Posted on 05/17/2013 3:07:30 PM PDT by SatinDoll
My nephew and his squeeze are talking marriage. They've been childhood sweethearts since 6th grade - they're now both 21. He wants a 'prenup', a prenuptial agreement, and she's never heard of such a thing. Should they have one?
Some background: they are each others best friend and confidant. When he left his grandfather's house after high school graduation to be more independent and encountered roughened circumstances, she supported him while she worked at WalMart, and together they became partners in a business that failed. Nephew moved back home while she went to school. But that's not all - her mother has been supporting her while she went to community college but Mom's work hours have been reduced and my nephew, who now has a good paying job, will be supporting his girlfriend. There is a lot of history in this relationship
So they're discussing getting married.
My nephew's now happily-married half-brother has an ex-wife, and told his baby half-brother to never marry without first getting a 'prenup'.
He asked me, his spinster Auntie with 6 cats, what he should do. Yeah, right! My first instinct would be to avoid commitment and get another cat, but that wouldn't suffice.
I am requesting the help of the world's most extensive and collective group of knowledge on earth, Free Republic, as I have no experience in the area of marriage. Many Freepers do have a great deal of experience with marriage/divorce.
Any practical advice? I know I'll see lots of puns and jokes, not to mention opinions, but useful advice would be greatly appreciated.
Bfl
Nothing in your post indicates a need for a pre nup at all.
Marriage is a contract. The contract must be agreed to by both parties. If a prenup is required by one of the parties it is up to the other party to agree or disagree. Beyond that, it doesn’t really matter what third parties may feel.
If he owns anything bigger than a car, GET THE PRENUP.
Chicks get vindictive as hell when they get mad, best to have
an effective shield against them trying to destroy your life
and profit in the process.
Pre-nup to cover what? Neither sound like they have a whole lot. If he’s just wanting to keep his income earned during the marriage as his alone, rather than theirs ... there’d need to be a damn good reason.
Ultimately, pre-nups are contrary to the actual purpose of getting married. The point is for two to become one ... not for two to stay two. There are limited cases where it might be worth looking into. This doesn’t sound like one of them.
SnakeDoc
...and not a lot of money. Why even bother with a prenuptial agreement?
Look, I don't like them in the first place, and the only reason to have one, in my opinion, is if one side is coming in with a LOT of money, and is worried about being taken advantage of.
Uh, what does ‘Bfl’ mean?
(Sorry for being so obtuse.)
If one person is walking in with a lot more fiscal worth than the other they’re absolutely necessary. Outside of that not really, unless the couple really wants to codify “if you do this (whatever “this” might be) to me you get nothing in the divorce”.
Err... this right here:
My nephew and his squeeze are talking marriage.
That's enough. Protect yourself from evil angry be-yotches.
My $0.02,
If he feels he needs a prenup- then he shouldn’t get married. The only time I could see it being appropriate is if you have someone marrying into “family” money and the prenup is to protect the heirs. Based on your brief summary both of them have few assets at this point- so that any wealth created would be during the marriage and it may not stand up in a community property state ( but i’m no lawyer).
I understand the concern given todays climate of “no fault” divorce- but I wouldn’t feel comfortable asking for a prenup given their situation.
In general, a pre-nup is to protect the assets of a wealthy betrothed. For example, if a wealthy groom was marrying a woman with a reputation for divorce settlements, a pre-nup clarifies the extent which she is entitled to if they divorce.
Similarly, a wealthy woman, or one who stands to inherit money from wealthy parents, might use a pre-nup against the groom to protect her assets.
Unless one of these two comes from money or expects to have money soon, I would think a pre-nup would be unnecessary. In addition, there is risk of causing marital discord because it implies one party or the other is already thinking of divorce before the marriage even begins.
I think they are often not needed, but sometimes they are when it is a second marriage and both have kids or somesuch.
I’ve seen many a situation where husband has kids, marries lady, they have mutual kids, mom leaves everything to “her” kids and the children of the father and the first wife are screwed.
Similarly, when someone is in a business with partners, I’ve had the wives of my partners disclaim interest in the company so they don’t end up my partner if something happened. Etc.
Book for Later (read)
Uh, what does ‘Bfl’ mean?
(Sorry for being so obtuse.)
I agree with Dave Ramsey’s take on prenups. Unless there’s a subsantial amount of money at stake in the range of $2 million or more, a prenup shouldn’t be considered. If your nephew is seriously pondering a prenup, then he may want to re-consider why he’s getting married in the first place.
I see.
Since he lives in a “community law” state, Washington State, I suppose he should have a prenup. He’ll be inheriting a house.
There you go. My pre-nup is "murder before divorce." That nullifies any others.
BTW, other than a half brother saying get one, can your nephew put three words together describing why he wants one and what it will accomplish? I’ll guarantee you one thing, when his sweetheart of 9 years figures it out, it will have ticked her off....
The very existence of a prenup casts doubt on how well a marriage will turn out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.