Prenuptial Agreements

[Kat]

I don't know very much about these, but I think it might be an interesting topic for debate. I think that if two people agree to sign one then that's fine, but at the same time I think it's a bit odd.

On the one hand you're saying 'I want to spend the rest of my life with you and I trust you completely and utterly when you say the same to me...', but then on the other hand you're saying 'but just in case...'

I suppose I think that if people want a pre-nuptual agreement they maybe shouldn't be getting married in the first place.

[tca]

not to sound dumb here, but uhm, what's a prenuptial agreement?

[Calienta]

A prenup is when they say, in case of divorce or you cheating blah blah this is what happens, this is how much money you'll give me, etc...

Kat I agree with you, I think they're odd. If you're unsure about your partner enough to have a prenup, then why marry them in the first place?

[Kat]

All for them. It's like a buffer so they can't leave you unless they want to be poor. And to those saying "Why marry in the first place if you need a pre-nup, shouldn't you have trust blah blah, I'm sure you'd regret it if you got screwed.
What if you were on the other end of it? Would you agree with it them, or would you think you deserved half for putting up with the rich bitch?

[Calienta]

If my fiancé suggested a prenup I'd walk. No way would I not be offended by that... It's like, I trust you babe but not TOTALLY, there's a little part of me that doesn't want to get screwed nah'mean?

[Calienta]

So you have the trust issue. It shows that you have doubt that you may not be together one day.


I wasn't meaning I was the one saying I had the trust issue... If HE has a trust issue then I wonder do I want to marry him if he doesn't trust me totally and feels that way.

[Uganja]

I dont think it has anything to do with trust... You never know what can happen in 25 years time.... people change.

[Kat]

I can't answer that question, but I can tell you that I would have no problem with signing a prenuptual agreement if I was marrying a rich woman. If it's about love and not money, there should be no problem signing a pre-nup.
I get what you're saying, but I thin kthat argument can be used the other way too. After all, your saying to someone 'I'm staking my heart and my future on the fact that we're going to work out, because I believe we will' and yet you're not willing to stake money on it. If you really love someone and it doesn't work out, shouldn't money be the least of your worries because you'll be so heart-broken?

On the other hand, if you get fucked over why shouldn't you keep a load of money to make you feel that little bit better?

hmmm...I think I'm moving closer to the fence on this one.

The only thing I would say is that if prenups create more opportunties for women specifically to be exploited then they should be over-ruleable by the courts.

[Kat]

I dont think it has anything to do with trust... You never know what can happen in 25 years time.... people change.
I dunno...I think if two people have been together 25 years then they should each be entitled to half the shared assets, regardless of what they brought into the relationship. That's a good portion of a lifetime, you can't just expect someone to settle for what they agreed to 25 years ago.

EDIT: I suppose what I'm saying is that if someone wants to marry me I want him to love me enough to risk loosing half of everything (if he's richer than me) EVEN IF I do fuck him over and leave him (or vice versa) or it just doesn't work out or whatever. I want to know that I'm so much more important than the money that he'll take that risk (and I want him to think the risk is very, very small).

[Calienta]

Exactly, so you have doubt that you will remain together. If you had no doubt, then you would gladly sign it.


I didn't have the doubt until he brought it up. I wouldn't sign it for the fact that it was introduced in the first place. I wouldn't sign it cos I wouldn't marry him.

[Uganja]

I dunno...I think if two people have been together 25 years then they should each be entitled to half the shared assets, regardless of what they brought into the relationship. That's a good portion of a lifetime, you can't just expect someone to settle for what they agreed to 25 years ago.

Even if it perhaps ended up that the female in the relationship became entitled to 100% of the assets, because she claimed to have never had a job as she was a "full time housewife"?

In this respect, the legal system is a load of shit

[Calienta]

Will you marry me?


Sure, just sign this paper...

[Psychostyle]

I dont think it has anything to do with trust... You never know what can happen in 25 years time.... people change.


to be more precise, MONEY changes people. Most 'normal" people dont sign prenups, they are generally only signed when one party has everything and the other has nothing but the love of the one with everything.

think of it this way kitty and cali..you have the house+everything in it, plus a job and your kids, ect ect..you fall in love with killaho, who lives in the flophouse down the street..you all are going to get married, but do yoou ever want to take the chance he A: doesnt like you anymore for whatever reason, B.he or you gets hurt or disfigured C: you dont like him anymore....do you want to have to sell your house? give him half your stuff? its about protecting the future, its not about lack of trust.

[Kat]

Even if it perhaps ended up that the female in the relationship became entitled to 100% of the assets, because she claimed to have never had a job as she was a "full time housewife"?

In this respect, the legal system is a load of shit
Not 100%; 50%. That's my stance because I'm feeling very feminist today, but I imagine it's something I could easily be made to look stupid for arguing...

[Calienta]

think of it this way kitty and cali..you have the house+everything in it, plus a job and your kids, ect ect..you fall in love with killaho, who lives in the flophouse down the street..you all are going to get married, but do yoou ever want to take the chance he A: doesnt like you anymore for whatever reason, B.he or you gets hurt or disfigured C: you dont like him anymore....do you want to have to sell your house? give him half your stuff? its about protecting the future, its not about lack of trust.

I think that if I ever had thoughts that I might not love him anymore and vice versa, well those are second-thoughts aren't they? And do I want to get married having those? As for B .. hurt or disfigured... Somebody that I marry is not going to be dropped just because they look different from when I married them. That's not real love.

Steve if you're worried about not liking your partner in the future, don't get married!

[Uganja]

In general, divorces are settled out of court... but quite often courts decide who gets what - heres a story:

After being together for 25 years, Husband decides to leave wife after an unhappy final 5 living seperately, Wife never had worked, but got given "X" amount to pay on bills, food, clothes, children etc.... Instead of spending money on previous items, wife hoards money in cash & spends on clothes, alchohol and cars.

Divorce proceedings start, Husband wants to settle divorce out of court, offers wife 55% and monthly amount to live off (40% of salary).
Wife rejects offer to settle out of court (mediation) and instead decides to proceed through lawyers. Meanwhile wife is getting credit cards out under both names, withdrawing maximum amounts of withdrawls per day and hoarding the cash. (Husband has no idea) - This is increasing the overal debt to which will be cleared on BOTH PARTS after sale of assets etc.

Divorce goes to court, judge favours woman in relationship due to her not having ever worked, and being mentally unstable (recovered manic depressive)... Wife's lawyers bring up affair that Husband had during their 5 year seperation. Lawyers can be incredibly

Wife gets 95% of assets, increased monthly amount from salary (55%) - the cash that she had initially hoarded. And proceeds to move to Spain, living an unemployed life of luxury. Free of debt.

I'll take a fucking prenup thanks

Edit: all percentage of assets were AFTER all the debts were cleared on both sides - Just to clarify

[Calienta]

I just think if you're thinking you might get screwed over at some point.. You shouldn't be marrying them.

[JaiJai]

Jacx...

Will you sign this prenup please?


I, Jacx, being of sound mind (questionable), do hereby agree to relenquish all claims to Doris and her offspring, and give you, JaiJai the big screen T.V. and any remaining beef jerky, and the season footy tickets, if the unfortunate day comes that we divorce due to unreconcilable differences.

signed and dated _______________________________

[Jacx]

Im not signing nothing bitch :p

My poor uncle...on his 4th wife now. Each one of the other wives screwed him over using the law to the max....why 3 devorces...simple, he works...his arse off. He used to work so much, so the wife could have a great life, that the relationships would fail.

3 EX wives means he has given away 3x family homes, 3x business stakes and 8 cars in total.

His 4th wife is a bitch half his age and is stealing all his cash away...but he refuses to see it.

So looking at what uganja said, and what my Uncle went through, i DO see the positives in it.....Would i want one myself.....nope...well...thinks about it....she might make more money than me....humm....ok yes please la la la

[VikesWookie]

in this day and age there are many individuals who pride themselves on being snaky. one partner can very easily decieve the other. when "love" gets involved the brain doesn't seem to function properly for a period of time. (til the honeymoon phase is over)
there are so many stories/rumors of people who get married then days/weeks/months later one divorces the other and takes them to the bank. if i had anything (wealth-wise) i would've had a pre-nup signed.
of course, my wife and i are broke, always been broke, hopefully not forever. nonetheless, there was no reason for us to sign one.

[steff]

Who notices its all the women, the ones who benefit from what I ever hear the most, that is against pre-nup's :spike:

[RobCheadle]

Who notices its all the women, the ones who benefit from what I ever hear the most, that is against pre-nup's This is because men are generally better than, and make more money than women :spike:



LMFAO... Thats really sexist Steff!

[for20gurl]

i dont see anything wrong with them if one person is significantly better off financially than the other. And yes women tend to benefit from divorce more than men, but there is a new trend of financially successful women being taken to the cleaners by some conartist who takes all that they have.

there are too many ppl out there whos first requirement in dating is to have money. they may fall in love with the person eventually but it was the money that lured them in.

lets face it guys...quit being so naive. human nature is to lie. thats why when you ask an angel of a 2 yr old if they snuck a cookie they will look at you with those big beautiful eyes and say nooooo mommy ...no eat cookie.

[Honeypot]

in this day and age there are many individuals who pride themselves on being snaky. one partner can very easily decieve the other. when "love" gets involved the brain doesn't seem to function properly for a period of time. (til the honeymoon phase is over)
there are so many stories/rumors of people who get married then days/weeks/months later one divorces the other and takes them to the bank. if i had anything (wealth-wise) i would've had a pre-nup signed.
of course, my wife and i are broke, always been broke, hopefully not forever. nonetheless, there was no reason for us to sign one.


Awww... Baby, we won't always be broke :D
But I do agree if you have a lot to lose you probably should have a prenup. These days it's too hard to tell if it's going to last. And if money is an issue then you should definitely sign one. Marriages that revolve around money rarely last... Like he said... I would've signed if either of us had a huge chunk of money, but I think it would've been more to protect the other person, not to protect ourselves if that makes any sense :D

[Buckledmac]

im all for them :cool2:

[YetAnotherKitten]

To be honest I'm with it as well. Obviously I wouldn't propose it as I have no assets and a minimum wage job, but if the person I love needs me to sign a paper saying that we are going to have a fair deal out shoudl we find ourselves somehow incapable of being married any longer I'll work with them. I would hope that the person I love is open enough to be able to talk about damage control without actually thinking it's going to happen.

I mean I have this code alarm system incase the nuclear incineratornear my home has an explosion. It just sits there and I think to myself," i should practice safety measures," but then what am I goign to do? be paranoid about something thats only there as a precaution??

Don't focus on it, but it can save your life...

on the other hand..

Obviously its the old why fix it if it aint broke scenario...

[vixen]

I am for them, just for the simple example that jacx gave...it doesn't mean I love a person anymore or less, expect to get a divorce etc....you just never know what can happen!

[tim|away]

excellent kat. i think i do have to figure out how the reputation system works now :)

there are two points of view that already have been discussed.

1. a formal agreement to make sure everyone knows what they are dealing with. it's not a trust issue, it's more of an insurance that you most likely won't need. people who fall in this category would most likely say people who fall in category 2 are unexperienced or even naive.

2. formalities destroy romance and trust. i don't need an agreement, as i don't want to question anything at this point. people in category 1 are unromantic and distrustful.



well, to be honest i see both sides of the dilemma. what really bothers me though is the irony of signing such an agreement and saying a line like "i promise this to you with all my heart as long as i live" a couple of days later.

i'm pretty sure my brother and dad would try to talk me into one of those agreements, but i think i'd pass on it. first of all, there are good times and bad times and people do change. if you decide to get married with someone, you should be able to grow with that person. here goes the worst case scenario: there is no chance that you and your partner find a compromise to continue the relationship, as both sides refuse to make an effort. a court decides who gets what and the lady might end up in spain having a relaxed life at the guy's expeneses.

i am aware that stories like that actually happen, but i have always been someone who has to learn from experience. what i haven't experienced in my life is that love turns into hate. i must have picked the wrong girls i guess. i do believe that you can end a relationship peacefully without the purpose of ruining someone's life. after x years being in a relationship with someone there is a lot to lose and there are also a lot of memories that you share with that person. call me naive, but i do believe that there will be a fair way without a formal agreement. it's really scary to assume that a lady might turn into a psycho bitch who just wants your money. you don't say it, but by signing such an agreement you don't exclude that option, as "you don't know what's going to happen in the future."
in case a judge has to decide who gets what and you end up as the loser, life goes on. it's a question what really matters in life i guess. if you need all your assets to get happy, you should ask yourself if you have ever started to live. i'd rather get screwed and pay someone tons of money than questioning what i believe in. it's not worth it. no, i'd rather get rid of all my assets and start from scratch.

bottom line: stop doing half-assed business and get married when you are ready. take your time and don't let yourself get pushed into a wedding.


obviously, i wouldn't propose a prenuptial agreement, but would i sign one?

i think i would if it made her more comfy. i do see the positive side of it, even though i'm everything but a big fan of it.