picard
Master Don Juan
Is it necessary to get prenuptial agreement before marriage nowadays? I just don't trust women anymore. There are too many fraudulent women.
Is prenuptial agreement necessary?
- Thread starter picard
- Start date
If you have any serious assets, yes.
Also, if you are actually thinking about marring someone, a complete background and credit check needs to be done as well. You don't want any unexpected surprises coming up. Oh, and if you are marrying someone from diferent country, triple that.
Also, if you are actually thinking about marring someone, a complete background and credit check needs to be done as well. You don't want any unexpected surprises coming up. Oh, and if you are marrying someone from diferent country, triple that.
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
Prenups are for when one party enters the marriage in an unequal position compared to the other - one rich and one poor. They preserve the pre-marital assets of the richer spouse. Generally any property the two of you accumulate during the course of the marriage will be joint property, divided 50/50 upon divorce.
penkitten
Master Don Juan
unless you have assets like vehicles, houses, major equipment, property, major cash, etc then you shouldnt have to worry about it.
picard
Master Don Juan
I have a vehicle, expensive moutain bikes, expensive outdoor toys, my investments, house. Will a north American woman agree to the pre-nuptial agreement?
Gangster Of Love
Master Don Juan
Will you agree to give up sex with other women, for the rest of your life?
DoubleA
Senior Don Juan
I think it's only beneficial for the individual who is coming in with more to lose than the other party.
It's a good practice because most states usually side with women in the divorce cases, historically.
The best way to resolve t aviod this, I believe is marry someone who has just as much as you have to lose if there is an actual seperation. So in other words, fellas and ladies leave these broke mothafvckers ALONE.
It's a good practice because most states usually side with women in the divorce cases, historically.
The best way to resolve t aviod this, I believe is marry someone who has just as much as you have to lose if there is an actual seperation. So in other words, fellas and ladies leave these broke mothafvckers ALONE.
Rollo Tomassi
Master Don Juan
Yes.
The popular argument is to accept the path of least resistance and not even mention a pre-nup so as not to upset your 'poor girlffriend' by having her think you're so 'superficial' as to even consider your long term financial stability in the harsh light of a potential break up later in life. Afterall if she's the ONE why would it matter? That, and if you're foolish enough to marry a woman before you have any considerable assets to mention, you're probably foolish enough to accept that your net worth will never amount to anything substantial.
Always bear in mind that alimony/spousal support is very real and entitles (virtually in every case) the woman to not only half of what you (collectively or not) have earned, but half of everything you will earn in the future for a set period of time. In most cases this is half a year for every year of marriage, but it varies from state to state. I've counseled (and worked for) very successful men in their 50s & 60s who are trapped in a marriage of convenience because when they married their wives they were poor and had a scarcity mentality with regards to women and never thought it would be necessary to even consider a pre-nup. After 30 or so years of marriage they find that they are beholden to their wives and cannot escape the situation because in doing so half of their assets in the companies they started after their marriages would be transffered to her and thus necessitate a buy out, a dissolution of the company or a serious deficiency in revenue for the company leaving it (and him) vulnerable to competitiors, shareholder sell off and expensive bankruptcy settlements.
You may think this is an extreme illustration, but so did a lot of 20 y.o. guys marrying their dream girl who went on to be business successes. The prospect is worse in small businesses where the man may not have the resources to rebound from an added financial burden, whereas the highly successful business man may have the insulation to weather an ugly divorce.
This of course says nothing of the guy who doesn't own a business, who's met with some career success post-marriage. The terrific medical intern who married his college girlfriend, makes substantially more in his career as a doctor after 20 years. At time of divorce he then owes (depending on state) up to 10 years of spousal support to her. To add insult to injury, in most settlements, she's also entitled to more financial support if his ability to earn it improves in that 10 year period. So for sake of example, lets say our divorced doctor is promoted to chief of staff for surgery in 5 years - when he gets a raise, she gets a raise.
Nowadays we have this extension of the utility of the ONEitis, soulmate myth that tells young men that pre-nups are only for the 'shallow' likes of Donald Trump or Michael Douglas who have considerable sums of money to wager on (another) marriage, yet for a young man to consider one it likens him to these 'superficial' celebrities, proves he has a bloated sense of self and means he'd consider money over "true love". Nothing could be further from the truth.
The popular argument is to accept the path of least resistance and not even mention a pre-nup so as not to upset your 'poor girlffriend' by having her think you're so 'superficial' as to even consider your long term financial stability in the harsh light of a potential break up later in life. Afterall if she's the ONE why would it matter? That, and if you're foolish enough to marry a woman before you have any considerable assets to mention, you're probably foolish enough to accept that your net worth will never amount to anything substantial.
Always bear in mind that alimony/spousal support is very real and entitles (virtually in every case) the woman to not only half of what you (collectively or not) have earned, but half of everything you will earn in the future for a set period of time. In most cases this is half a year for every year of marriage, but it varies from state to state. I've counseled (and worked for) very successful men in their 50s & 60s who are trapped in a marriage of convenience because when they married their wives they were poor and had a scarcity mentality with regards to women and never thought it would be necessary to even consider a pre-nup. After 30 or so years of marriage they find that they are beholden to their wives and cannot escape the situation because in doing so half of their assets in the companies they started after their marriages would be transffered to her and thus necessitate a buy out, a dissolution of the company or a serious deficiency in revenue for the company leaving it (and him) vulnerable to competitiors, shareholder sell off and expensive bankruptcy settlements.
You may think this is an extreme illustration, but so did a lot of 20 y.o. guys marrying their dream girl who went on to be business successes. The prospect is worse in small businesses where the man may not have the resources to rebound from an added financial burden, whereas the highly successful business man may have the insulation to weather an ugly divorce.
This of course says nothing of the guy who doesn't own a business, who's met with some career success post-marriage. The terrific medical intern who married his college girlfriend, makes substantially more in his career as a doctor after 20 years. At time of divorce he then owes (depending on state) up to 10 years of spousal support to her. To add insult to injury, in most settlements, she's also entitled to more financial support if his ability to earn it improves in that 10 year period. So for sake of example, lets say our divorced doctor is promoted to chief of staff for surgery in 5 years - when he gets a raise, she gets a raise.
Nowadays we have this extension of the utility of the ONEitis, soulmate myth that tells young men that pre-nups are only for the 'shallow' likes of Donald Trump or Michael Douglas who have considerable sums of money to wager on (another) marriage, yet for a young man to consider one it likens him to these 'superficial' celebrities, proves he has a bloated sense of self and means he'd consider money over "true love". Nothing could be further from the truth.
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
Rollo, I have not yet seen a prenup between two poor people, and I don't think it would hold up in court. Assets that either spouse generates during the marriage are marital property, even if the prenup says otherwise. An agreement, even if mutual, cannot trump state divorce law. It would likely be voidable as an unconscionable contract.
As a caveat, I am not an attorney; there are fifty sets of divorce law; and it's not always possible to predict exactly what a judge or jury would do.
As a caveat, I am not an attorney; there are fifty sets of divorce law; and it's not always possible to predict exactly what a judge or jury would do.
in the end its back to the same thing. what do YOU want? figure that out, then do it. and if she won't respect that, then maybe you shouldn't be marrying her!
theres no right answer here. its up to you.
personally when i marry ill get a prenup unless she has an equal amount of assets.
J
theres no right answer here. its up to you.
personally when i marry ill get a prenup unless she has an equal amount of assets.
J
Bill S. Preston Esq
Don Juan
This reminds me when Britney's mom forced Britney to get one because she didn't want one. I couldn't stop laughing because this guy was straight broke and he was willing to leave his girlfriend and the mother of his children like it was nothing.
What makes Britney think he's in it for the long haul:crackup:
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
Bill, are you an attorney, as the suffix "esquire" would indicate?
Bill S. Preston Esq
Don Juan
No, just took it from bill and teds excellent adventure.
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
oh, bummer. Don't ever go to law school, btw. It sucks ass. CA will let you practice with an on-line degree.
Bill S. Preston Esq
Don Juan
Will do man, except i'm trying to become and Air Force Pilot
However, law enforcement is my backup should ROTC and OTS dump my ass. I worked with a chick that went to a Law School called McGeorge. She looked like a girl who would crunch books like nothing.
Rollo Tomassi
Master Don Juan
BIBLE: That's exactly why you have an licensed attorney write up the pre-nuptual agreement prior to marriage. Any attorney that specializes in divorce/marriage law will know what can or cannot be included in a binding agreement depending on state.
I should also ad that you are correct; assets that either party generates during marriage become marital property in the absence of a prior, binding agreement, which in and of itself ought to be enough to make any guy with some sense of ambition hesitant regardless of his present financial status, but did you know that prior debt from either party also becomes marital property? This works both ways of course, but as the primary consumer of western culture, single women carry as much as 6 times the debt load that single men do. Meaning that when your future wife was putting that spring break trip to Cancun on her Visa card in college to go clubing with her girlfriends in search of guys to fvck you as the second half of the marriage agreement will be held responsible for paying that debt in marriage. It's no secret that the major credit card companies actively pursue freshmen uniiversity students and statistically it is women between the ages of 18 and 26 that carry the highest debt loads in America after graduation. Even after divorce, without a pre-nup to counter this, a guy in effect will be paying for half of the trip to Victoria's Secret his former wife made in college to buy the lingerie to turn on her Ex-Jerk Boyfriend.
Makes you think huh?
I should also ad that you are correct; assets that either party generates during marriage become marital property in the absence of a prior, binding agreement, which in and of itself ought to be enough to make any guy with some sense of ambition hesitant regardless of his present financial status, but did you know that prior debt from either party also becomes marital property? This works both ways of course, but as the primary consumer of western culture, single women carry as much as 6 times the debt load that single men do. Meaning that when your future wife was putting that spring break trip to Cancun on her Visa card in college to go clubing with her girlfriends in search of guys to fvck you as the second half of the marriage agreement will be held responsible for paying that debt in marriage. It's no secret that the major credit card companies actively pursue freshmen uniiversity students and statistically it is women between the ages of 18 and 26 that carry the highest debt loads in America after graduation. Even after divorce, without a pre-nup to counter this, a guy in effect will be paying for half of the trip to Victoria's Secret his former wife made in college to buy the lingerie to turn on her Ex-Jerk Boyfriend.
Makes you think huh?
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
so does this web site
http://www.nomarriage.com/
They are selling ads for mail order bride companies, but they still make some good points nonetheless.
http://www.nomarriage.com/
They are selling ads for mail order bride companies, but they still make some good points nonetheless.
