not to marry if the marriage is contingent on a prenup that she doesn't want to do.

 

 

But I haven't seen where she has said that. All I have read is that she pressuring him for a ring etc and that she won't have children if there is a prenup in place.

 

 

My interpretation is that she wants to go full steam ahead with the marriage but is upset over the prenup and is refusing children with him if there is a prenup in place.

 

 

I may have missed a post somewhere that proves my interpretation wrong, but if I am reading this right, I don't see how it can be interpreted as anything other than strong-arm manipulation.

 

 

There is a galaxy of difference between saying, "I do not agree with your terms and will not go forward with this arrangement." VS "ok fine. Have it your way, but you are going to pay the consequences."