What is your opinion of prenuptial agreements?

Question

As for me, I'm with Sookie on this one. To ask someone for a prenup seems to imply a complete lack of trust...but then again they're practically necessary in society today.

And no I'm not planning on getting married. Ever. I was just having this discussion last night and wanted to get the opinion of the R&S community.

Answer 1

If both members of a couple enter the marriage with virtually no assets, like most did at one time, they're unnecessary.

However, if one partner has assets, property, etc., a prenup to make sure that partner keeps that property in the event that the marriage tanks is just plain common sense.

With people marrying later in life, and more marriages ending in divorce, a prenup is advisable. It doesn't suggest that either person thinks the marriage will fail, or the selfishness of wanting to keep what you had going in if you later go back out.

Answer 2

Either party may be seeking to avoid a major loss of assets, income, investments, or a business in the event of a divorce.

There are three basic rules that should be followed to safeguard prenuptial agreements ...
1) full and fair disclosure,
2) separate and independent counsel, and (3) ample lead-time before the wedding.

People marrying for a second or third time often want to make their children the beneficiaries of all of their assets, rather than have the property pass to a second spouse and that spouse's offspring from a prior marriage.

Contrary to popular opinion, prenups are not just for the rich.

While prenups are often used to protect the assets of a wealthy fiancé, couples of more modest means are increasingly turning to them for their own purposes.

For example, a marrying couple with children from prior marriages may use a prenup to spell out what will happen to their property when they die, so that they can pass on separate property to their children and still provide for each other, if necessary.

Without a prenup, a surviving spouse might have the right to claim a large portion of the other spouse's property, leaving much less for the kids.

Answer 3

It depends.. If there are children from another marriage involved and assets accrued prior, then a prenup might be a wise move.

If no children from a prior marriage are involved, one would have to ask himself/herself: "am I looking for an exit door? Is the prenup because I am not committed to a lifelong relationship with this person?"

Marriage is about commitment, working together as a team and riding the highs and lows. If before the "I do's" both parties have a foot out the door, is getting married such a good idea?

Answer 4

Since the divorce rate in the US is about 50% now, I can see why some would find them necessary. But it also means they enter into a marriage with the presupposition that it could fail, which rather reduces it to a cold business contract. If that's how a couple views marriage, they may be better off single.

Answer 5

Why humans get "married" in the first place is beyond me.

They claim to mate for life, and then rely on their laws and paperwork to hold it together when they lack the strength of will to do it themselves.

If a relationship cannot be held together without outside help then it shouldn't be made at all, or all that will come of it is aggression and spite.

Prenuptial agreements? Why not just agree in the first place not to get married?

Answer 6

All long term commitments should be treated as a hand-fasting.

Any relationship lasting longer than a year (whether there was a legal and/or socially binding ritual or not) should be re-committed at least once a year (at minimum).

Everyone goes into a relationship with expectations (some of which they are not consciously aware of). People grow and change over time, so should their commitment.

Answer 7

I will never get married without one, and people that do in the 21st Century are idealist, and border on foolhardy.

The divorce rate is around 51%, and about 67% for those married less than five years. I'd rather make sure I'm taken care of at the outset of that, than to have to take care of her. If that makes me selfish, then guilty as charged. I'd rather be called selfish for signing a prenup, than foolish for not signing one.

Answer 8

That's like saying up front "OK, we can try this and see if it work will work out or not. But since I'm expecting that it won't, at least I'm covered." If someone feels the need to have a pre-nup, why are they even bothering to get married in the first place?

Answer 9

My gut reaction would be absolutely not. That if you can't trust someone enough to marry them without one, then you shouldn't marry at all.

But there are so many unknowns with marriage. And I have seen so many horrible divorces where every nickel and possession between a couple becomes a battle zone. It's disgusting, and it changes people.

I'm not looking to marry for profit so I would not be opposed to signing one. And if a man is looking to do that, he wouldn't pick me anyway.

Answer 10

due to the unequality regarding divorce in the justice system prenups can be a great way to balance it out. if a woman marries a guy whos rich and she has nothing when she came in, she deserves nothing coming out. If money has been accrued during the course of a marriage then i believe she is entitled to a decent % of it. For instance.

Man makes $30k /yr during marriage.
wife makes $0

married 10 years
Man makes $320k /yr the wife is entitled to some money for sure. How much? difficult to say, pretty situational though.

Man makes $3.2 million /yr
wife -$30,000 in CC debt, with no job

Married for 6 months
Wife deserves litterally nothing. If she got her CC debt paid off, she should consider herself lucky and stop using marriage as a weapon for a get-rich scheme.