Pre-nups

[ido]

I also don't think that you can expect to separate a prenup as a financial issue vs. an emotional issue. A healthy relationship is the combination of all aspects, not each one segmented from the others.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

kof...if you think that a pre-nup is about finances only and doesn't involve emotions then you are either very naive or have no emotional health whatsoever.

You can't separate the two...you talk about the fact that after a divorce the emotional welfare would be out the window...a prenup is singed BEFORE the divorce and BEFORE the marraige - that absolutely affects the emotional well being of the relationship.

And yes, I can talk about emotions in relation to a pre-nup - you're the one that has wanted to separate the two issues not me...so you can talk about the "logical" financial side of things all you want - feel free....but I will talk about the emotional side as well because there is one in regards to pre-nups. I am sticking to the topic and not wandering off - you just don't like my point of view or the emotional issues that I bring up...

 

[kingoffools13]

I still think it comes down to integrity. I don't think that people change b/c of divorce. I think they finally show their true colors and that leads to divorce. The other person either chose to ignore the signs of who their partner really was - or the person kept their true self well-hidden. But, I don't think anyone becomes someone they weren't already.

JMHO

really? i kinda think there are both kinds, people that show their true colors, and people that let circumstances get the better of them and allow that to adversely change who they are.

I've met some pretty messed up people after divorces, i would say it has to have some sort of change wouldnt ya think?

as for the money and emotions thing, yes for the relationship its totally one thing, everything should be one thing ... that is what i was talking about earlier when i said something to the effect of ideal circumstances

Only the pre-nup doesn't apply to the marriage at all, it is there to protect in case the marriage doesn't go through(or at least the type of pre-nup i am referring too. i know there can be ones that affect conditions of the marriage while its current but they aren't the norm)

Like i said before, if a couple decided to do a pre-nup the ideal use for it would be never, and it wouldn't be involved in the relationship at all ... you could still continue on into the marriage, and combine financial and emotional and any other aspect of your single life you wanted to, and it wouldnt hold any affect ... the only time it would come into play, is if you had decided to break the sacred vow of marriage, and then, like i said before, it wouldn't be an issue of healthy emotion and finance, just finance (or perhaps sentimental value if it was a possession of some sort) but emotonal well being would be done for.

K
O
F

 

[Tamara224]

Is it just me, or does the whole idea of someone planning to "protect" themselves or their money "from" their spouse just seem really really wrong?

The last wedding I went to, the couple used traditional vows. There was something in there about: "for richer or poorer."

Maybe I'm a little too idealistic, but I figure that when I get married my husband and I are inviting one another into our lives forever - to share everything.

The very idea that he might be thinking "I need to protect myself from her" just sickens me.

I would like him to be thinking "I want to share everything with her, life, money, passions, everything I have will be hers and everything she has will be mine. I will be hers and she will be mine." Because that is certainly what I will be thinking.

A little romantic of me, I know. Perhaps naive and idealistic. But at this point I figure that if I don't find that, I'm doing just fine on my own and it wouldn't be worth it to enter into a relationship built on selfishness with someone who is afraid of me, afraid of sharing with me or who feels the need to protect himself from me.

 

[ido]

really? i kinda think there are both kinds, people that show their true colors, and people that let circumstances get the better of them and allow that to adversely change who they are.

People that let circumstances get the better of them were like that before they "changed" it just took the circumstances to happen for their true colors to show. (IMO)

I've met some pretty messed up people after divorces, i would say it has to have some sort of change wouldnt ya think?

My divorce rocked me to my very soul. But, I stayed the course and worked through everything I was feeling and came out whole and healed on the other side. I did not allow the circumstances to own me - b/c I'm not the kind of person that would. If people are owned by their circumstances it is b/c that is how they are, how they've always been.

as for the money and emotions thing, yes for the relationship its totally one thing, everything should be one thing ... that is what i was talking about earlier when i said something to the effect of ideal circumstances

Well then, I guess I don't want a relationship that isn't ideal.

Like i said before, if a couple decided to do a pre-nup the ideal use for it would be never, and it wouldn't be involved in the relationship at all ... you could still continue on into the marriage, and combine financial and emotional and any other aspect of your single life you wanted to, and it wouldnt hold any affect ... the only time it would come into play, is if you had decided to break the sacred vow of marriage, and then, like i said before, it wouldn't be an issue of healthy emotion and finance, just finance (or perhaps sentimental value if it was a possession of some sort) but emotonal well being would be done for.

If I may, the flaw in this statement is that the divorce would be just about finances. Emotional welfare may go out the window (which probably happened before the divorce and contributed to the divorce), but divorces are typically emotionally charged. It's that emotional drive that makes people desire to "stick it to" the other person or try to withold support (ie deadbeat parents). I guarantee that a prenup cannot protect a person's finances 100% b/c the other party could easily steal/break/destroy physical property and that would be considered a financial loss that was not protected by the prenup. The fight would drag out in court just to cost the other person more money. And so on. My point is that there are plenty of other ways to try and impose financial ruin on an estranged spouse that a prenup could not protect.

 

[Luther073082]

Is it just me, or does the whole idea of someone planning to "protect" themselves or their money "from" their spouse just seem really really wrong?

The last wedding I went to, the couple used traditional vows. There was something in there about: "for richer or poorer."

Maybe I'm a little too idealistic, but I figure that when I get married my husband and I are inviting one another into our lives forever - to share everything.

The very idea that he might be thinking "I need to protect myself from her" just sickens me.

I would like him to be thinking "I want to share everything with her, life, money, passions, everything I have will be hers and everything she has will be mine. I will be hers and she will be mine." Because that is certainly what I will be thinking.

A little romantic of me, I know. Perhaps naive and idealistic. But at this point I figure that if I don't find that, I'm doing just fine on my own and it wouldn't be worth it to enter into a relationship built on selfishness with someone who is afraid of me, afraid of sharing with me or who feels the need to protect himself from me.

There are no more assurances that people uphold their vows. You know as well as I do that if someone has fifty million dollars and someone marries then and divorces them two months later then they can run off with half of it. Its not moral but the law isn't based on morality becuase morality too complex to legislate.

The problem is that emotionally as much as I feel to that the person really loves me, logically I also know how often things like that happen. "Oh no baby we don't need a pre-nup we'll be together forever". Three months later "I can't stand you, its over, now where's my money."

Never underestimate the power of someone who is lawfully evil.

 

[ido]

I'll tell you what bothers me about the whole concept....

IT'S JUST MONEY.

There is so much more to life than a person's bank account.

Luther, I have to say that for someone that thinks buying a new car is sinful and wouldn't marry a woman that would want a new car - you certainly don't seem to have a problem with protecting the wealth. I would think that you would see it as idolitry of money. That's really what this boils down to - holding on to the money is more important that taking a chance at love.

JMHO

 

[Luther073082]

I'll tell you what bothers me about the whole concept....

IT'S JUST MONEY.

There is so much more to life than a person's bank account.

Luther, I have to say that for someone that thinks buying a new car is sinful and wouldn't marry a woman that would want a new car - you certainly don't seem to have a problem with protecting the wealth. I would think that you would see it as idolitry of money. That's really what this boils down to - holding on to the money is more important that taking a chance at love.

JMHO

Money affects every other aspect of your life, its the leading cause of divorce. Its a source of security.

The only things you can do with money are save it, give it, spend it.

When you already bet your heart on love, then I don't think you should have to bet your money on it as well.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

I'll tell you what bothers me about the whole concept....

IT'S JUST MONEY.

There is so much more to life than a person's bank account.

 

[Luther073082]

Lets not forget that no one would ever marry us to take our money or would typically try anything else to take our money other then basic stealing. We just don't have enough of it.

If I was a financial advisor for a high net worth client and their fiance was of a significantly lower net worth then I would consider it mal-practice to not recommend a pre-nup.

I can't trust that I have judged her charcater better then all the other millionares who have lost their money this way.

 

[Bridgit]

I'll tell you what bothers me about the whole concept....

IT'S JUST MONEY.

There is so much more to life than a person's bank account.

Luther, I have to say that for someone that thinks buying a new car is sinful and wouldn't marry a woman that would want a new car - you certainly don't seem to have a problem with protecting the wealth. I would think that you would see it as idolitry of money. That's really what this boils down to - holding on to the money is more important that taking a chance at love.

JMHO

I know some people who have been taken to the cleaners after a nasty divorce. It might be "just money" but, unless you plan on living in a shelter, without it you can't eat, you can't have a bed to sleep in, you can't have a roof over your head, you can't have a car, no bank will want to loan you anything ..... I would never remarry without a prenuptial agreement.

 

[Tamara224]

There are no more assurances that people uphold their vows. You know as well as I do that if someone has fifty million dollars and someone marries then and divorces them two months later then they can run off with half of it. Its not moral but the law isn't based on morality becuase morality too complex to legislate.

Well the situation you describe is highly unlikely. Property division isn't "you were married, you get half" it is about what is considered equitable. And being married for 2 months doesn't entitle you to half.

The problem is that emotionally as much as I feel to that the person really loves me, logically I also know how often things like that happen. "Oh no baby we don't need a pre-nup we'll be together forever". Three months later "I can't stand you, its over, now where's my money."

What this tells me is that you have a different definition of love than I do.

Love isn't an emotion. Love is a choice. When you "fall in love" with someone there are certainly emotions involved. And I do not discount the power of emotions. However, if you really believe you are at risk of being bamboozled by your emotions such that you think the other person is not really in love with you... Then you aren't ready to marry her anyway because you are misunderstanding what true love really is. You should be able to judge the fruits of the person's character well enough to tell if she really loves you or not.

Never underestimate the power of someone who is lawfully evil.

Right and if my fiance said this to me I would turn from him and walk away forever. If he could even entertain the possibility that I might be evil and yet he still wants to marry me, I would be forced to conclude that he doesn't know me and can't possibly really love me.


The way I think of it is this:

If I were wealthy: I would be willing to share everything I have with a man who loves me. I would be willing to risk all of my money for the chance of a good marriage. I would trust God and my own experience and reasoning to help me evaluate the character of the man I was about to marry. If I had any inkling that he was marrying me for my money, I wouldn't marry him.

If he were wealthy: I feel that if he truly loves me, he would want me to share everything with him and he wouldn't be afraid of me. If he were to ask me to sign a pre-nup, I would be highly offended because it would mean that a) he places his money ahead of me; b) he's not really willing to share with me; c) he doesn't really know me and therefore couldn't possibly love me; d) he is leaving himself an "out" in case things "don't work out" which means that his idea of marriage and my idea of marriage aren't compatible.

 

[ido]

Money affects every other aspect of your life, its the leading cause of divorce. Its a source of security.

The only things you can do with money are save it, give it, spend it.

When you already bet your heart on love, then I don't think you should have to bet your money on it as well.

I'm sorry but I didn't divorce over money. I divorced for reasons much more important - like personal safety. I'm not saying that there aren't people who take advantage of another's wealth, but I think that the person with the money really needs to consider why they are marrying someone that they wouldn't trust without a prenup in place.

 

[kingoffools13]

kof...if you think that a pre-nup is about finances only and doesn't involve emotions then you are either very naive or have no emotional health whatsoever.

lol and you were the one who complained about making generalizations and blanket sweep statments ... I am simply able to control my emotion and not let it get the better of me

You can't separate the two...you talk about the fact that after a divorce the emotional welfare would be out the window...a prenup is singed BEFORE the divorce and BEFORE the marraige - that absolutely affects the emotional well being of the relationship.

they would only affect it if you and i mean you specifically let it. Perhaps if you didn't dig your heels in and get so stubborn on the issue, it wouldn't so adversely affect ya.

And yes, I can talk about emotions in relation to a pre-nup

a pre-nup is not an emotional document by nature, any and all emotions are coming from you, you cloud the issues with your personal emotions and dont actually discuss the issue in an unbiased manor.

you're the one that has wanted to separate the two issues not me...so you can talk about the "logical" financial side of things all you want - feel free....but I will talk about the emotional side as well because there is one in regards to pre-nups.

there is an emotional side to everything when it happens, but in debate you at least attempt to keep a level head or you cant accomplish much

I am sticking to the topic and not wandering off - you just don't like my point of view or the emotional issues that I bring up...

its not that i dont like your point of view, its that i've been waiting for like 10 pages for you to make a point instead of just saying that you have one. I dont mind when people have alternate points of view, just dont debate if you arent going to detail them

You still haven't said what youre really good reasons were, you still haven't listed out a logical though process as to why what you want personaly is more important than what your SO wants.

And i think the reason for both is that they dont really exist, there is no reasonable way of presenting a POV that says what you want matters more than a person you supposedly love to the point of marriage.

K
O
F

 

[ido]

I know some people who have been taken to the cleaners after a nasty divorce. It might be "just money" but, unless you plan on living in a shelter, without it you can't eat, you can't have a bed to sleep in, you can't have a roof over your head, you can't have a car, no bank will want to loan you anything ..... I would never remarry without a prenuptial agreement.

As I said, it's *my* humble opinion. I have a friend right now who left her marriage quite literally with the clothes on her back. She is scraping by and having to make some huge sacrifices, but she's doing it. I just went and asked her if she was making a considerable amount of money more than her current BF if she would ask him to sign a prenup. She said no. We discussed that it's all about trust and that if you need that paper to trust someone, they're the wrong person.

I don't think that losing everything is an automatic reason to default to a prenup. Again - all of this is just my opinion.

 

[ido]

Well the situation you describe is highly unlikely. Property division isn't "you were married, you get half" it is about what is considered equitable. And being married for 2 months doesn't entitle you to half.



What this tells me is that you have a different definition of love than I do.

Love isn't an emotion. Love is a choice. When you "fall in love" with someone there are certainly emotions involved. And I do not discount the power of emotions. However, if you really believe you are at risk of being bamboozled by your emotions such that you think the other person is not really in love with you... Then you aren't ready to marry her anyway because you are misunderstanding what true love really is. You should be able to judge the fruits of the person's character well enough to tell if she really loves you or not.



Right and if my fiance said this to me I would turn from him and walk away forever. If he could even entertain the possibility that I might be evil and yet he still wants to marry me, I would be forced to conclude that he doesn't know me and can't possibly really love me.


The way I think of it is this:

If I were wealthy: I would be willing to share everything I have with a man who loves me. I would be willing to risk all of my money for the chance of a good marriage. I would trust God and my own experience and reasoning to help me evaluate the character of the man I was about to marry. If I had any inkling that he was marrying me for my money, I wouldn't marry him.

If he were wealthy: I feel that if he truly loves me, he would want me to share everything with him and he wouldn't be afraid of me. If he were to ask me to sign a pre-nup, I would be highly offended because it would mean that a) he places his money ahead of me; b) he's not really willing to share with me; c) he doesn't really know me and therefore couldn't possibly love me; d) he is leaving himself an "out" in case things "don't work out" which means that his idea of marriage and my idea of marriage aren't compatible.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tamara224 again.

 

[kingoffools13]

People that let circumstances get the better of them were like that before they "changed" it just took the circumstances to happen for their true colors to show. (IMO)[/url]

this reminds me of T.U.L.I.P. discussions i have had with Calvinists on predestination and salvation.

what you are saying is people dont change ?

My divorce rocked me to my very soul. But, I stayed the course and worked through everything I was feeling and came out whole and healed on the other side. I did not allow the circumstances to own me - b/c I'm not the kind of person that would. If people are owned by their circumstances it is b/c that is how they are, how they've always been.

I'm glad you came out of your divorce and were able to find healing, but what you are saying means that people dont have a choice in the matter ... they will either fail or succeed when the time comes and they have no control over it because it is based on who they were born? ... thats pretty fatalistic thinking

Well then, I guess I don't want a relationship that isn't ideal.

everyone wants an ideal relationship, but what i was talking about was ideal circumstances for a relationship ... ie not the sinful culture we live in today where divorce is as rampant as it is. i dont think i even need to tell you though since you have had the experience that you do, but it reinforces my point that we dont have ideal circumstances anymore

If I may, the flaw in this statement is that the divorce would be just about finances. Emotional welfare may go out the window (which probably happened before the divorce and contributed to the divorce), but divorces are typically emotionally charged.

all the more reason for one side to financially attack the other side

It's that emotional drive that makes people desire to "stick it to" the other person or try to withold support (ie deadbeat parents). I guarantee that a prenup cannot protect a person's finances 100% b/c the other party could easily steal/break/destroy physical property and that would be considered a financial loss that was not protected by the prenup. The fight would drag out in court just to cost the other person more money. And so on. My point is that there are plenty of other ways to try and impose financial ruin on an estranged spouse that a prenup could not protect.

actually it depends on how the pre-nup is written, you can control a lot with them if you want to. as for the emotional part, yes there are emotions there, but (and this is the main point about the emotions) they are not the issue here because they are not trying to build a relationship, they are trying to tear it down. You are talking about two people splitting up permanently, they are no longer trying to worry about or concern themselves with the emotional well being of the opposite party. So while they both have emotions, the point wouldn't be to build these emotions up like it would in a relationship, and as you have already said these emotions provide the exact reason for having a pre-nup, someone trying to take it out on them and make them suffer.

K
o
F

 

[dluvs2trvl]

lol and you were the one who complained about making generalizations and blanket sweep statments ... I am simply able to control my emotion and not let it get the better of me

Actually, I wasn't making a generalization or blanket statement - I was talking about you specifically.

they would only affect it if you and i mean you specifically let it. Perhaps if you didn't dig your heels in and get so stubborn on the issue, it wouldn't so adversely affect ya.

It hasn't adversely affected me at all...and I would venture to guess that you are digging your heels in and being just as stubborn...

a pre-nup is not an emotional document by nature, any and all emotions are coming from you, you cloud the issues with your personal emotions and dont actually discuss the issue in an unbiased manor.

The document is not emotional you are correct...however, there are people involved with the document and they are emotional...well, at least some people have emotions and understand that emotions are involved in a marriage...you also are not discussing the issue in an unbiased manor - all you want to do is stick to the financial, logical side of things and totally disregard the emotions involved...I guess that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black - huh?

there is an emotional side to everything when it happens, but in debate you at least attempt to keep a level head or you cant accomplish much

I have kept a level head but I'm sure you'll disagree with that as well...

its not that i dont like your point of view, its that i've been waiting for like 10 pages for you to make a point instead of just saying that you have one. I dont mind when people have alternate points of view, just dont debate if you arent going to detail them

Then you obviously haven't been reading my posts. I have detailed out my reasons why I think that a pre-nup is a bad idea. However, you don't like them or won't acknowledge them because I do speak to the emotions involved and you seem to think that the only valid reasons would have to come from a more "logical" point of view...

You still haven't said what youre really good reasons were, you still haven't listed out a logical though process as to why what you want personaly is more important than what your SO wants.

Again, I have given my reasons - but you don't acknowledge them because they are "emotional" and not "logical". I never said that what I want is more important than what my SO would want...what I said was that I found it interesting that posters seemed to think that what the person who was requesting the pre-nup wants was more important than what the person who didn't want to sign one wants...

 

[kingoffools13]

I'll tell you what bothers me about the whole concept....

IT'S JUST MONEY.

There is so much more to life than a person's bank account.

Luther, I have to say that for someone that thinks buying a new car is sinful and wouldn't marry a woman that would want a new car - you certainly don't seem to have a problem with protecting the wealth. I would think that you would see it as idolitry of money. That's really what this boils down to - holding on to the money is more important that taking a chance at love.

JMHO

you are looking at it from the POV of holding onto money and miser'ing but we are talking about it in more of a protection stand point.

it is money yes, but money is not just something you can collect, and choose to leave or not. Money, in essence, is concentrated time("how much money do you have on you?" "um... about 2 hours worth" ... lol silly joke). When they take you for half of your money? they are taking you for half of the time you had saved up, taking away, again in essence, part of your life.

When they take you for alimony, they are making you a financial slave, its not just money then, its a requirement that you have to give a part of your life from then on.

so its not just an issue of people being selfish about money or hording it, its not just some possession, it goes deeper.

K
O
F

 

[ido]

this reminds me of T.U.L.I.P. discussions i have had with Calvinists on predestination and salvation.

what you are saying is people dont change ?

No, what I'm saying is that people have layers (you know, kind of like ogres and onions ) and that sometimes the deeper layers don't get exposed right away. But, it's always been a part of them.

I'm glad you came out of your divorce and were able to find healing, but what you are saying means that people dont have a choice in the matter ... they will either fail or succeed when the time comes and they have no control over it because it is based on who they were born? ... thats pretty fatalistic thinking

Quite the opposite, I'm saying they do have a choice but sometimes they get stuck emotionally. I'm not belittling people that get stuck, I'm just saying that they have the ability to reach down deep and find the faith/strength to pull through and heal, but something stops them from doing so.

everyone wants an ideal relationship, but what i was talking about was ideal circumstances for a relationship ... ie not the sinful culture we live in today where divorce is as rampant as it is. i dont think i even need to tell you though since you have had the experience that you do, but it reinforces my point that we dont have ideal circumstances anymore

Anymore? Life stopped giving us ideal circumstances when Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden. The more distrusting and suspicious we become of one another, the further away from ideal ANYthing we get. Why not move in a direction that takes us closer to ideal?

actually it depends on how the pre-nup is written, you can control a lot with them if you want to. as for the emotional part, yes there are emotions there, but (and this is the main point about the emotions) they are not the issue here because they are not trying to build a relationship, they are trying to tear it down. You are talking about two people splitting up permanently, they are no longer trying to worry about or concern themselves with the emotional well being of the opposite party. So while they both have emotions, the point wouldn't be to build these emotions up like it would in a relationship, and as you have already said these emotions provide the exact reason for having a pre-nup, someone trying to take it out on them and make them suffer.

Again - if someone is that hell-bent on making their estranged spouse suffer, they'll find a way. Just as love will find a way, so will hatred if it's given the opportunity.