Why Every Woman Should Get a Prenup

[AngryAmish]

http://www.elle.com/_mobile/life-love/sex-relationships/why-every-woman-should-get-a-prenup#comments

But 18 years later, when I divorced my husband, I had a successful writing career and some money in the bank. He got to take half of it. But it isn't even the fact that I had to give him half that I find so egregious. It's the alimony he demanded I pay him on top of it that makes me very, very angry—like scream-really-loud, get-drunk, and eat-gratuitous-carbohydrates angry. On the first day of every month, I have to write him a mother^#%*ing check for six thousand dollars. I've been doing this for two and a half years. I've got five more left.

How did this happen? Because California divorce laws are antiquated and ridiculous and favor the less successful spouse. You're probably thinking that he must have been raising our children, while I was acting as the breadwinner. Nope. We don't have any. The state of California says that I'm supposed to keep him at the standard of living he got used to during our marriage, even though he's no longer my husband. So despite the fact that he has a master's degree and more marketable job skills than I do, I've had to give up my quality of life in order to maintain his. I can now no longer afford such luxuries as cable TV and haircuts.

When my divorce lawyer, Melanie, first told me that my ex was eligible for spousal support (the new way of saying alimony), I replied, "There's no way he would ever ask for that. That would be such a pussy move." She shook her head, looked at me across her desk, and said, "Every woman who's sat in that chair has said the same thing. Get ready, because he's going to ask for it."

She was right. Melanie and her firm, Wasser, Cooperman, and Carter, have a roster of female clients who, like me, wish they could build a time machine and go back and make their ex sign a prenup before they walk down the aisle. I've met a few. We manage to find one another at parties. Maybe it's the look of disbelief and rage we all share. We end up huddling in the corner, discussing ways to cut down our monthly bills so we can afford to write that damn check. One woman was going to hire her ex to be her nanny. He didn't want the job. Why would he? He doesn't need a job. He gets her check every month.

[yeoman6987]

1. Equal Rights

If you are married and a woman makes more money then the husband then he should get alimony. I am sorry but woman cannot have it both ways. You cannot say that you want to be treated equally but not in a divorce. That is all part of getting closer to full rights all around for woman equal to men. A prenup should be used for prior savings and investments though.

[tblue37]

51. Exactly. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. nt

[Fumesucker]

2. !

[Shrike47]

3. After 20 years with the spouse, you end up having to contribute to their support.

A pre-nup would have helped her, but who foresees this kind of situation? Would she have wanted to sign one back then?

To get into pre-nups in your 20's, you have to have a very cynical view of marriage.

[Logical]

58. Cynical or Realistic? n-t

[Bonobo]

4. I'm sorry but that outrage is hilarious.

Does she really have no idea that that is what men have experienced for decades upon decades?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

6. shhh... let them have their outrage

and just enjoy the irony.

sP

[Major Nikon]

10. Not only that if every woman got a prenup more would wind up on the shit end of the stick

Personally I think it should work the other way. Alimony benefits should be opt in, not opt out, via prenup or postnup. If someone wants to give up their career to raise kids or whatever, fine, but both parties should have an agreement of what that means if the marriage contract is dissolved.

[bemildred]

5. How sad. That poor woman.

How dare the divorce laws favor the less successful spouse?

[RandiFan1290]

7. lol

[awoke_in_2003]

49. I have seen that a time or two before...

who is it?

[RandiFan1290]

64. Just a silly screen shot from TV

It's from the Truecar.com commercial.

[Shrike47]

8. So the lesson is, if he doesn't start making big bucks in the first couple years, dump him.

Or her, of course.

[DireStrike]

9. I find it pretty hard to care about the problems of someone who can write a monthly check for $6000

[anneboleyn]

57. Seriously! 6000 a month! Cry me a river over "her" money.

[Captain Stern]

11. Lame law.

I don't think anyone should receive alimony unless they set back their career during the marriage by taking care of the kids, working to send their spouse through college, etc. The idea that they should be paid so they can live the lifestyle that they're used to is antiquated and silly.

I also find it amusing that the article is titled "Why Every Woman Should Get a Prenup"....seems like it should be titled "Why Everyone Should Get a Prenup".

[Ilsa]

14. Excellent post! nt

[zazen]

18. I agree, although a slight correction for increased ageism/sexism is okay

I'm sorry, but getting divorced at 40-50-60--everything else being equal--is a very different social world for females than for males. I was at an event last night where there were four females for every male. It's not a problem for me, yet, but I see the writing on the wall. And women live longer, and still earn less, so unless they're independently wealthy they're facing a tougher situation in terms of options for remarriage/partnering and managing healthcare into old age.

Having said that, you're absolutely right that one spouse shouldn't be able to have that lifestyle if they just sat on their behind and didn't put their career on hold to raise kids or maintain a serious suburban homestead. Even without kids, renovating and maintaining a large home and garden and doing the invisible work of being the spouse of a successful person ought to be paid work--they're called "development officers" and "special events planners" now. I did a lot of invisible work that's on my ex's vitae and not mine. But men can do that valuable unpaid labor as well as women and ought to be compensated for it if they lost career opportunities because of it.

As you suggest, the spousal support ought to be tied to compensation for valuable work, regardless of the sex of either spouse, not just entitlement to a lavish lifestyle. A small amount to help someone get on their feet to be self-sufficient is one thing--but years of it? Hell no.

I absolutely support my male friends who've either gotten compensation for being the stay-at-home Dad, or in one case who successfully resisted providing endless spousal support when the wife acted the victim when she was in fact the violator.

There are enough real female victims in the world--I've worked with them. Those privileged women who cry victim to abuse the system enrage me. They screw it up for the many women who really need it.

[seaglass]

19. +1 n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

33. How do you determine that, though?

I bet that every non-earning ex-spouse will claim they contributed as a homemaker, and most of their spouses will claim they didn't.

[Captain Stern]

50. Good question

I think our courts would have to determine that the way they determine other stuff....with evidence.

Some cases, I suppose, would be easier to decide than others. I would think that the easier cases would be where a spouse worked instead of going to school so they could pay for their partner's schooling, or where a spouse put their career on hold to stay at home and raise children.

The harder cases would be where one spouse stayed home, didn't work, and didn't raise children. (Then again, that might be an easy case.....judgement = 0$).

The thing that I find ridiculous is the idea that someone could be entitled to alimony just because they are used to living a certain lifestyle. They got used to that lifestyle over time.....they can get used to another one as well.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. And when there isn't any?

In a criminal court, that's easy - the burden of proof rests on the prosecution.

But in a divorce case, it's not so obvious where it should lie.

My view is that prenups should be a mandatory part of the legal recognition of a marriage - I think that when people enter into such a contract, they should fully specify it, rather than trusting the state to make up the bits that they didn't actually fill in. It would make people think more carefully before getting married, too.

[Captain Stern]

56. I think prenups are a good idea in a lot of cases, but shouldn't be mandatory.

If someone would rather trust the state to settle things for them, I think they should be able to make that decision.

[Phentex]

45. Agree!

I know I am so far removed from their world but when I hear about celebs getting $10,000/month and then whining because they can't live the same lifestyle as before, I really don't feel much pity.

[blueamy66]

65. I agree too.

Alimony is for the birds.

Unless a spouse quits a job or forgoes a job to help a spouse get through college or stays at home to raise kids.....geez, get a job and some pride.

[Major Nikon]

12. "That would be such a pussy move."

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. Charlie, you blockhead.

+1

[Adrahil]

63. You reacted to the same line I did....

... I mean, holy crap!

And defining "success" strictly on the basis on income? FAIL!

[dawg]

13. This is an example of how our patriarchal society is sometimes harmful to men.

He's was the lesser earning spouse, so under the law he is entitled to spousal support. That's not unusual; in fact it is a very normal thing. But because he is a man, it is a "pussy" move to even ask for it.

He's to be shamed for making less than his spouse in the first place. And he's to be shamed for receiving the help that he's entitled to under the law once the marriage failed.

And it isn't just his wife who thinks that way. I know men who receive alimony payments, and I have seen this same attitude directed towards them.

[woolldog]

24. Doesn't sound like he's too shamed to take the money though...

And good for him. Men have been on the shit end of these divorce laws for a long time and I dont have a problem with the law being applied equally.

[MadrasT]

15. How does she think men feel?

If this is something that someone feels is unfair -- anyone, male or female -- then they should consider a prenup. Not just women.

I have sympathy for her, but no more than I have for men who find themselves in the same situation.

Equality means equality.

I have a feeling she'd be screaming to high heaven if the roles were reversed and she didn't get her "fair share".

[MicaelS]

16. Oh the irony is sooo delicious.

Waa, waa, waaa.

[PoliticAverse]

17. Is this article parody?... n/t

[NaturalHigh]

20. Ah...

Somebody call the waambulance. This happens to men all the time, and nobody even blinks an eye. Bettu Broderick was getting $16,000 a month from her ex-husband, and she still killed him and his new wife.

If it's fair for one spouse, it should be fair for the other. That said, I do think the whole alimony thing is ridiculous sometimes, especially when the spouse receiving it is healthy, educated, and capable of supporting himself/herself.

[treestar]

21. I dunno, I think if we heard a man saying that, we'd be outraged

too bad. Why is she so pissed off? And the comment about "least successful" is a turn off. Sounds like a right winger/libertarian.

[badtoworse]

22. Sauce for the goose

[PowerToThePeople]

23. Waaaahmmbulance

6k a month alimony? She must be VERY well off then. This is not driving some working wage person into poverty.

I have little sympathy in this case.

[NaturalHigh]

25. But, but, but...

She can't afford cable now. She even said so!

[FrodosPet]

67. Internet and Netflix

$50 Roku box, $8 a month Netflix, and $40 a month Internet. If she can afford $6000 a month, she can afford that.

[flamingdem]

26. She can read. Why didn't she know this could happen?

People should know the law before they get married.

That said, the guy is within his legal rights and she learned a lesson.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. Dishonorable, whiny women exist. This is one good example. No sympathy from me. None.

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. What?? That's outrageous!!! Who ever thought up such a stupid system?

It's amusing that theres only pressure to change stupid laws when women get caught in the crosshairs.

[JustAnotherGen]

30. You get married at 24

Male or Female - regardless of gender - and broke - this can always happen. I know quite a few women and men tha have married in the past few years that have dual prenups. But marriage for the first time in your late 30's/early 40's when you spent up until that time acquiring wealth on your own - makes you more cautious and aware of the pitfalls.

Love affairs come and go - I've had some real rip doozies! But being a libertine for 36 years taught me a lesson - what you feel today you might not feel tomorrow so proceed with caution.

It's very difficult to get people who are marrying in their early 20's or who have been married 25+ years to understand these realities of love and life. As a single woman I could smell a gold digger from ten miles away . . . But I didn't get the idea of the scent even existing until my early 30's. My husband didn't get his sniffer in gear until he was 40!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

31. I find it weird to see it presented as though it's specifically the sexes this way round.

Far more often, men end up paying alimony to women than vice versa, and arguments about whether it's too much, too little or the right amount are framed that way round.

An example the other way round is not, in itself, unusual, but I find it surprising that it seems to be actively presented as though that way is commoner.

FWIW, I think that prenups should be mandatory. I don't think that there is a "one true answer" about how much spousal support should be due in the event of a marriage breaking down; rather than the state decreeing what terms people should get married on, it should force them to make that decision themselves as a condition of recognising their marriage.

Mandatory prenups would also stop people rushing into marriage without their eyes open.

To make it easier, there could be a range of "sample templates" which couples could just fill in the numbers on, or modify as they saw fit, but the right people to make a decision about the terms on which a legal contract will be dissolved are the people entering into that contract, and those terms are a key part of any contract.

[cthulu2016]

32. Hilarious whining (and quite sexist, also)

Just swap the gender pronouns to see what a hateful bit of bile this is.

The assumption underlying the piece is that it is categorically wrong for men to get alimony on the same basis as women... "a pussy move" in fact.

[LadyHawkAZ]

34. "Ermahgerd! I just found out what equality under the law means!"

"It's not faaaaair! I don't liiiiike it!"

What an insulting article. I agree with the basic idea that everyone (of all genders) should have a prenup in place before they get married, but am nothing but disgusted with the author's self-serving whine.

[davidn3600]

35. Looks like someone doesnt like how equality works

This has been happening to men forever and no one cares. So I really dont care when it happens to a woman.

[Gormy Cuss]

36. Missing from her story is her spouse's work history during the marriage.

If she was supporting the household and he has been essentially out of the workforce he is entitled to spousal support. Prenups in this state can't be "unconscionable," which it would be if he had little prospect of supporting himself immediately. A prenup maybe could have placed a limit on how long he received it.

Divorce. It's an ugly business.

[anneboleyn]

59. I would like to know his work history/school also. She sold some screenplays; he may have worked as

her manager or who knows. She just slanders him and doesn't say a word about anything he did during their marriage (except that they did not have kids so he wasn't a "stay at home dad&quot . Maybe he was in school part of that time earning his graduate degree?

Yeah and as other posters are noting, welcome to the world men have been in for years regarding divorce laws.

[Vashta Nerada]

37. I feel absolutely no pity for her.

[laundry_queen]

38. Um. Ok.

I'd like to know who didn't know this? She must have had her head up her butt. This is actually common where I live.

I don't feel bad for her. Yes, it's true that things are not usually the same for men and women after 18 years of marriage...usually women are the ones who have a hard time getting their feet on the ground...but when the circumstances are opposite, then I see no issues with her paying him.

I had a friend who was very successful...retired military with a good pension, owned quite a bit of property outright, had a new job that paid well...when she got married she made her husband sign a prenup that said, "you don't get any of my property and I won't pay any spousal support for a marriage of less than 10 years" It's a good thing she got him to sign that prenup - a year later she threw him out for cheating and he tried to get money from her. He got nothing b/c the prenup was solid.

The woman in the article was married for 18 years. I don't see what the issue is with her paying him after all that time. Personally, my ex pays me quite a bit every month - I quit a bank job to raise our kids and there was never a question that he would pay me spousal support on top of child support. I know plenty of women who don't have kids who receive money. And it works for men the same way under the law. I don't understand how this woman in the article didn't know this. Did she just crawl out from under a rock?

[raccoon]

39. I can't believe no one has yet said

[CFLDem]

40. ...

This is too rich!!!!

[Ratty]

41. At first the title confused me

Why should women especially get a prenup? Yeah, I think she's whiny too, the "pussy" comment, the $6,000 monthly check. No sympathy from me. But I guess they titled the article that way because women don't typically think about prenups as often as men do. Traditionally it's been the man who asks for the prenup. I now interpret the title to be more along the lines of "Yes, prenups are for women too."

[tammywammy]

42. Doesn't a prenup mostly protect assets acquired before marriage?

Wouldn't assets acquired during the marriage still be divided up? And why shouldn't the martial estate be divided equally?

[Phentex]

44. I thought so too but you can probably

exclude or limit alimony, child support, etc. Still, at 24 with no assets, who would think about that?

[Coyotl]

43. What a sexist headline!

Men should too given my experience.

[ileus]

46. Sounds like the same reason every man should get a prenup

[uppityperson]

48. But don't you want legal protections to make sure you get your share of your kale field?

[flvegan]

52. Is this a joke or satire?

I mean, if the subject of this post was "Why every man should get a prenup" there would be flames of the likes Revelations could not put into words.

[chrisa]

60. I was wondering as well. I thought the author was being ironic.

Doesn't seem to be the case - this just comes off as silly.

[bravenak]

53. Wrong title.

This applies equally to men. Unless one spouse had to put their career on the shelf in favor of the other to manage the household or raised children I don't see the reason for alimony. If they both work during the marriage and pool income it should be split, but I don't see why they should continue to pay for years without children to support. I wouldn't want nothing from my husband if I left him, that's the point of leaving for me. But he would probably try to support his kids if I let him, he takes that very seriously, and I could hurt him by not taking his money. If I were rich and he wanted my money I would just give him how ever much it would take for him to leave me alone. All of it if that's what it takes. Mo money mo problems.

[mn9driver]

54. A good prenup is essentially working out your divorce

in advance. If you still want to get married after that, you must really be in love.

My ex ambush divorced me after 29 years. Turned out she had been cheating on me for over half of that time. She is very comfortable on the permanent lifetime support she receives from me although she does complain about it; with child support it is more than half of my income. She will never get a job; she has no need. She will also never marry her friend, since that would put her paycheck up for review.

My present wife and I have a very good prenup.

[msanthrope]

61. Who would want to divorce this gem? Who? nt

[Iggo]

62. Would she have sued him for support if he'd been more successful than she?

Or would that have been "a pussy move"?

[demwing]

66. if the woman does it

Is it a dick move?