Pre-Nuptial Agreements

[ringmastery]

Romance killer or modern-day necessity?

[101 Proof]

1. Modern day necessity!

[Alenne]

2. modern-day necessity

People do crazy things to each other during a divorce.

[Robb]

3. Weeellllll, that depends.

Ask yourself two important questions:

1. Do you have so much money that you find yourself constantly wondering if people like you just because you are rich?

2. Are others dependent upon your wealth for their own survival, to the extent that chopping it in half would lead to their financial demise?

:shrug:

[jpgray]

4. Only a romance killer if your SO's romancing your estate (nt)

[Bronco69]

5. Absolutely positively

a modern-day necessity!

[Deja Q]

6. Romance killer...

On the other hand, given that half the legal marryable population can't seem to make their marriages last anymore, I suppose the repuke philosophy of "what's yourn is yourn, what's mine is mine" must apply.

It's wonderful, the world people made for themselves...

On the other hand, all celebrities/sports figures/wealthy people MUST be forced to share all. Maybe that'll keep 'em together longer and keep them from playing puerile games, right Brit Brat? :D

[unblock]

8. oh, it's better for gays?

gays merge lives and hence finances, then when they split, they have zero legal help because the financial relationship is not recognized.

one gay partner can end up with no assets and negligible earning potential while the other lives it up on a huge salary. oh, and the debts might just all be held in the name of the one who can't earn as much.

all this is a good thing?

divorce sucks, but often the painful legal process, inexact though it may be, is still more fair than no process at all.

[Deja Q]

15. Hey, I can't even get a one night stand! But you do have a good point!

You actually have a good point. Of course, the one partner who doesn't make as much then has to be that much more observant to make sure he/she doesn't get taken for a ride...

For once, maybe I should consider myself lucky. If I wouldn't get AIDS from some creep, I'd get some kniving repuke freep (freeper creep) who'd try to take everything I've got.

As much I've always romanticized marriage, it seems to be pointless in the end.

[trof]

7. Absolutely!

If we had them back in the day, I would have INSISTED on:
"I, Miz t.-to-be, do solemnly swear that I will replace ALL lids, caps, corks, tops, and covers of any kind tightly and securely with NO cross threading."

I mean WHO merely 'places' the top on the Worcestershire sauce so that you grab it while you're cooking and give it a good shake and now the stuff is splattered all over the kitchen walls and ceiling?

jeez
:grr:

[unblock]

9. i'll tell you WHO

the fool that's gonna clean up that mess, THAT's who!

[Robb]

10. As we used to say in the kitchen

"...Bet he'll check that lid next time." :)

[trof]

14. I do NOW.

But it still bugs me.

[trof]

12. keereckt!

[curse10]

11. Modern day necessity

:-)

[Turbineguy]

13. A well-off friend considered it

but found out he was well protected under state law already. I think it's a romance killer. Check alternatives first.

[Kamika]

16. I am so getting one

I'll refuse to marry without one.


I have alot of money and even if love is strong I'm no fool. Even if we really love each other when we marry, if we'd decide to divorce things could get really nasty.

[ringmastery]

17. I won't get married without one either

And if she won't agree to signing, I'll know she wanted me for my money and not for my love. Because if it's true love, the money shouldn't matter.

[wtmusic]

20. Exactly. So why do you need one?

?

[Kamika]

21. because..

a lot of shit can happen.


Better safe then sorry man.

I hope whoever I marry also want's one.. it'l show he has some brains

[wtmusic]

23. Well, to each his/her own, but...

if you're not in it forever I wouldn't bother.

To me that's part of the strength. You're saying you believe 100% in 'for better or worse'. All or nothing.

[Kamika]

26. wow

I wish the world worked like that :D

[rbnyc]

18. We chose not to do a pre-nup.

I wouldn't put a couple down for having one, but for us, we don't intend to act as if we don't have faith in our love for or trust in one another.

[shanti]

19. only if either party has significant assets

and/or children from previous relationship(s).

[wtmusic]

22. Never

The second you sign a pre-nup you put a value on your love. Why cheapen it?

[Nikia]

34. I agree

When I say significant, I mean something more than an above average house or $20,000 in the bank. A small business or a large stock portfolio that was gained before the relationship might be something that a person would want to protect.
I've been told that a prenup is necessary when you have children. You might think that your love will last forever and will take that risk for yourself, as you should, but children can unfairly be big losers to the new family.
My mother-in-law wanted me to sign a prenup regarding my husband's inheritance. I didn't want one and my husband agreed with me. He stood up to his mother even though she threatened to take him out of the will. The funny thing is that I rarely think of the potential money in the future and want to save money whereas my husband sees no need to save money for the future for that reason.

[AlienGirl]

24. Do you wear a seatbelt?

Nobody expects to get divorced, just as no one ever expects to get in a car accident. But its better to plan for the possibility, while hoping it never arises...

Tucker

[Kamika]

27. it's like a condom

it's for your protection.. and noone gets hurt

[SiobhanClancy]

25. Romance killer...

I've been married twice and neither time had a pre-nup,and neither time was it a problem. My first marriage lasted for quite a few years and produced my lovely daughter. When we divorced,most of the assets had been brought to the marriage by me,including a house that my father gave me. I signed the house over to him quite happily,in the belief that he would keep it for my daughter. He and his current wife still live there,and someday it will pass to my daughter. I am not very practical and not a bit handy,and this seemed best. I have no regrets. In my second marriage,it was not a problem either. If a pre-nuptial agreement had been raised in either case,I wouldn't have gotten married. I can't see how it would do anything positive for a marriage....it seems to indicate a lack of trust going in. I know I'm probably in the minority,and everyone has to decide this for themselves. One of my problems is a lack of interest in material things,or so I've been told.

[BiggJawn]

39. I'm with you.

Been married twice, been divorced twice. both times I came out OK other than the Psych damage.

Guess I'm not interested in material things, either. In fact, I KNOW I'm not, because I don''t have enough assets to wory about.

Yeah, sure, if you're sitting on 2-3 gigabucks, and some honey 1/2 your age that you met last week is hot to trot down the aisle, sure, it might help. But face it, for the rest of us, do we really need a legal document to direct disposal of the double-wide and the Firebird? Are you REALLY that afraid for you collection of toy light sabres?

Romance Killer.I have a proven record of not giving my ex's the fucking of their lives. that should speak for itself.

[James T. Kirk]

28. Romace killer!

:loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya:
I'm getting married in less than two weeks and my fiance and I are 100% agreed that we're getting permanently hitched, 'til death do us part. A pre-nuptial agreement says to the other person that you're only 99% committed and your partner will always have a little fear that you will leave. We know we're going to have rough spots in our marriage; all married couples do. But we're going to work it out, no matter what.

Kirk out.
:loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya:

[Kamika]

29. ok

not to be mean, but don't you think most other married couples ever, thought they would be permanently hitched?

[James T. Kirk]

35. Those with prenuptial agreements weren't planning it.

I'll bet most couples are planning permanence, but the pre-nup people are already sort of planning on having a bail out, so it's never a total commitment. My fiance and I have discussed it at length and having the lifetime commitment is such a relief. She'll never leave me and I'll never leave her.
It's like saying you will love your spouse forever...or for the next few years, until things get rough.

[wtmusic]

31. Good for you!

best wishes

[James T. Kirk]

37. Thanks!

[Piperay]

30. Modern-day necessity

I would never get married without one. I am well off on my own and I am not about to lose what was hard earned (by a relative I inherited from)income to anyone else.

[Baclava]

32. Pre-nups? ha!

Shizz...if my ho' ever disses me I'll just cap her & dump her in the hole like all the rest... sho nuf...

[philosophie_en_rose]

33. It depends on how it's done.

Making it a condition of marriage, turning into a belligerent fool, or implying that your future spouse is a gold-digger is just not conducive to a good marriage. (But at least there's the prenup :))

On the other hand, leaving everything to chance makes it more difficult to protect yourself.

I would do the prenup, but make sure that the terms are very fair. Presume that your marriage will last and that your fiancee deserves consideration, just as you do.

A good strategy might be doing the prenup along with other legal paperwork - your wills, bank accounts, name changes, etc.

[ScreamingMeemie]

36. Romance killer...If you're not sure, don't get the license.

Plain and simple.

[happyslug]

38. Legal problem

Most states (and by that I mean ALL States that I Know of) generally have ruled against pre-nups. The rationale is simple, to have a valid contract (and a contract is what the pre-nup is) the transaction must be a "arms-length" transaction. How can you have a "arms-length" transaction when one (and hopefully both of you) are in love with each other?

"Party of the first part hereby agrees to have sex with party of the second part at times set forth in Part VII, Section S, subsection ii of this agreement. By the Term "Sex" we mean "Sex" as it is defined in Part "A" of this agreement.

This paper has been re-viewed by both Parties and their lawyers. Given the review of this agreement and that neither party is under any emotional influence at the time of the signing of this agreement...."

Look at the above can that be the act of two people in love? Anything less could not be a "arms-length" transaction. Pre-nups have been disfavored in most jurisdictions for that problem.

Now Pennsylvania did say a simple statement that both parties have seen each other finances is enforcable, but as a general Rule most pre-nups are not worth the paper their are printed on.

[Missy Vixen]

40. Mr. Belli

The lawyer that handled the Lee Marvin/Michelle Triola "palimony" suit (the beginnings of the pre-nup craze,) once said that he has never, ever seen a couple remain married that signed a prenup. Again, and those who disagree are free to dissent: When one mentions "divorce" before one is even married and plans for said filing in advance, it's over before it even starts.

With the exclusion of abuse, serial extramarital affairs, etcetera, sometimes it's cheaper to stay married, especially if one has children.

Julie