I wouldnt say so much its case of ‘should’, as it can take some time to figure out how to make those kinds of relationships work, particularly when it comes to discussing money. Trying to race through all that just before getting married is asking for trouble later, given money is often the biggest stress on a relationship anyway, and this is potentially money issues on steroids.
Its not only about ‘you’, its about things like how you’ll end up talking about things like what the children get or how decisions like where you live will get decided. Otherwise you might stay with the other person out of love, and find yourself breaking up with them in ten years so the children can go to college or have a better home for instance.
If he doesn’t like me enough to want to share his life & things with me…
And he doesn’t trust me enough to tell me who he is …
And he doesn’t know me well enough to know how I’ll feel about being lied too for the whole time he’s known me …
Then he’s not perfect for me and we shouldn’t be getting married in the first place. He can fuck off, preferably with my boot up his ass.
And yeah, I do see it as lying, especially if he gives me a song and dance about hating his family. But even if he won the the lottery and turned up with a pre-nup at the last minute, I’d have to think, "wait a minute - we’re planning our partnership, here, and suddenly you’re all “Mine! Mine! Mine!”?
I’m more curious about their careers and child care. Are they dipping into the trust for a nanny? Did he take a few years of paternity leave? If one of their employers moved cities, whose career would win out?
I’m with the ‘Thanks for the memories but no’ crowd. If I could know so little about this guy’s childhood that he’d be able to spring this on me, we’re not ready to get married.
Not only would it not bother me to sign it it wouldn’t bother me that he’d lied. It makes sense.
It’s just money anyway. There are far more important things to worry about. Why don’t they make pre-nup agreements where if one person gets caught cheating they must have the word “Adulterer” tattooed on their forehead? Why not “If things go well for the first 20 years we’ll go 50-50”?
Someone who asks for a prenup is asking you to give up any future income in the event of a breakup. They are automatically discounting any contribution you make to the marriage in advance. They are also assuming you will break up.
As to the entitled bullshit, I’m basing that on my past experience dealing with rich folks. Either you love someone or you don’t. If you automatically assume someone is a gold digger and you need the prenup, then you shouldn’t be marrying them.
If you have so little trust going in how the hell could you possibly expect a marriage to work? To me, the assumptions on their part would be enough to make me walk. I don’t play head games, and the idea that someone would hide something from me and then drop something like this at the last minute with an ultimatum is the mother of all head games.
As for the trust not being community property, in many states, if money is withdrawn and put in a joint account, it magically becomes community property. I’ve been both the main wage earner and the supported partner in a marriage and I don’t see how it’s fair for the wealthier partner to say ‘my money is my money.’ It’s a partnership. If one partner is ill, the other takes up the slack. Someone who asks for a pre-nup would probably trade my ass in if I got sick, or if I gained 20 pounds, or for any number of bullshit reasons because for them it’s not about love, it’s a business deal.
No, they aren’t. For one thing, in a case like the OP’s, they’d be asking you to give up money you had absolutely nothing to do with earning; money that was earned before you ever met, possibly before you were even born. It has nothing to do with any contributions you may or may not make. So many people get married because they’re in looooooove and completely disregard all of the legal things that change. They look at all of the people who get divorced every day and stupidly assume it could never happen to them because they’re so in loooooooove. Pre-nups are a way to make sure things end fairly just in case you do break up. They’re also customizable. Both parties can work together to come up with one they both think is fair - it isn’t some one-sided deal designed to cheat anyone out of anything they deserve.
Marriage isn’t just about love and romance, which becomes very clear when you watch some poor sap get completely screwed over by legalities in divorce. You don’t always know someone as well as you think you do.
I voted that I would not sign that pre-nup under those conditions, but your OP did say negotiations were a possibility. And I might sign a re-negotiated one.
What if she cheats on me? Basically, whatever behaviors that I might do that she wants to penalize, we must write in a penalty for her if she does that same behavior.
No more than putting your seatbelt on is evidence that you’re assuming you are going to crash.
I’d have no problem signing the pre-nup: I’ve heard enough horror stories that I’d forgive this caution. I’d have more of a problem with marrying someone who possesses $50 million but lacks the desire to use it. Even if she just funnelled off 5% of the interest each year and gave the other 95% to charity, that’s enough that we’d never have to work again, giving more time to do the things we want to do in life.
No, the reason pre-nups exist is so people can get out of the obligations that already exist in their states of residence by law. The only reason a person would have you have a sign a pre-nup is because they’re already thinking of screwing you over.
I wouldn’t have an issue signing a pre-nup in this case, after having it vetted by my attorney of choice and likely making a few changes (make the infidelity thing on both our parts, no penalties for providing no heirs). I don’t take more financially from a relationship than what I brought / put into it.
As for having kept it a secret, like a few other posters, I could easily understand the reasons why.
Just because it is the law does not inherently mean it is morally right. I would not be going after her trust fund if we broke up anyway, so I don’t mind putting that in writing.
Absolute rubbish. It might mean she’s afraid that I’m going to screw her over, seeing as she’s the one who has the most to lose if the marriage collapses.
I’d be there for the ‘her’, not the ‘her stuff’. I was raised to think that people work and that it keeps them strong and alive. When we stop, we die (my cite is Florida and % of people who die w/i 2 years of retirement). And if she wanted me, she’d want a guy who works and brings home some sort of paycheck, not a Leech*.
I would sign without reservation. I would be marrying her because I loved her and wanted to spend the rest of my life with her. If it happened not to work out I would be devastated, but I don’t see how that would entitle me to her previously amassed fortune.
Any children in the mix would change the equation dramatically, but that is not the scenario in the OP.
For the record, I had significantly more assets than my wife when we met, and she graciously offered to sign a pre-nup (I didn’t bring the topic up). I appreciated the offer, while at the same time being horrified at the thought of asking the woman I loved to sign such a document. Even if it all went wrong I would have rathered lose 50% of what I owned than go the pre-nup route. But if she had happened to have lots more than me and wanted a pre-nup then I would have signed it. I didn’t deserve her then and I don’t deserve her now, so if she wanted some protection for her assets I would completely understand.
As it happens we went through a tough time many years ago and I made it clear to her that if she decided to end it all then she should keep the kids in our house and I would move out while continuing to pay the mortgage as best as I could. Fortunately she overlooked my shortcomings and we are still together.
Nashiitashii and I have a Prenup. Neither of us are wealthy by any measure at all but we did feel it was important to make our wishes known and not leave things to the state in the event of something bad happening. Mostly it protected things that we were bringing to the table and prevented them from being mingled and made certain that certain debts stayed separate in the event of a divorce. For example, she has a student loan debt from her Master’s degree, and while we happily pay that bill from our joint income, if we were to divorce, I’m not assuming half of the balance on something I cannot use and only she will benefit from. We set forth some other things such as division of certain property like vehicles, etc…and left room for changes later. We put in that any property we couldn’t agree upon dividing would be sold and the money split rather than leaving it up to lawyers.
When it comes to money it is not about emotion and trust, it is about doing the smart thing. If you can’t have a frank discussion about money without getting emotional then you aren’t ready for the legal commitments that marriage brings.
I can actually see this - over the last month, I’ve spent a bunch of ostensibly-free time taping, putting down tarps, standing on stepladders, waving paint brushes around, and cleaning them. It’s annoying work and I’d rather be doing something more fun, but the bathrooms have to be painted, and both of us have been pitching in on it. If I knew my wife could easily afford to hire a damn professional to come in and do it for us, but she wouldn’t because she’s playing some kind of game with herself, it would bother me.
Would her reasons matter? Suppose the family fortune were made in an illegal or immoral way, and she felt it was wrong to benefit from it in any way? I mean, you wouldn’t hold it against your wife for refusing to take a high-paying job as an assassin, prostitute, or some such, even if she were offered, would you?