Would you sign a PRE-NUP?

How do you feel about pre-nups?

Some people say that 1 person automatically proposing a pre-nup before the marriage has even began is taboo & almost a jinx to the relationship. They feel that it's almost as if you're already insinuating that the marriage won't work out.

How would you feel if your partner asked you to sign a pre-nup? Would you even agree to sign one?

And for those who are all FOR pre-nups, why? And have you ever proposed a pre-nup to your partner?

@Little: Understandable. I am not personally for pre-nups. But, my thinking about this subject gears more towards supporting the whole concept of marriage in the 1st place. The concept of marriage is that 2 people become 1 in mind, body & spirit. For example, if they have kids together, these are things 2 people cannot separate, divorce from or take from one another even if the marriage doesn't work out. And honestly, if I can't even agree to the "2 become 1" concept (which includes finances), I have no business getting married.

And you're right, not everyone who suggests pre-nups are rich. Hell, an average Joe with barely anything to his/her name could suggest a pre-nup.

The idea of pre-nups bothers me somewhat personally just because of my sacred view of marriage. But at the same time I can only imagine how much it would suck when you check your joint account to find all your savings emptied out on gambling on your partner's behalf.

Posted by LittleAquanot
Frankly, I'd rather my husband and I decide what we'd do worst case scenario while our heads are clear and we have each other's best interests at heart, versus have a complete stranger make the decision for us.

It's highly doubtful I'll get married, but if I did - I wouldn't be upset at all if he asked me to sign a prenup, and I sure would have him sign one too; regardless if I have a little bit or a lot of money.

As you stated LittleAquanot, it's easy to think all of these things are crazy ideas when you are in love; however, as we have all seen ad nauseum via the television/internet of Superstars/Athletes/Megamillionaires who have their personal divorce proceedings splashed any and everywhere. And when our friends and family members are embroiled in horrible divorces; when someone feels they've been slighted, and/or hurt, oftentimes the gloves come off and "all bets are off." It's better to be proactive than reactive from where I sit...so having something set in place is my preferred choice versus being blindsided in the future. There is a reason they say, "All's fair in love and war."

@Little: Excellent points! I can also see your point of view too.

It makes sense to discuss things beforehand, like you said when all heads are clear vs. waiting until both people probably hate eachother to have such a discussion. Makes sense.

Idk, I can see it from both ways. On 1 hand, couples can decide not to make everything they own joint, whether it's property, bank accounts, etc. For example, if a couple moves into a new house but yet only 1 person is on the deed (married or not) the house still legally only belongs to 1 person--the person whose name is on that deed. I guess there are other ways to avoid taking the risk that your partner will take you for everything you've got.

Man divorces nowadays can be so nasty! It's amazing how some people can let their ugly sides come all the way out FULL FORCE when the marriage is over. I watch too much court tv lol. I'd be more afraid for my soon to be ex husband to poison me or something moreso than take everything out of my bank account!

@Lovely: LoL Crazy thing is, it's actually VERY hard to prove such things. And especially the kind of proof that holds up legally in a court. Calling "Cheaters" always does the trick!

@Lovely: Yeah hopefully. I'm learning that alot of people just really don't give a damn. If a person is dead set on cheating, yeah they might go through extra steps to cover up their tracks, BUT they WILL be true to their own desires & continue cheating.

Have you heard of the "ALIENATION of AFFECTION" laws that are legal in some states? This law makes it so that any wife/husband can not only sue their partners for cheating, BUT they can ALSO sue their partner's mistress if cheating can be proved in a court of law! That is crazy! You'd think this law would not only make your partner think twice, BUT also that it'd make the women who chase after married men think twice before stepping into another woman's territory!!!

@Little: I agree, that law is ridiculous. I'm more in shock that they were even able to pass such a law in the 1st place. That's like suing your children's friends b/c your child decided to make a bad decision or get on drugs (example). Doesn't really make sense b/c 1. It doesn't put back together the family that was broken 2. It doesn't erase the pain & 3. It doesn't necessarily stop your husband from continuing to see his mistress, which is what each wife would really even want anyways. Plus there is no price cap on a marriage. I think if there were even such a law, the only person that should be sued IS the person who made the personal choice to cheat, which is the spouse, not the willing mistress. I'm sure that if women could sue their actual husbands for cheating, men would think twice.

@Scorpiochic: Understandable. Just like it's okay to become "1" in every aspect of the word with your spouse, it's also just as okay to maintain some type of independence too. Personally, I'm not moving into any properties & investing my hard money into if after my divorce I lose it all. There's a way to maintain & expect some form of financial independence w/o signing a pre-nup. Alot of people are okay with getting joint accounts with their partners BUT they are also (sometimes secretly) setting up their own individual private accounts. That's the smart thing to do.

Even though divorce is the last thing people want when they're walking down the isle, it is something to consider, no different than they encourage people to get life insurance policies JUST IN CASE a death were to occur. Sure, no body wants to hear/talk about death BUT it's def. a possibility just like divorce is.

When I think about it I think pre-nups can actually strengthen marriages. Its like having your own space. You have your own thing and the other has his/her own thing and you get contentment.

You guys heard of married couples sleeping in separate rooms? Its just like that. And they're happy.

Posted by KingPisces

Marriage is supposed to be about trust....What do you think it is? Stocks and shareholding? What was 'my' and 'mine' and 'your' and 'yours' becomes 'ours'....Singularity is given up to have two converge and create one (a new future and new kids).

Supposed to be....

Oh look at me. I'm letting bad marriages and statistics get in the way of my ideals. 😢

@Amandus: Sleeping in separate rooms? Now that's a little far fetched. Do people not realize that the whole ideal/point of marriage is to hopefully spend the rest of your ENTIRE LIFE with that person? If someone lacks so much faith in their marriage that they feel sleeping in separate rooms is the only ways to keep the marriage afloat then that couple should've never gotten married. Granted, some things work for others that I couldn't see working for me, but come on now...sleeping in separate rooms? Look, I'm not marrying someone if I can't even sleep next to them at night.

People are always trying to make marriage more of a business partnership moreso than an actual marriage. Yes, finances & all that good stuff should be discussed, BUT I don't believe the key to a successful marriage is to go about the marriage as if you're still single. When you're single, no one can blaim you for being independent, sleeping by your damn self, etc. BUT if a person can't really live up to what marriage is even about then there's no point in them getting married.

The same goes for people who feel the need to have other partners, thus they convince themselves that since no 1 person can fulfill all their needs, it's only necessary to avoid monogamy. That's bull. If a person/couple isn't okay with the idea of 2 becoming 1, then they shouldn't get married. Hell, if acting like you're married is what's going to eventually break a couple up then they should've never been married to begin with. Sleeping in separate rooms isn't going to fix the issue that's probably the problem. There's a REASON people sleep in the same bedroom & the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. The bed is just a bed; the bed didn't cause the marriage/relationship any problems. It's the 2 people in that commitment that need to find other ways to deal with the commitment they signed up for.

If a couple can't save their marriage all b/c they are literally acting like a married couple, then that couple should've just remained in a regular relationship. That'll fix that. That way they won't have to worry about their partners taking them for all they've got; after all, you can love someone w/o being married to them.

My opinions on Pre-nups changes daily. If you are marrying someone it should be for life there is no need for a pre-nup because this is supposed to be you together with someone forever.

Also though if you are planning on being with someone forever then why not sign a pre-nup as it will never be neccessary for it to be brought out.

And if you think someone just wants you for your money then why are you marrying them?

If I was marrying someone who was VERY rich I think i would agree that everything he bought to the relationship he can keep if we divorce, everything new that was made while we were married is to be split. Same would apply if I was rich (in my dreams!)

I think pre-nups can be very unfair, especially if a wife has stayed at home raising the children while her husband works then she has to leave the realtionship with nothing? if it wasnt for her raising the kids the husband would not be able to go out and earn that money.

Maybe a clause in the Pre-nup saying if you cheat you cant get your hands on anyones money— because there is no way i would be signing a PRE-nup then 10 years later my rich husbands starts sleeping with 20year olds and I have to divorce and end up with nothing!! but if the poor one is having the affair why should the tramp get a nice lump some for their infidelity?

@King: I don't think she was insinuating that motherhood is a paid job BUT don't get it twisted, raising children IS a FULL TIME job. If the man feels that his salaried/hourly work at an actual building is worth taking with him persay the relationship/marriage ends, the wife/girlfriend who is JUST AS dedicated to her family should have something to fall back on also.

This is why I am ALL for women/men getting educated & atleast going into a relationship already financially independent enough persay something were to go wrong, they wouldn't be stuck. Problem is, when people get married, alot of people like the ideal of making everything they've grown TOGETHER as a couple, to become joint. It's not fair that 2 people can put JUST AS MUCH dedication/work into something but yet just b/c the relationship ends, only 1 person comes out ahead, while the other is left behind. And this is unfair ESPECIALLY if that couple has children. Even if the man came into the relationship with more than his partner, why would any man be okay with his child suffering all b/c he's no longer in love with his child's mother?

The same goes for child support. There's a reason for child support. If 2 people are together, the man never minds spoiling his wife & kids, BUT the minute that couple breaks up, it's not fair that b/c the relationship ended that all of the sudden the child/wife/mother no longer deserves the same things she was receiving when the relationship was secure. Child support is used for the children AS WELL as for the parent/guardian supporting/raising that child. Children can't pay their own bills or support themselves. If a man has kids with a woman that he no longer decides to want to be with, the law requires him to pay child support so that the family dynamic won't be any more broken/changed than it already is.

The same goes for pre-nups. I'd be damned if I went into ANYTHING giving my all & yet just b/c the relationship ended, I'M the one stuck with nothing. Men might be the MAIN providers for their families, BUT w/o a caretaker for their families, they wouldn't have the time/energy to go to work; they'd be at home doing what the WIFE Is doing. So in a way, the wife staying at home & being the caretaker is doing the man a favor b/c SOMEBODY's gotta do the job of raising the kids (they can't raise themselves). It's a give & take. Women do just as much as men; it's just that the ways in which they contribute to the family dynamic are different

I think if two are ready to marry they would have the right kind of communication between eachother to descuss a pre-nip. I'm guessing I'm to young to know how and what to think financially, because mommy still pays my bills 🙂, but I think it's important to adjust the rules on what if something doesn't work, a plan B sort of thing. I personally would just hope that I don't loose too much and try to be reasonable, like we both go our seprate ways with enough to go on by. But then, remembering that movie The Breakup and the appartment thing... makes me wonder how everything would be split... :/ Orrrr maybe we add up the amount of money that the intire place would cost and who ever really wants it, like in the movie since they were fighting for it, who ever gets to keep the place gives the half of the places coast to the person leaving. Good idea, no? It's fair.

"Would you sign a PRE-NUP?"

No but I'd make him sign one. 🙂

Posted by MissPirate
"Would you sign a PRE-NUP?"

No but I'd make him sign one. 🙂

Hahahaha!

You know, I get it.

I totally get the whole pre-nup thing. I get the protecting one's assets. I get the whole "if you care about the person, then you want to make them happy" business. Yadda yadda yadda. Perhaps, this is the realistic view point.

But here's the thing...
Isn't the whole concept of "One Love, One Life", marriage, 'til death do us part based around the concept of 100% COMMITMENT and 100% CONSUMED WITH YOUR PARTNER and CONSUMED BY YOUR PARTNER? If you truly have that, then a pre nup is utterly worthless.

Idealistic? Definitely.
Easier said than done? Absolutely.
But isn't this "idea" the one worth having and not settling for any less?

Here's one for the charts. I recently found an OLD friend of mine via Facebook. Catching up with her, found out she got married, had two kids and....just finalized the divorce.

Her - Pisces
Her X - Gemini

Posted by krysrenee7
@Amandus: Sleeping in separate rooms? Now that's a little far fetched.

Thats what I thought when I read the article. But it kept saying how happy those people were. I was like, "really?...ok." I couldn't do it.

Posted by krysrenee7
How do you feel about pre-nups?

Some people say that 1 person automatically proposing a pre-nup before the marriage has even began is taboo & almost a jinx to the relationship. They feel that it's almost as if you're already insinuating that the marriage won't work out.

How would you feel if your partner asked you to sign a pre-nup? Would you even agree to sign one?

And for those who are all FOR pre-nups, why? And have you ever proposed a pre-nup to your partner?

No I would not sign a pre nup. If the man doesnt want to get married because of that then so be it.

@Amandus: I'm pretty sure there are some couples in the world who find utter joy in sleeping in separate bedrooms. Hell, I've seen just about everything. Whereas, most of my peers & I are ALL for MONOGAMY, there are some people who claim purposely NOT following monogamy is what leads to happier, more long-lasting & fulfilling relationships. It's very true when they say that what works for 1, might be trouble for another.

@Virgo: I agree. The def. of marriage & it's ideals remain the same. People don't have to follow the "rules" or agree to what marriage is all about, BUT if someone is not going to BE married, then why go out of your way to be married? Hey, if 2 people don't want to join everything together, that's fine, BUT I'm sure they'd last just as long if they weren't married. Why sign up for a 3 some if you're only comfortable with having sexual contact with 1 person or 2 person? Signing up for a 3 some, but yet only being comfortable with anything less than THREE completely DEFEATED the purpose of signing up for it to begin with.

I do however agree that divorce, separations, splits, etc. yadda yadda yadda are things that each couple need to atleast consider & discuss. It's no different than how important it is for people to discuss a possible death in the family (example). It's an uncomfortable conversation, YES BUT b/c it IS possible, each couple should atleast be on the same page & know what 1 another expects BEFORE that situation were to arise. I agree that the WORST time to start thinking about the possibility of things not working out is when you're literally in the process of a divorce/break-up. Not all divorces/breaks ups are ugly and/or filled with 2 greedy, money-hungry people, BUT if people learned how to have this conversation in the beginning OR atleast when things are good, half the people going through bitter divorces wouldn't be so damn surprised at how "greedy" their partner really is/was.

From experience I married my high school sweetheart with him 10 years married for only two .so DEFINITLY I think pre numts are nessesary ,it's simple .what's mine before marriage stays mine .what's yours before stays yours .what we build together in matrimony 50/50 . Totally got to do it.

Here's my thing: There is NO law that actually REQUIRES people to make all of their assets joint. The law leaves that in the hands of each individual couple. So what I don't understand is why people feel the need to sign a piece of paper that promises that if the relationship were to end, that they'd leave with everything they started with, when they really could've just kept everything seperate the whole time anyways during the entire marriage?

It's almost like people want to make things joint even though on the inside they really don't believe they'll end off with their own things & to me that is crazy. If a person knows up front that if the relationship were to end persay, that they'd want to take everything they brought into the relationship with them SO if that's what they want (which is justifiable) then why don't they just keep everything seperate to begin with. No one forces any couples to make their assets joint. If people know up front that if things were to end, they wouldn't want things to remain joint, then why even go into something joint to begin with?

Sure, signing a pre-nup is alot easier than having the discipline to seperate everything as time goes along, BUT it is possible.