Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if you are in your 20's and dont have a lot of money currently, but have the potential to earn a lot of money in the future?
No offense, but that just sounds like an inexperienced kid and a bit silly. Given that likes tend to go with likes you will probably end up with a financial equal who has the same potential.
I'm speaking of both career and family inheritance. Would you consider your spouse completely entitled to your parents earnings/properties/investment they left you as their child?
That automatically stays sole and separate without any sort of prenup. If you get a large inheritance talk to a lawyer and accountant about how to avoid co-mingling it before you get the money.
Depending on the length of marriage, some states do provide for spousal support. A failed marriage may end up costing you in the long term.
Another issue always revolves around inherited wealth and gifts. Although they technically aren't marital assets, sometimes ownership gets transferred around over the course of a marriage and they inadvertently become marital assets. Also there is sometimes the issue of increase in value ... if you inherited a house 20 years ago and have been renting it out technically the spouse may be entitled to part of whatever income generated by the house?
In this day in age, better get it down on paper.
I should have expressed my point in more detail. To me, a prenup or marriage license is all the same. Why? Prenups can be thrown out in court. Either of these types of paperwork are too risky. I favor the idea of marrying solely for love and not business partnerships, which means only having the ceremony and avoiding residence in a state that recognizes common law marriages.
I should have expressed my point in more detail. To me, a prenup or marriage license is all the same. Why? Prenups can be thrown out in court. Either of these types of paperwork are too risky. I favor the idea of marrying solely for love and not business partnerships, which means only having the ceremony and avoiding residence in a state that recognizes common law marriages.
Anything "can" happen, but if you followed established law (i.e. full disclosure, having an independent attorney review her agreement, ample time to review) in this state they are bulletproof. The only time a court will ignore it is when there are kids (that belong to both parties, not step kids) that are getting screwed out of support.
And even if some parts of it get thrown out, you are still better off with a prenup than without one. While they may throw one or more provisions out, it is not likely the whole thing will be thrown out.
Anything "can" happen, but if you followed established law (i.e. full disclosure, having an independent attorney review her agreement, ample time to review) in this state they are bulletproof. The only time a court will ignore it is when there are kids (that belong to both parties, not step kids) that are getting screwed out of support.
And even if some parts of it get thrown out, you are still better off with a prenup than without one. While they may throw one or more provisions out, it is not likely the whole thing will be thrown out.
Different strokes for different folks. I am a very careful person overall, which is my philosophy veers closer to avoiding it completely instead of taking a chance that only some parts will get thrown out.
I won't even get into the potential pitfalls in the courts with kids, I'll save that for a thread related to the subject.
Different strokes for different folks. I am a very careful person overall, which is my philosophy veers closer to avoiding it completely instead of taking a chance that only some parts will get thrown out.
There is worry over what is likely to happen and then there are people who worry over fluke situations. The situation you describe would be a fluke very unlikely to happen. Put another way, you don't live underground for fear of being hit by a meteor or a tornado, do you? The situation you're describing is along those lines.
Very, very unlikely to happen and I am in a position to know these things
If you want complete safety, you don't marry. Otherwise, you are far better off with a prenup than without one, especially if what you bring to the marriage is in the 6 figures or more.
It's like having insurance on your house. Even if you never use it, if you need it you'll find the cost was well worth it.
When we got married neither one of us had anything to worry about preserving. So the answer would have be no because I would be entitled to half of whatever we built together. If I had to re-marry at this point in life then yes I would sign a prenup and ask him to sign one as well.
Same with me. My husband is the closest person to me in the world and my only family. If he asked me to sign a prenup, my feelings would've been incredibly hurt. Other people can argue all they want that it's just a precaution or whatever, but I feel differently about it and that's just me.
But, we are young and we don't have a lot of material posessions. I can see how that would be different though if you are older and have spent your entire life saving money to buy a house or something like that. That's a different story. Whatever you get throughout your marriage is something you both work towards and sacrifice for, so it belongs to both of you.
It would have made no sense for me and my late husband, we both made equal money and acquired our assets together.
It would have made more sense for myself and current husband because we both have assets, and he has children, but we didn't. If he would have asked, or I would have asked, either of us would have done it.
Same with me. My husband is the closest person to me in the world and my only family. If he asked me to sign a prenup, my feelings would've been incredibly hurt. Other people can argue all they want that it's just a precaution or whatever, but I feel differently about it and that's just me.
But, we are young and we don't have a lot of material posessions. I can see how that would be different though if you are older and have spent your entire life saving money to buy a house or something like that. That's a different story. Whatever you get throughout your marriage is something you both work towards and sacrifice for, so it belongs to both of you.
A joke I always tell people about computers and how they've made life more complicated is this: You can pull out any lease or contract used by most Fortune 500 companies from the 1960's, and it was 10 or 12 pages long. Nowadays, for your typical McDonald's Restaurant it might be a 50 page lease.
In the old days, nobody wanted to waste their time typing and reviewing these things, so they cut to the chase. Nowadays, because it's so easy to pull things off of the computer everything has become so legalistic these days.
Likewise with prenups. They are not uncommon nor really anything to get offended about, especially these days. If someone is coming to a marriage with money or likely to inherit money, it is a prudent step to take.
I have signed a pre-nup (late husband) and will again in the future. My pre-nup with DLH was designed to simply be FAIR, in our opinions. Nobody was out to screw anybody over
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
