<p>I know the quick answer is marriage is about love and trust, and what’s his is hers, etc. That’s true. But would you ask your son or daughter to ask his/her fiance to sign one if there was quite a bit of money/property/inherited jewelry, etc. at stake? To many people it seems cold, like reducing the marriage to a business. But if you were the one with the higher assets, and much of them were in your child’s name, how would you feel? Would you leave it to your child to decide? And how would you feel if it were your child who was asked to sign?</p>
<p>The other day I was surprised to find myself thinking, “oh, I hope they have a pre-nup.” I can’t remember what the couple’s circumstances were, but I do recall there were reasons unrelated to marital deceit. Like it was something sudden, tragic, and accidental. Oh, how I wish I could remember.</p>
<p>Anyway, that news changed my opinion on pre-nups. I’m now neutral toward them. I used to be opposed. I think the key is for them them to fair.</p>
<p>I don’t have one, because when we were being married we were both really poor and didn’t think this way.</p>
<p>However, I do think they are useful under different circumstances - when one or both parties have assets.</p>
<p>If one person has a lot of assets prior to the marriage it could make sense to have some kind of protection.</p>
<p>I agree that it is good if someone comes into the marriage with substantial assets. But, to me, anything earned in the marriage needs to be shared.</p>
<p>I/We have one. At 26 years of marriage, it remains to be seen whether we’ll need to invoke it 
. I would however, never bring it up with my kids – their relationships and marriages are their own to negotiate.</p>
<p>If that’s what the couple chooses then so be it. Fine by me. The idea of one being pushed by outsiders is where it bugs me. </p>
<p>We’re getting married with nothing so no need for one.</p>
<p>Don’t have one; wouldn’t recommend them to our kids.</p>
<p>I might have to weigh in for our kids, just to mention it as a possibility. H and I came in with nothing so never thought about it. Now there is enough to think about. But if you have assets that would go to the kids, can’t they be tied up to go to JUST the kids? Of course, then if they share there is not much you can do.</p>
<p>You can’t predict everything, my cousin and wife deeply loved each other, no one would think of divorce, but he got a brain tumor which changed his personality so much they divorced, before the tumor was diagnosed. a prenup might have helped in that case. </p>
<p>The more important question I learned is don’t let your Mom remarry without a pre-nup! Very very very expensive divorce. His kids now have my family’s inheritance.</p>
<p>Our pastor refused to officiate any marriages with pre-nups. We had not considered one, so not an issue. It is certainly an issue for the couple only (not the parents/in-laws)! </p>
<p>I see the benefit for second marriages where there are children (of any age) involved. My grandfather’s third and fourth wives’ offspring are enjoying a higher quality of life than my mom!</p>
<p>In California what you bring into the marriage is your to keep…as long as you don’t co mingle the assets. But a prenup does come into place if one of the partners has the ability to make an extraordinary amount of money…and does during the marriage. There is alsoa post nup. That has more to do with inheiritance by one partner or the other.</p>
<p>AND then you deal with a marriage of long standing…as opposed to the marriage with a prenup that give the husband or wife more access to funds at the 10, 15 etc. There you have the Tom Cruise pre nup who served at least on of his wives divorce papers the day prior to that time frame.</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings about this–didn’t apply in my marriage (H and I had nothing when we got married). However, for my kids, who are recipients of a trust (funded by H and me–as a result of successful business ventures) it is an issue. When we set up the trust our lawyer advised us that when our kids got married they should ask their spouses-to-be to sign a pre-nup. Our oldest got married 3 years ago and we told her what the lawyer recommended. She was concerned and didn’t want to have the pre-nup, so we suggested that she talk to our lawyer (also the trustee) about it–apparently he set her mind at ease and gave her some ideas on how to explain it. Turns out my son-in-law didn’t have a problem signing it–his comment was “I don’t want your parent’s money.” As I understand it, their pre-nup simply states that son-in-law signs away any claims to D’s trust if they divorce. </p>
<p>I don’t know how we would have responded if my D had refused to ask for the pre-nup. It does seem strange to go into a marriage anticipating or preparing for failure, but then we did feel strongly that the trust was set up for D’s benefit (how she uses it is up to her and the trustee) and if my son-in-law benefits from it through her that’s fine with us (in a few years, she’ll get a monetary distribution from the trust).</p>
<p>
This is a good move.</p>
<p>If there are sizable assets, a business, family inheritance, real estate, etc. it’s something to consider at any age. I would absolutely urge my mother to have one if she ever remarried. My Dad did not, but was remarried when I was in hs. He and his second wife did not have children, but if he predeceases her, unless he has stated specifically otherwise in his will, all of my grandparents assets that went to my father will go to my father’s second wife (and then to her family I suppose).</p>
<p>I had a close gf who was getting remarried. Both she and her fianc</p>
<p>I don’t think its a bad idea, depending on the circumstances. If you’re Warren Buffett, or Derek Jeter, or 50-cent, I think there is a reason to have one.</p>
<p>It does make you wonder what the average assets are of someone who wants a pre-nup agreement. I suspect its a lot lower than you would think.</p>
<p>*Our pastor refused to officiate any marriages with pre-nups. We had not considered one, so not an issue. It is certainly an issue for the couple only (not the parents/in-laws)! *</p>
<p>Most/all Catholic priests will not officiate at any marriages with pre-nups unless there are existing children that need inheritance protection in case their bio parent dies.</p>
<p>I’ve never heard of that so it’s interesting to me. Is it because divorces are not allowed*?</p>
<p>^^
Essentially, yes. It would be argued that the marriage wasn’t valid since plans had been made in case of divorce. </p>
<p>A trust fund wouldn’t be that vulnerable in case of a divorce as long as “marital money” doesn’t get deposited into the acct. The problem would be more with bank accts or properties that could then later be argued that community property funds were added or were used for maintenance or payments.</p>
<p>Very interesting, m2ck. Thanks.</p>
<p>I think it depends. When H & I got married neither of us had a thing so a pre-nup would have been silly. </p>
<p>My sister, otoh, went through a terrible divorce which took 5 very long hellish years to get settled, but when she remarried she still didn’t want a pre-nup. If it were me I would have insisted on one. I guess she figured what her attorney could do once she could do again.</p>