Hypothetical Future Divorce

motorguy

Comms69 wrote: »

Don't get married.


(She's one lucky gal!)

To look at marriage from an outsiders perspective (ie, the O/P when they havent yet met Miss Wright) then it makes little sense, however when someone is a strong committed relationship it then can make a lot of sense.

Likewise its easy to forget that Miss Wright might easily have considerable financial assets too, so its rarely a one sided arrangement.

Comms69

motorguy wrote: »

To look at marriage from an outsiders perspective (ie, the O/P when they havent yet met Miss Wright) then it makes little sense, however when someone is a strong committed relationship it then can make a lot of sense.

Likewise its easy to forget that Miss Wright might easily have considerable financial assets too, so its rarely a one sided arrangement.

I don't think people shouldn't get married as a whole.


But anyone who is so obsessed with keeping ownership shouldn't consider marriage as a goal.


It wouldn't end well in anycase.

clearingout

It will be a financial asset in the event of divorce. I benefited from my ex having bought a house before he met me. The house formed part of the divorce ‘pot’.

Doodles

Marriage isn't right for you.

All I hear from your opening post is mine, assets, percentages, divorce, individual, protection, investments etc etc etc.

Marriage is about love, not about fear of needing to protect oneself.

And with that mindset, you are unlikely to hold down a relationship for long enough that marriage would be on the cards I'm sorry to say.

Red-Squirrel_2

Comms69 wrote: »

I don't think people shouldn't get married as a whole.


But anyone who is so obsessed with keeping ownership shouldn't consider marriage as a goal.


It wouldn't end well in anycase.

I agree.

Marriage is right for some, not for others. Its not compulsory but it is kind of a package deal.

If you're asking 'How can I get all the benefits of marriage for myself but not have to make any of the compromises?' then its a sign you're in the second group!

elsien

homeless9 wrote: »

I am not getting divorced, not even close......I am just wondering how to protect my savings/assets from the possibility that one day I'll get married and divorced.

I have a fair amount of savings of which the majority will likely be put into buying a property of my own, with a small amount in investments.

Say......

I buy a property, get a mortgage, I meet someone, settle down, she moves in with me, we get married. Assuming she has less than ~30% of the value of the house in cash to put towards it, then I'd probably choose to remain the only name on the deeds and the mortgage in order to hopefully protect them during a potential divorce.

2 scenarios for you....

1. We have no kids during the marriage, we get divorced....
Would the house remain 100% mine? If not, would a prenup suffice? if not, will anything suffice? I would not allow her to pay anything towards the house, no building extensions, garden patio etc and no electric/gas/water/council tax bills, I'd maybe ask her to pay for Food and any holidays. Also would the cash in my own individual bank account and individual stock broker account, remain mine?


2. We have kids during the marriage, she was/is a stay at home Mum, we get divorced....
I assume I can say good riddance to 50% or maybe more of the house? Even if you bought the whole house before you met your wife, as soon as she has your children and becomes a stay at home mum - you give up ~50% of it to her?

There is just so much wrong with this post that l'll simply content myself with observing that it's a problem that's unlikely to arise.

Comms69

Doodles wrote: »

Marriage isn't right for you.

All I hear from your opening post is mine, assets, percentages, divorce, individual, protection, investments etc etc etc.

Marriage is about love, not about fear of needing to protect oneself.

And with that mindset, you are unlikely to hold down a relationship for long enough that marriage would be on the cards I'm sorry to say.

I do think that's too simplistic. no-one needs to get married just because of love.


It is however a commitment I agree; and one that comes with a lot of responsibilities.

trailingspouse

I actually think the OP has a point.


Yes, marriage is all about love and commitment and being 'in it together'. But we're all grown up and we know that happily ever after is for fairy tales. I think it's wise to know beforehand just how it all works from a financial perspective - certainly not a subject that Disney covers. You wouldn't enter any other type of contract of this size without due diligence.



A full and frank discussion of finances between couples would actually save many marriages.

Comms69

trailingspouse wrote: »

I actually think the OP has a point.


Yes, marriage is all about love and commitment and being 'in it together'. But we're all grown up and we know that happily ever after is for fairy tales. I think it's wise to know beforehand just how it all works from a financial perspective - certainly not a subject that Disney covers. You wouldn't enter any other type of contract of this size without due diligence.



A full and frank discussion of finances between couples would actually save many marriages.

absolutely, I 100% agree. But if the fundamental nature of the contract is that assets become jointly owned. Trying to manoeuvre around that comes across as somewhat immoral.

BrassicWoman

If it helps, I wouldnt marry someone who trusted me so little and expected the marriage to fail


I expect many others feel the same


So it will probaby not be a problem.