Do pre-nuptual agreements cast a shadow over a marrage?

Answer 1

They do. But that is only of limited relevance. Let me explain...

If this is a first marriage between two young people of equal estate, I'd say, the worst thing they can do is sign a pre-nup. There's really no need for it; and under the circumstances, the preceived lack of trust would seriously undermine the integrity of the marriage.

But if this is a second (or third, etc.) marriage -- particularly if one or both people have children, a pre-nup is a must. You had your children long before you had this other person, and you have an obligation to ensure inheritence rights.

The same is true for a marriage at any age between people of unequal estate, or older people who've spent many years prior building up their net worth. In both cases, it's simply foolish to take the risk.

Does this cast a shadow? Absolutely -- of course it does. But so what? Regardless of what John Lennon said "LOVE is NOT all you need." Too often people lead with their emotions, and wind up in all kinds of problems precisely because they fail to take into account the practical consequences of their actions. And that's one of the reasons for the alarmingly high divorce rates today. "Love" there may be -- but ultimately, "marriage" is still a contract.

Would you run willy-nilly into the "Elvis Chapel" in Las Vegas and sign a major business deal? I certainly hope not. But how many people do this very thing in the choice of somebody on whom they're conferring Community Property rights.

So, with the above considerations taken into account, I think if people were willing to "cast a bit of a shadow" over their marriages there would probably be fewer divorces. I don't dismiss the importance of love -- I'm just saying, "Think with your head, not with your glands."

Cheers, mate.

Answer 2

I used to be very anti pre nuptuals. Now that I am older I have changed my mind. Not for my protection but if I remarried I don't want to be seen as a gold digger. I would want it clear that I am not after money or support and the guy doesn't have to pay my way. Although getting married young and the first time I don't see a reason to have an agreement.

Answer 3

I told a man once, that I will only hold the gold of a man that loves me. If he dosent love me, then he dosent trust me, if he dosent trust me, I have no business holding his gold.



Pre-nupts what is the difference? the girl is married to you right?

I would only worry if the guy was wasting my time? I am only young and beautifull for a short time, if I give him my youth and body what will I do if he leaves me for a younger girl?

I would of wasted my youth on him and I could of found a guy that really does love me, and would never leave me.

So who does the pre-nupt protect?
Does it protect you from her stealing your money?
Or does it protect your money so you can find another young one when your tired of stealing her youth?

Prestige, who is prestigeous? If you can answer that then you know the shadow in the marrage.

Answer 4

Only if you allow it to.

A pre-nuptial agreement protects both parties. I think they are good things.

It depends on how you view pre-nuptial agreements. Is the glass half empty or half full?

Answer 5

No. They make sense. There's about a fifty-percent divorce rate, and very few people think they'll end up divorced going into a marriage.

Answer 6

If they are marrying that person because they love them not because of their money it shouldn't cause any problems. If they do have a problem with a pre-nup I'd say they aren't the one for them.

Answer 7

Kind of seems that way. Trust issues and all. Just another arrangement to a business deal. Which is what marriage is today anyways.

Answer 8

Yes! Definitely. Since when that it became so widely used anyway?

Answer 9

marriage in itself is an agreement.

Answer 10

no , they cast a shadow on spell-checking