One day, while going about your usual lonely business, you meet someone who seems perfect for you. You share interests, but disagree enough to make for stimulating conversation; you find each other’s jokes amusing and always known when to let the other cry; and the sex is bedframe-shatteringly fantastic. The only thing that causes you any concern is that you never meet your lover’s parents.
After a year together, you decide to get married. (For purposes of this discussion, please assume that, if this would be a same-sex-marriage, you live in a state that allows such.) It is your lover who pops the question. After you say yes and as the wedding planning is beginning, your lover reveals something you didn’t know. She or he comes from a filthy rich family, with a fortune in the billions; your lover lives modestly because she or he prefers it that way, but has access to a trust fund worth well over $50,000,000. Your lover asks you to sign a pre-nup before things go any further, the terms of which will restrict you to no more than a $1,000,000 payout if the two of you divorce before five years have passed–and absolutely nothing if you are ever unfaithful. Your lover is willing to let you have a lawyer look the paperwork and maybe even to negotiate slightly different terms–but if you refuse to sign, the wedding’s off.
I stated that I would refuse to sign the pre-nup, but in reality I would also refuse to marry him. This would be the end of our relationship because he spent our entire dating life lying to me.
You want me to swear forever to you, you’d better mean the word partner in every possible sense of the word.
I could, one day, be changing your diapers, or deciding to pull the plug, and you’re worried about some money? Clearly you’re not the man for me, I’m out of there.
( I actually know a man who hid a large portion of his wealth from his new wife. He gigglingly told me how cute, he thought it was, that she was watchful of their expenses and spending, when he had this money she didn’t know about. A case of knowing he had money, but nobody terribly sure exactly how much. He wooed this woman with expensive restaurants, exotic holidays, fancy cars and jewelery, but he won her so figured it was all worth it. When divorce came round, I walked into a conversation, of his friends, all bemoaning what a heartless money-grubber she was. I was quick to point out that when you win a girl by throwing your money around, you shouldn’t be too surprised to learn she’s all about the money. They all just stared at me, mouths agape, so I apologized and suggested they return to trashing their friend’s’ soon to be, ex-wife. They were all, ‘You stay out of this, nobody asked you, this is why we like your husband better than you!’)
I think the OP implies (and is certainly meant to) that he doesn’t live off the trust fund, but rather his ordinary job. Suppose he, say, periodically signs papers assigning his income to the trust to a worthy charity (Rehabilitate Abused Flying Monkey Henchbeasts, say) and wants to make sure said charity keeps going. Assuming you never asked him “Hey, are you that Jack Carter who is heir to the Carter fortune, earned from the tears of suffering orphans” and he has simply never volunteered the information, has he still been dishonest?
Assuming I love her, I’d sign up with no hesitation. If I’m getting married to someone, why do I care about the money NOW? It didn’t impact me earlier.
But since the lover lives modestly, and thus is not taking advantage of the trust, is she or he not actually asking you to accept the same conditions under which she or he lives?
Well, yeah. But how is this relevant? Your lover wooed you WITHOUT flashing the Benjamins, and doesn’t use them his ownself.
It would be very weird. Did she never talk about her family, or growing up, or reveal a casual acquaintance with various foreign parts that she’d traveled to as a tourist as a child, or the mechanics of a household with more than one servant? No notion of going to an elite private school or never having to worry about paying off college loans?
Not meeting the parents (in over a year) would be odd. Not knowing a thing about them would be doubly odd. I could imagine getting along with someone under those circumstances, but. Weird.
I don’t have a problem with pre-nups in general. I think they can serve a good purpose, but only if you’re worth a LOT of money.
In this situation though, I’m with the people that say the person is dishonest and I would possibly end the relationship because of it. I’d be pretty hurt they thought they had to hide something so important from me. If I’d known about the money from the beginning, I wouldn’t have much issue with a pre-nup.
I gave serious thought to never introducing my then-girlfriend-now-wife to the family before we married.
If you asked your lover, before the engagement, about his or his parents, and was told, “You know something? I hate my family. I don’t mean I don’t want to be around them at holidays. I mean I despise them and their values and what they did to me while growing up, and even talking about them gives me hives. Please don’t make me talk about them,” would you have accepted that?
But you said he wanted to limit my share to $1,000,000, in the event of a divorce. And a penalty if I am untrue. Sorry, no sale.
We’re either partners, or we’re not.
I’d have no problem living modestly and giving it all to charity. But we’re equals in everything or it’s off, sorry. For me it’s about trust. If you don’t trust me with your money you shouldn’t be marrying me. If you’d trust me to bear/raise your children, care for you if you become infirm, pull the plug when the time is right, then you should trust me with a partners share of your money, in every instance and situation, without reservation.
I’d sign. It’s not my money. I’ve been married 3 times. The first two I walked away with my sanity and dignity. That was all I needed or wanted. I earn my own way in life.
Not a big fan of a hidden reveal right at the cusp of marriage. Kind of manipulative and puts your relationship in an utterly different context. Would probably pass WRT what it reveals about SO’s character.
I said I would sign and I don’t see this as a betrayal to not mention. I think at a lot of people who grow up with money get used to being liked for their money first and themselves second. From the OP this is someone who has made a radical change to their life on their own, and after coming to know and trust me is now willing to share that knowledge. Hey from my perspective I fell in love with someone who had nothing and the prenup doesn’t change that.
We would definitely have a long conversation about trust and keeping things back but it would come from a perspective of understanding why they made the choice to hold back up to this point but if we are now saying we trust enough to get married there are no more secrets.
The five-year clause I could deal with- heck, it’s just five years, and I could see someone exhibiting that kind of caution to make sure I’m not just marrying them for the money.
The infidelity clause would stop me from signing, though. He’s trying to use money to assure my faithfulness, while providing no similar guarantee to me? I’d rather not be with someone like that, thanks.
I would sign the pre-nup. I generally feel like they are a great idea. I would certainly have the agreement reviewed and negotiated by an attorney of my choosing.
I would have questions about the money, though. Like, if the person wants to live modestly, why are they so concerned about protecting the money? With that kind of cash I would want my partner to be investing into making the world a better place. Anyone who wouldn’t be doing something good with that kind of cash wouldn’t share my values and therefore wouldn’t be a viable partner.
And I’d be pretty annoyed they didn’t tell me about all this sooner. I like modest living, too, and he should know by now he can talk to me about the money.
I guess the pre-nup would not be the problem, but there would be a problem.
Suppose you share this with your lover, and he says, “You know, you’re right. Sorry, I should have thought of that; I just went to the lawyer who admnisters the trust and asked him to draw me up a pre-nup, and I don’t know him all that well. Anyway, would you rather add on a mirror clause invalidating the pre-nup if I cheat, or remove the infidelity clause entirely? Either is fine with me.”