Your thoughts on Pre-Nups?

[Seraphim]

I think you missed my point, the part about it being rare to have joint (or meshed, as you put it) bank accounts AND a successful marriage.

 

To further clarify at the risk of being repetitive: More marriages fail than are successful. In other words the odds of a marriage failing are greater than that of the marriage lasting for the rest of the lives of the spouses. Those failed marriages and the subsequent divorce could be a lot faster and smoother and more fair, especially in the case where one spouse entered the marriage with more assets if they had maintained their premarital assets in separate names (accounts, property titles, etc). Of course a prenuptual agreement would be even better.

 

That would be depending on what study you look at as to what the statistic is. At divorce link removed they say for the US a first marriage rate is 41% 60% for a second marriage and 73% for a third marriage. So as far marriage goes about 59% are successful and even if the rate is 50%, that still means 50% are successful.

[blackhawks1287]

So even more reason to conclude, are you willing to risk your life's work and achievements, along with possible families work and inheritance on a 50% chance of something going to fail?

 

I don't want to risk my hard work that I built without my SO on the fact that I could lose it all with the flip of a coin.

[Fudgie]

I think you missed my point, the part about it being rare to have joint (or meshed, as you put it) bank accounts AND a successful marriage.

 

To further clarify at the risk of being repetitive: More marriages fail than are successful. In other words the odds of a marriage failing are greater than that of the marriage lasting for the rest of the lives of the spouses. Those failed marriages and the subsequent divorce could be a lot faster and smoother and more fair, especially in the case where one spouse entered the marriage with more assets if they had maintained their premarital assets in separate names (accounts, property titles, etc). Of course a prenuptual agreement would be even better.

 

This is true. in the event of a divorce, separate accounts ARE easier to deal with. There is no denying that.

 

You're still an equal in marriage even if you don't make as much money as your spouse. I don't believe that you need to smush it all together in order to be considered "equals". Isn't that putting a lot of emphasis on money? I think so. Despite combining everything together, your husband/wife may still make more even if it's all "our" money and they are still supporting you and "giving" you money. It's just not as overt, like I said.

 

The main advantage to having separate accounts is in the event of a divorce, you get to keep your money. You also get freedom over your discretionary spending without your spouse getting to have say in what you get and vice versa. That's why I would go that route.

[OptomisticGirl]

Same logic can be applied to people who mesh their accounts together.

 

You're suggesting a connection? Even if you could determine that there was a statistical link and accurately say that more marriages fail that have separate accounts than those where the spouses just mix everything together, it cannot be concluded that by separating the funds it caused the marriage to fail, you can't even say with any certainty that the separation of the funds implies a pre-existing problem that eventually was exposed years later. Along the same lines you can't even say with any conviction that people who have separate accounts are more prone to bail because they can make a clean break. It could be any of the above, none of the above, some of the above, or all of the above..

[tresqua]

So even more reason to conclude, are you willing to risk your life's work and achievements, along with possible families work and inheritance on a 50% chance of something going to fail?

 

I don't want to risk my hard work that I built without my SO on the fact that I could lose it all with the flip of a coin.

 

This sums everything up rather nicely.

 

I'd give you a reputation vote but I am unable to do that at the moment due to account restrictions.

 

Same logic can be applied to people who mesh their accounts together.

 

You lost me. Or else there's really no point to 'get' and you're just saying that it's impossible to determine cause and effect when it comes to a marriage succeeding or failing based on whether or not the couple mingles their funds or not and if that's what you're saying then yes I agree because you're agreeing with me.

[Seraphim]

But why is marriage the flip of a coin? I have NEVER looked at it that way. I prefer to see my cup half full than half empty. Maybe that is why a supposed 50% of marriages fail because people approach it with the glass half empty approach.

[blackhawks1287]

And I wanted that rep point...nice tease!

 

But really though. Even if you have nothing, there is something you may get...maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow that you will have to automatically SHARE or RISK TO LOSE, if there is ever divorce. You are protecting each other from the future and with what it may bring. Whether is be polio, a lottery jackpot, blood transfusions and an amputated limb, or a millionaire uncle.

 

People are shallow, perceptions change...who knows what we will have to "put up" with in our latter years so why risk it? I am not saying this is me, but I am a realist. Amputated Veterans who cannot help themselves come home to a wife that is so mad she has to now put up with this man who risked his own life and did this to himself. She resents him for what she has to now live with, cheats and or leaves him, and if she does divorce she takes what she can for her trouble (and I have read of cases like this)

 

You DO NOT KNOW what will happen. Those willing to risk it have a lot more tolerance than myself. My risk tolerance when it comes to marriage does not reflect on my ability to trust or love my partner till the end of time, but it reflects on the lack of predictability of the future...which is how most investments are made. We like to predict the future, but can't always do it and it all depends on our risk tolerance to determine how badly we want to invest ourselves in something or someone.

 

And I am a realist. I am not saying marriage is a flip of the coin, but the mere percentage of success to fail is the same as if you were to. It is an analogy. I will stay in a * * * * ty situation no problem and I wouldn't be the one to openly divorce someone which is why I know I would be safe with a pre-nup...because I wouldn't be going anywhere.

[tresqua]

But why is marriage the flip of a coin? I have NEVER looked at it that way. I prefer to see my cup half full than half empty. Maybe that is why a supposed 50% of marriages fail because people approach it with the glass half empty approach.

 

That much I can tell you is not true. Sure some marriages might appear doomed from the start but not by the bride and groom who are so blinded by their love they don't see the forest for the trees. It's everyone else who knows them well and as they throw the rose petals secretly (or between themselves) they're guessing how long it's going to last.

 

For the most part (and sure there is a rare exception to every rule), people do not expect their marriage to fail when they exchange their vows. Otherwise they wouldn't make them.

[Seraphim]

SOME people are shallow.

[Seraphim]

That much I can tell you is not true. Sure some marriages might appear doomed from the start but not by the bride and groom who are so blinded by their love they don't see the forest for the trees. It's everyone else who knows them well and as they throw the rose petals secretly (or between themselves) they're guessing how long it's going to last.

 

For the most part (and sure there is a rare exception to every rule), people do not expect their marriage to fail when they exchange their vows. Otherwise they wouldn't make them.

 

I just see a lot of self full filling prophesy in people is all.

[Fudgie]

I think you need to go into marriage saying "It's going to be a very tough road but I'm willing to commit to it."

 

I would never look at marriage as a happy, perfect thing. People who are overly optimistic about it get divorced. Why? Because that's not what marriage is about. Their expectations don't get met very quickly and then they get upset and leave.

 

Those who go into it assuming that it will be HORRIBLE, however, do not put forth the effort to make it not horrible and then they too will get divorced.

 

There is a happy medium somewhere. Marriage isn't all flowers and sprinkles and rainbows and it definitely can suck, but it can be very rewarding and provide you with a lot of support and happiness during its good parts.

[Seraphim]

I think you need to go into marriage saying "It's going to be a very tough road but I'm willing to commit to it."

 

I would never look at marriage as a happy, perfect thing. People who are overly optimistic about it get divorced. Why? Because that's not what marriage is about. Their expectations don't get met very quickly and then they get upset and leave.

 

Those who go into it assuming that it will be HORRIBLE, however, do not put forth the effort to make it not horrible and then they too will get divorced.

 

There is a happy medium somewhere. Marriage isn't all flowers and sprinkles and rainbows and it definitely can suck, but it can be very rewarding and provide you with a lot of support and happiness during its good parts.

 

This is all so true Fudgie. marriage sure isn't rainbows all the time. One does however need a certain amount of optimism mixed with realism to have it work out.

[blackhawks1287]

But this matter is not about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

This topic is seen in neutral light. Pre-nup's are not negative nor are they a positive. We aren't getting one to expect things to last and we don't get them expecting things to fail. Getting a pre-nup is simply a means of IN CASE OF, nothing more nothing less. It is a matter of perception of the being whether is can be seen as a positive, negative or be indifferent about it.

[tresqua]

I just see a lot of self full filling prophesy in people is all.

 

Well that's certainly one of the possibilities, that if people consider the possibility that a marriage will fail, and make plans to protect themselves, then it's more likely to fail.

 

But like I said, there's no proof of that, at least as far as I know. That would take some sort of large controlled study, where you compare groups of divorced and happily married people and question them about how they handled their funds and property during the marriage. I don't know that's ever been done.

[tresqua]

Edited to add to above, even if a study was done, and even if it was statistically proven that marriages with prenups fail at a higher rate than those without, it would be a heck of a task to figure out exactly WHY there was such a connection, whether it was "causal" or there was another connection between the two.

[shes2smart]

"Oh, no, I'd NEVER get into a car accident! I'm a great driver. Why do I need car insurance?"

 

"I come from a ridiculously healthy family -- not a trace of heart disease, cancer or diabetes in our gene pool. Why do I need health insurance?"

 

"I'm very careful with my things. I always turn off the stove, I don't smoke, I keep my home perfectly maintained. Why do I need homeowner's insurance?"

 

But somehow, when we try to protect material things in a relationship, the idea of doing so seems unpalatable. Is someone with car insurance more likely to get into an accident? Is someone with homeowner's insurance more likely to have a fire or a tree come crashing through the roof? Is someone with health insurance less likely to get sick? Yet people proclaim people with prenups are more likely to crash & burn.....

 

It's a business decision. It's no more "emotional" than insuring your car or your home. (Unless one or both partners decides to take it as a personal insult...but even then, that's THEIR choice...)

 

...and if you think "business" has no place in marriage, you're in for a rude awakening the first time you clash with your beloved about how to spend or save your money -- no matter if the funds are his, hers or ours.

[DN]

I agree with S2S especially these days. As I said before, my wife and I have been lucky.

 

But here is something to think about. The only wedding vow (and wedding vows are a form of contract) that is enforced by a court in the event of a divorce is the one that has to do with property and money. No one forces you to love, honour and remain faithful etc. but they do force you to pay up.

[SayWhen]

My husband and I have a pre-nup...we have been married for slightly over three months and to be honest the thought of it never crosses my mind. It was my idea and in the beginning he didn't want one, even though he is the one with all of the assets. He said that by getting one we would be admitting to possible failure...and I guess that didn't sit well with him. Well, the reality is no one can predict the future and if we were to one day divorce I can pretty much guarantee it wouldn't be totally amicable and I wanted to protect myself and him from that reality and prevent a future mess by signing what is, in my opinion, a VERY important legal document. Even though we still keep our assets separate, he is extremely helpful/generous in regards to my needs (ie- tuition, housing, food...he is more than willing to provide for what I need, and most of the time without asking)...and I feel comforted knowing that we have that pre-nup...just in case. Do I think we will ever need it? Of course not...but again...there is no way to be sure. I personally think the OP should get one after reading about her financial status...however "taboo" it may be.

 

EDITED TO ADD:

I just read through the thread a bit more thoroughly. Let me just say by NO MEANS does my husband view supporting me or anything I need as "a favor" or "a loan." He says he doesn't even think about it, and that it's natural to him and he wants to give me what I need especially while I am furthering my education. I don't feel like it's an "allowance." That's quite a juvenile way to view it IMO. Even if we had a joint account, I'd still be taking more from his earnings than from my own because I make FAR, FAR less than he does. All of our vacations are paid for completely by him...but again...since he makes a very hefty salary and I make peanuts due to being a student, he wants to pay and wouldn't let me pay even if I wanted to/could. This is a total non-issue for us...we have not argued over money once despite the large disparity between our incomes. It's weird to me that people take such issue with pre-nups...there is nothing offensive about them from my experience...it's a lot more destructive when two people do NOT discuss finances prior to marriage, or just assume this or that regarding who will pay for what...I almost feel like the approach we took is what prevents us from arguing about money. We both knew exactly where the other one was coming from, we drafted the pre-nup together, and we filed it away with our lawyer. What exactly is bad about that?

[tresqua]

My husband and I have a pre-nup...in the beginning he didn't want one .. He said that by getting one we would be admitting to possible failure..

 

There's nothing like a person who just has to state the obvious.

 

"A drowning person isn't bothered by rain".

 

I always liked that one. Not sure it fits here exactly but close enough.

[SayWhen]

I think it's a very common feeling in regards to pre-nups, but of course as everyone here knows there always IS a chance for divorce (and in fact quite a large chance given statistics) so it is something that "goes without saying" I suppose.

[OptomisticGirl]

I agree with Saywhen. The biggest thing I preach is there is no certainity your marriage will last. People change, things change - marriages end for a variety of reasons. But for some, we are willing to risk the financial hurt because to us, it leaves a bad taste in our mouth to even think of signing one. I refuse to say my fiance and I will last forever. I don't KNOW but I have faith we will. But I still would not ever sign a pre nup, Each to their own.

[Fudgie]

Many people when they get married (esp the younger ones, when it's their first marriage) want to believe that there is no chance for divorce, that it is forever and ever. And hopefully it is! But as we know, it's not always that way.

[SayWhen]

Yes, it's important that you do what works for you and what you and your spouse agree on. There is also always the option of a post-nup. If we ever have children our pre-nup becomes invalid and we have to draft a post-nup with our lawyer. Whatever works for each couple is what should be supported, even though I am obviously pro pre-nup just because to me it is a protective document that is nice to have "just in case" we divorce. I certainly don't believe that will happen but it's good to have a little extra security.

[greywolf]

My thoughts: Ideally, I wouldn't want a pre-nup. I'd like to think that I was with someone that I could trust completely, even if we got to the point where we couldn't stand each other. But sometimes we don't always completely know people, and people do change.

 

My own parents, for example: My dad cheated, they got divorced, he threatened to file for alimony if my mom asked for child support... He also put her deeply in debt while they were together. Must be nice marrying someone with more money than you, using all of it, and then leaving.

[Capricorn3]

Since I have a large amount of assets, my mother was advising me yesterday about getting a pre-nup.

 

Does everyone think it spells doom or taking precautions?

Listen to your mother - she is a very wise lady.

 

And NO, it does NOT spell doom. It means you have a very wise head on your shoulders. Go for it!