A relative had end stage cancer. We briefly researched and learned that she could save over $100,000 for the estate if she would do some minimal estate planning, so she was willing and the attorney came to her home and worked with her to understand her wishes and get everything finalized in literally days, finishing less than 36 hours before she died. It did create a trust that was used to distribute her assets and then dissolved. The planning did allow more money to go to the beneficiaries, so it made everyone happy and it really wasn’t that much more of a headache as the trust was dissolved as soon as all assets were disbursed.
I guess I’m ambivalent and would say there is definitely a weighing of cost vd benefits of s trust. If it’s fairly short term, to distribute assets upon death and dissolved, it seems fine. A long term trust is another creature entirely.
I don’t view it as a matter of trust. To me, marriage is a full commitment. Prenup carves something out meaning its not a full commitment. I understand some people want one. I just don’t. And I came into my marriage with more money than did my wife (family wise and income wise). My kids will be adults at that point and can make their own decision. I will offer my view if asked.
i disagree that a prenup necessarily equals “less than full commitment/trust.” I certainly trust my kids to split things 50-50 but I’m still going to write it in my will that way. For that matter, I trust my kids to be responsible with money they are given but I’m still going to parcel it out in chunks of $x over x years versus a lump sum at age 21.
I agree with al2simon it’s probably not necessary for the vast majority of young couples. It wasn’t for me and I don’t anticipate it would be for my kids. We have a family business but they aren’t involved in it.
Whenever money management in general comes up, a lot of women talk about having a small checking account of their own, accountable to no one. I personally never felt such a need - we were all joined from day one - but to each her own. Does that mean such women “don’t trust their spouses”? Or are they smartly protecting themselves by having a little mad money such that if things turned south, they could rent an apartment, etc for a while? I never did such a thing but I can easily see how it’s prudent to do so.
^I’d answer that your two choices are saying the same thing.
And as I said before, my brother-in-law and his wife are splitting after 26 years. And no, just because they decided to divorce, it doesn’t mean they are treating each other badly. That really isn’t how all people behave. And I could have told you that about them at any time.
And I know that would be the same about his brother (my H.) Some people are wired to be honorable. I’m sure that’s true of most people here commenting, too.
I can tell you it did make me feel a bit distant from SisIL when she mailed H a book, Divorce in Hawaii after he told her we were engaged. H laughed it off, but showed it to me. I was hurt and offended.
H and I were pretty open about our assets and debts and roughly equal in “net worth.” I believe I may have been earning slightly more than him and was just starting my profession while he’s been at his for 15 years. We chose to mingle all our finances.
I’d like to think we would be fair and civil if we ever split but am glad not to have ever had to find out. I must admit it took some years before I had “warmer feelings” toward my SisIL (s became her very favorite), tho I understand she was just looking out for her younger brother. Just putting out the perspective of a former bride.
Not if the person accumulated his significant assets himself. There are many people who work in high tech or finance who have multi-million in assets before 30 years old.
My S has amassed a significant sum by age 28 (more than enough to have fully paid for his college private education, but not yet 7 figures). He did it on his own, with one low interest loan from us. He doesn’t work in tech or finance and his salary is 5 figures, but he created a profitable hobby. He graduated in 2010 but didn’t start work until 6/2011. It can be done, especially when folks live well below their means and have initiative and graduate from school with little or no debt.
S lives very comfortably, travels, and has rents a nice condo. He still is an amazing saver.
I’m going to try to explain better what I’m saying:
There are a lot of people in the world that are allegiant to the things, or people, that are important to them, but not to the world in general. Lots of people call themselves “pragmatists”, cut corners, cheat a little, but not in a “bad” way–maybe cheat on taxes, keep money from a found wallet, maybe undermine a colleague to get ahead at work, cut off another driver because they’re late, etc etc etc <fill in="" your="" own="" examples;="" these="" are="" more="" heavy-handed="" than="" they="" should="" be="">. But they’re fine to the person or people they love, cuz they love them.
That sort of person, if divorce happens, may then–probably will-- put that formerly loved person outside the circle, and then–boom! It’s suddenly a matter of protecting themselves, getting ahead, keeping what’s mine, etc. And they look like a different person–but they’re not! They’re being themselves; they just have removed the spouse from the circle of allegiance.
Okay, that’s my dimestore psychoanalyzing for the day…take it as you will, or not–I think I at least explained it to myself well, anyway.
S1’s marriage was unfortunately short-lived, but he and DIL came in with similar income, student loans and assets. They used a mediator, as things were cordial. Even so, he had to give her part of his 401(k) because she hadn’t put as much in hers as he had.
The concern for him will be in a second marriage, as he has a lot of stock grants, earns good $, and lives like a grad student, so he has a tidy amount of savings. He lives in a community property state. He is an absent minded professor about $ – it’s not important to him, so I can see him getting tripped up by not paying attention. OTOH, if kids were involved, I can see him being very generous.
DH and I still don’t have a will. I keep bugging him because there are some specific things I want to do, but we really need to have our wills dovetail. We don’t have an estate that requires estate tax planning, but I do want to make sure my sons and future grandchildren benefit from what DH and I have spent a lifetime building.
I say its a matter of commitment rather than trust. You respond with a prenup doesn’t necessarily equal less than full commitment/trust and then go on to talk about trust. Ignoring the commitment part which is what I said to me is the issue and focusing on trust which I said to me wasn’t. Odd reasoning. Though again, different people will have different views and different approaches. No one approach is necessarily right, right?
@garland, what you say makes sense to me and likely applies to many situations. There is so much emotion in marriage and divorce as well and that has its own baggage.
“And as I said before, my brother-in-law and his wife are splitting after 26 years. And no, just because they decided to divorce, it doesn’t mean they are treating each other badly. That really isn’t how all people behave. And I could have told you that about them at any time.”
Garland, my mother has been divorced twice. The first time after a brief marriage to my bio dad in which I was the only asset that emerged :-). The other was after a 30 year marriage in which they accumulated significant assets - my dad worked and my mom was a SAHM for most of it.
In both cases, everyone acted completely honorably and aboveboard and in good faith. Everything was divided fair and square, there was little to no acrimony, and lawyers were only needed to finalize the paperwork, not to negotiate. I KNOW that people can and should behave civilly in these matters. Trust me. I’ve seen it and I’m glad I only lived through “pleasant” divorces where everyone worked together to make it as painless as possible. My parents greet one another warmly, socialize with one another at family events and act like grown ups. I GET it.
What this has to do with a situation in which a person brings in substantial assets or a family business … Is nothing. I don’t care HOW honorable someone is, don’t you get how the part- owner of a family business needs to ensure that his spouse doesn’t get part of the business (unless that is the overall succession plan)?
I know a family who owns a business that just sold for $150 million. It was started by the now deceased father and is now run (til the sale) by his two sons. You don’t think they should be able to pass the business on as they choose? You don’t think even the simplest of financial advisers would make sure that the business assets stay separate from personal assets?
Dh and I talked about suggesting a pre-nup to S1 then decided that wasn’t appropriate. That decision was about us and our family, but I can see how others might disagree.
D1 is now involved with a guy who earns significantly less than she does. We’ve talked about it (she brought it up) and told her that our main concern is that he’s a good person who truly cares about her and has her best interests at heart. They’ll work out the money/job issues if the relationship continues.
Nope. Don’t get it. A good person says, “this isn’t mine” and a good family-business person says “let’s be sure you’re treated fairly.” Easy peasy.
But I’m happy to see that this discussion has stepped away from distrusting spouses cuz ‘you never know’, to the tiny slice of business interests and what matter to them.
Do you agree that people of good faith and good will could sincerely disagree on what is “fair” treatment in a given situation? For example, we discuss on here all the time whether it’s fair / right to make students whose parents can pay have skin in the game, whether it’s right to give an allowance and if so, how much and what should it cover, how much one might help getting a young person established. Of course we are only dealing with our own families, but don’t you see how people can sincerely differ on what’s the “right” or most fair way to handle a situation? If husbands and wives under non-stressed situations could reasonably disagree that a “fair” allowance for junior is nothing or $200/month, whether they’ll help put the deposit down on junior’s first apartment or buy him an interview suit, you can certainly see how people could disagree when the stakes are higher and the situation more tense.
My DH and I had nothing when we married. The only reason to sign a pre-nup at that point would have been to circumvent our state laws, which state that everything accumulated after the marriage is community property. Since there was an agreement between my DH and me that I might be a SAHM at some point, there would have been zero benefit for me to give up my legal rights.
In most community property states, as far as I’m aware, assets, inheritances, rights to ownership of the business, etc., that are in place before the marriage are not counted as community property, so are therefore protected. I could understand someone who comes into a marriage with assets wanting to protect those assets, most certainly in states which don’t protect those assets in the event of a divorce. That’s where I see the utility of a pre-nup the most, and I would not have had a problem signing something like that in that situation.
Sure. But that’s a different point entirely. That’s not “a prenup in xyz circumstances isn’t smart.” That’s “a prenup makes me feel distrusted or not fully committed to.”
I believe both my ex and I are honorable and honest people. In our case, I was the major breadwinner. When it came to split our assets, what my ex proposed was very different than what I thought was fair. He looked through the lens of he would not be able to earn a living to support the life style he had grown accustom to, so he wanted to get as much as he could get out of marital assets. He didn’t take our kids’ future expenses into consideration. Since our kids were over 18, legally we no longer had any obligation toward them, but in reality D2 was not even close being self supporting. My ex went into self preservation mode. He wanted and needed to ensure his own financial future, and he assumed/expected me to take care of myself and our kids’ future. I think people act differently when they are desperate. It is always easy to be honorable when time is easy.
