Getting married.. prenup?

Kynthia

I can understand having a pre-nup if there's a family business or family home/estate that would be under threat from a divorce. I view these things as belonging to the whole family and not the individual getting married. Also if there are children from prior relationships, particularly if their other parent is deceased as you know some of the assets were build-up by the parent for the future benefit of that child and not a future spouse. Apart from that I'm a believer in becoming a family when you marry and everything being jointly owned, so that you can make decisions based on what's best as a family rather than worrying about what's best for you as an individual in order to protect yourself. Contributions to a marriage and family come in so many forms other than just money and should be valued too.

svain

With the evolution of blended families, multiple marriages etc it is about time pre-nups were recognised in this country

Marvel1

svain wrote: »

With the evolution of blended families, multiple marriages etc it is about time pre-nups were recognised in this country

Or simply don't get married.

svain

Marvel1 wrote: »

Or simply don't get married.

or simply allow people to get married without penalising the better off should it not work out

AndyBSG

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

It's never been 'his' and 'mine', it's all just ours.

With my wife if it was 'mine' it's now 'ours' but if it was 'hers' it still is 'hers'

bugslet

I'm another in favour of pre-nups being made legal. Thinking about what would happen if things went wrong may not be romantic, but it makes a lot of sense a few years down the road when it goes wrong.

19 years and Mr Bugs decides to fool around with some loose knickered tramp. We weren't married (and ultimately got back together). Had we been married, he would have got half the business that I worked my bits off to build up - no he had little to do with it in the first 9 years and was well remunerated in the 5 years he worked for me.

If we had split up because things weren't working out between us and he handled things like a grown up, then there's room or a conversation. But hell would freeze over before the tramp got any money of mine. I once met her and within 5 minutes she had asked, 'so what percentage of the Company does he own?'. Answer from me, 0%. Within two months they were no longer together:rotfl:

Red-Squirrel_2

bugslet wrote: »

I'm another in favour of pre-nups being made legal. Thinking about what would happen if things went wrong may not be romantic, but it makes a lot of sense a few years down the road when it goes wrong.

19 years and Mr Bugs decides to fool around with some loose knickered tramp. We weren't married (and ultimately got back together). Had we been married, he would have got half the business that I worked my bits off to build up - no he had little to do with it in the first 9 years and was well remunerated in the 5 years he worked for me.

If we had split up because things weren't working out between us and he handled things like a grown up, then there's room or a conversation. But hell would freeze over before the tramp got any money of mine. I once met her and within 5 minutes she had asked, 'so what percentage of the Company does he own?'. Answer from me, 0%. Within two months they were no longer together:rotfl:

She was a tramp but he was good enough to be your partner again? Even though he was the one who betrayed you not her?

Amara

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

She was a tramp but he was good enough to be your partner again? Even though he was the one who betrayed you not her?

It's Bugslet's decision. It's a thread about pre-nups, no personal relationships. I believe pre-nups make a lot of sense. People marry then for love, not because someone may profit from it. I really don't think people shouldn't be entitled to anything they didn't work for. Why it's a such problem with not wanting to share family inheritance? Or assets someone gained before we met them? As long as married couple is together , they enjoy each others wealth. Why even honest person would want to get anything, what wasn't theirs, should divorce happen?

bugslet

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

She was a tramp but he was good enough to be your partner again? Even though he was the one who betrayed you not her?

People make mistakes and one in 19 years is not the end of the world, as long as the people making the mistakes acknowledge that and work towards making it right. We went on to have several happy years together until he fell ill.

Red-Squirrel_2

Amara wrote: »

It's Bugslet's decision. It's a thread about pre-nups, no personal relationships. I believe pre-nups make a lot of sense. People marry then for love, not because someone may profit from it. I really don't think people shouldn't be entitled to anything they didn't work for. Why it's a such problem with not wanting to share family inheritance? Or assets someone gained before we met them? As long as married couple is together , they enjoy each others wealth. Why even honest person would want to get anything, what wasn't theirs, should divorce happen?

Just struck me as very one sided, but people do what they need to do to cope I suppose.

I think if you don’t want to go all in and share and be a unit, don’t get married. Not getting married is a totally legitimate choice if you prefer to stay as a fully independent entity. Pre nups are trying to have your cake and eat it, trying to get all the rights and benefits but none of the responsibilities.