Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:16 PM
 
Location: san francisco
2,057 posts, read 3,861,045 times
Reputation: 819

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dissenter View Post
Emotional duress. The man presented her with the prenup days before the wedding. Therefore emotional blackmail.

Amazing what you learn with 2 semesters of business law.
I think we have the real answer. So it was more like a lawsuit? If so, then it certainly was for purely selfish reasons. In other words, she was "under emotional duress" because she knew that with the prenup she wouldn't be entitled to half of his wealth. Selfish woman indeed.

 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:23 PM
 
Location: At the corner of happy and free
6,457 posts, read 6,639,419 times
Reputation: 16232
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia View Post
What is the specific issue--why divorces pay half in the first place? Legally it's equitable and the easiest to process, so it's in the courts best interest. People who don't want to pay half should get a prenup. I can see the merit in having one. Not only can you protect your assets, you can probably name a maximum payout in case of a divorce or require that it be calculated a certain way.
THAT is precisely why some of us are discussing this---because even a pre-nup is no guarantee that things will be divided as you planned. I'd always heard that pre-nups can be thrown out. This article was a concrete example of that happening.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:24 PM
 
Location: san francisco
2,057 posts, read 3,861,045 times
Reputation: 819
Quote:
Originally Posted by chance2jump View Post
It is so very easy to point fingers at the wife in this case. Sure, he made the money, but how about her contributions?

She's been with him since she was 18. She was his arm candy. She was promised a certain level of care and lifestyle from him if she put her own future goals aside to be his young arm candy. She later bore him 3 children. She remained loyal to him, she held up her end of the vow. And, you know DARN WELL that he knew she had no idea what she was signing when he presented the prenup 4 days before the wedding. He gambled that she had wedding bells ringing in her ears, so she would sign anything to ensure the wedding happened. His gamble was right, she signed. She was younger and inexperienced than he, so I would say he took advantage of her naiveness.

How is her entitlement to half of his estate any different than a middle class couple getting a divorce and having to split everything 50/50?

As a successful business man, he should have kept his end of the deal. As a successful business man, he should have been fully aware of the consequences of not upholding his side of the contract. As a divorcee, she was able to prove (from the article) that he had demonstrated a pattern of lying - so, all the haters out there, he should be entitled to dump her on her a** without a dime after a marriage of broken promises time and again? Kudos to her for doing her leg work and creating a case for herself.
She was his "arm candy"? HAHAHA If anything, he was protecting her and at age 18 she hit jackpot! She left her own careers and dreams because she didn't have anything going for her. She knew the guy had it made so there were no reason why she should look for a career of her own. Who cares if she knew or didn't what she was signing up to. Its her responsibility. Now we are a society who award people for being irresponsible? And how did he take advantage of her naiveness? He was simply protecting his own assets. How is that a crime?

How is her entitlement different than a middle class couple? None! That's the point. You get NOTHING if you brought nothing to the marriage. That's the way it should be. What is it with you folks needing this explained? What has this society raised?

Yes, as a successful man, he should have been able to keep his entire wealth without owing her anything. Even if he was a lying manipulating, whatever else you want to call him, his money WAS HIS MONEY. END OF STORY.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:29 PM
 
Location: The Hall of Justice
25,901 posts, read 42,622,264 times
Reputation: 42767
Quote:
Originally Posted by migol84 View Post
So what do you have to say in the case of this woman in this article? Or how would you respond to any women, and in some cases men, receiving half of the assets that a man accumulated before a divorce? What would you say to them? Would you call them out on it?
Like what? Standing outside the courtroom with a sign? Posting nasty things on Twitter? I don't know these people.

I already said that I do not think she deserves half. I'm not going to start calling anybody names over a Yahoo article. It's written to make you mad, and it's working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by migol84 View Post
Why [do you think a wife is generally entitled to part of any money or assets that a husband accumulated during a marriage]?
Because they are operating as a unit for the good of the unit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by migol84 View Post
Okay so we agree on this issue. What is your opinion on women who take advantage of this law?
I think angry people do mean things. They can be monstrous. I also think that the lawyers make it worse.

I didn't marry a rich man. If I did, and we divorced, would I be amicable and not want a large chunk of money? I hope so. Would I sign a fair prenup if I had time to review it carefully? Probably.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:31 PM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,044 posts, read 27,462,475 times
Reputation: 15953
Quote:
Originally Posted by migol84 View Post
Yes, as a successful man, he should have been able to keep his entire wealth without owing her anything. Even if he was a lying manipulating, whatever else you want to call him, his money WAS HIS MONEY. END OF STORY.
Here in orange county, a full time job for a lot of OC housewives involves with beauty routine, yoga lessons, pick up and drop off kids, and afternoon tea time with their girlfriends. I do see your point to a certian degree.

I do agree with others, however, that it is not all black and white. Let's say when two people got married and the wife decided to become a stay at home mother, husband agreed. She really made a sacrifice by giving up on her career for the sake of the overall well being of the whole family. If he somehow accumulated wealth and decided to dump his wife for a younger prettier person, do you honestly believe the wife does not deserve anything? Each situation should be dealt with individually in my opinion.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:38 PM
 
Location: The Hall of Justice
25,901 posts, read 42,622,264 times
Reputation: 42767
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post
THAT is precisely why some of us are discussing this---because even a pre-nup is no guarantee that things will be divided as you planned. I'd always heard that pre-nups can be thrown out. This article was a concrete example of that happening.
Yes. Consult a lawyer and avoid doing things that will cause it to be thrown out of court. A former poster, Redisca, used to give some really good advice about prenups.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:39 PM
 
Location: san francisco
2,057 posts, read 3,861,045 times
Reputation: 819
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
If he somehow accumulated wealth and decided to dump his wife for a younger prettier person, do you honestly believe the wife does not deserve anything?
Not really. Why? The only thing she deserves is support for the children and that's enough. It's her responsibility to have made money before the marriage.

In all honesty, given my personality, I probably wouldn't even mind helping out my ex if it ever came to that... but considering how so many people can take advantage of you, I understand where the guy in the article was coming from. He was trying to protect his assets... and he gets in trouble for it. I can't believe that not many people are speaking out for this guy. The article makes the woman look like the hero and the man like some manipulator.

People say that it's too black and white, etc.... and that the article doesn't give much, but it also doesn't give much of his side of the story either. In other words, the article is speaking in favor of the woman and she still sounds like a terrible person. Think about that.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:40 PM
 
15,714 posts, read 21,039,892 times
Reputation: 12818
Quote:
Originally Posted by migol84 View Post
The real issue is that anyone who makes money during or before a divorce is the sole owner of the money. No exceptions. The only people who should be receiving any money are the children. That is all.

That's awesome. I commend the two of you for it.
I would disagree with this statement depending on the circumstances.

I didn't have formal employment for the better part of 13yrs through our marriage. He and I decided together that it was best for the family if I stayed home with our children. If he up and left I'd absolutely ask for half. I didn't put my family first and make sacrifices (putting my career on hold, moving to another state..etc) so that he could walk out one day and leave us high and dry. I'd ask for half of everything.

HE was able to move forward in his career because I took a step back from mine so we could raise our family the way we intended when we married. If he took advantage of that by claiming all of our assets were "his"...he'd have a good fight on his hands.

Edit: I should add too, the majority of our 401K was my contribution. I maxed that account out in our early years and whenever I did work. We have made gains well beyond what was contributed at this point but I'd have no issue halfing that with him.

Last edited by *Sixy*; 03-12-2013 at 07:56 PM..
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:48 PM
 
Location: san francisco
2,057 posts, read 3,861,045 times
Reputation: 819
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia View Post
Like what? Standing outside the courtroom with a sign? Posting nasty things on Twitter? I don't know these people.
Oh please... you know, what I mean. What is your over all opinion about such people? Do you think they are nice people who deserve love, respect and all that good stuff?

Quote:
I already said that I do not think she deserves half. I'm not going to start calling anybody names over a Yahoo article. It's written to make you mad, and it's working.
But what do you think of such people in general?

You know what I think? I think they are cruel, selfish and I think we should keep making this very thing aware so we can stop this injustice, because it is an injustice. I also wonder about people who don't want to question these things. They should be less apathetic and consider how flawed our court justice is. If we only speak up a little more about this I think they too can benefit from avoiding any issues that they may or may not encounter in their future relationships.

Quote:
Because they are operating as a unit for the good of the unit.
And say a woman decides to leave the marriage. Is she then entitled to that half yet still?

Quote:
I think angry people do mean things. They can be monstrous. I also think that the lawyers make it worse.
Okay, I finally got something out of you. Do you think the woman in the article was a bit monstrous for doing what she did?

Quote:
I didn't marry a rich man. If I did, and we divorced, would I be amicable and not want a large chunk of money? I hope so. Would I sign a fair prenup if I had time to review it carefully? Probably.
My opinion is that if you married a rich man and you both divorced you get nothing of his wealth. Zilch, you understand? Not even a prenup would do anything for you. His money was his money alone even if he made it during the marriage. You would deserve absolutely nothing if you did not bring anything to the table yourself. That is an honest approach. And I am speaking as clearly and as concisely that any rational person can speak.

The only thing you can get is money for the children, if you do have any. That is all.
 
Old 03-12-2013, 07:55 PM
 
Location: san francisco
2,057 posts, read 3,861,045 times
Reputation: 819
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sixy* View Post
I would disagree with this statement depending on the circumstances.

I didn't have formal employment for the better part of 13yrs through our marriage. He and I decided together that it was best for the family if I stayed home with our children. If he up and left I'd absolutely ask for half. I didn't put my family first and make sacrifices (putting my career on hold, moving to another state..etc) so that he could walk out one day and leave us high and dry. I'd ask for half of everything.

HE was able to move forward in his career because I took a step back from mine so we could raise our family the way we intended when we married. If he took advantage of that by claiming all of our assets were "his"...he'd have a good fight on his hands.
Part of the woman's liberation movement was to empower women and give them more opportunities to find jobs, etc. I understand where you are coming from... but the laws in place today make it to where spouses, in most cases women, really take advantage of the situation. I mean they really really take advantage of the situation.

If your husband was a basketball player and he made loads of money, do you feel you deserve half of what he makes?

They should make the law to where any man who is working for a family gets a certain amount of money deducted from his paycheck and given towards the children and his wife. Eventually that amount will climb higher and higher. If at any point there should be a divorce, that money goes directly to the woman and the children. Yet, it is still the man's obligation to pay child support. That is all from there on that needs to occur. Just a thought.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top