is there anyone else who doesn't believe in prenups?

AJoe,

there may be states like that, Cali is pretty screwed up I think. Community property, maybe?

I don't think prenups are a bad idea at all, I just don't think I'd use one. Of course it's all talk until you're actually in a position where you might need one.

I am conflicted because I got married very young with no assets. I am pretty sure that I would have caused a huge family scandal (on both sides) had I requested a prenup. Plus, I would have looked like an idiot because I was worth less than nothing. My wife and I never even discussed a prenup. However, when I see all these rich people getting HOSED out of tons and tons of undeserved money from spouses that cheated on them... I can see why people would want to get one.

I just feel that I am lucky because my wife wouldn't do that to me.... but I'm sure I'm not the only person who has said that. No warning signs, though!!

The institution of marriage is dead.

Average_Joe wrote:

As I understand it there are states that simply have an automatic 50% division, no?

just to reinforce my earlier point, say you are informed about the divorce laws in massachusetts and get married (without a prenup) and live there early on in your marriage. you and your spouse may well have intentionally defaulted to the state law rules governing distribution of assets upon divorce because you thought they were fair and appropriate for your pre-marriage life situation. however, if you move to another state, say california or another community property state, the distribution of assets upon divorce could be very different.

a pre-nup can avoid that messiness and confusion, even without materially altering the original distribution under massachusetts law. you could even just copy that distribution into an agreement and sign it.

my point is, if your sense of a just distribution would be everything accumulated after marriage split 50/50, it may be a good idea to write that up and sign it. if you think it should be 50/50 of everything, pre and post marriage, if the marriage lasts, say, 10 years, then write that up and sign it. a pre-nup doesn't need to protect one person from another. it can simply be a reflection of the values of the two people getting married.

although i must say that i also recognize that standing to gain or lose a certain amount upon a divorce could influence the eventual choice of divorcing or sticking it out. and any provision relating to punishing the person who asks for the divorce could lead to some very unhappy years together. so i'm not suggesting that pre-nups have a magical ability to solve all problems.

How much should one be worth before getting a prenup? I'm still relatively young, I make a decent salary, and I'm a woman, so a divorce would probably result in a 50/50 split. There's not much I couldn't recover from, but it seems like it would be a huge pain to split investments- IRAs, mutual funds, stocks, etc. Even though I'm not rich, I'd like to keep these intact. Presumably whomever I marry would have his own investments. If we kept them separate, could we just make off with what's in our own name or would they have to be divided up?

I'd like to see statistics on probability of divorce for those who signed and those who didn't. Anybody know? I'm guessing the signers are the divorcers. Seems like a real chickenshit move. Nice way to start the most important relationship of your life--shows strong commitment. Cowards.

I'm guessing the non-signers are the divorcers. Frauds.

bump

bad sign wrote:

I'd like to see statistics on probability of divorce for those who signed and those who didn't. Anybody know? I'm guessing the signers are the divorcers. Seems like a real chickenshit move. Nice way to start the most important relationship of your life--shows strong commitment. Cowards.

pure speculation on my part, but i don't you'd see much of a raw correlation (perhaps a better connection if you do a regression analysis). only wealthier, more educated folks will even consider a prenup. those people are probably far less likely to divorce than poorer, less educated people. i believe that economic issues, in fact, are the leading cause of divorce.

perhaps in the early days of prenups, when they were popular among only celebs and the uber rich, you would have seen more of a raw correlation. i doubt it now though.

yetanotherchick wrote:

How much should one be worth before getting a prenup? I'm still relatively young, I make a decent salary, and I'm a woman, so a divorce would probably result in a 50/50 split. There's not much I couldn't recover from, but it seems like it would be a huge pain to split investments- IRAs, mutual funds, stocks, etc. Even though I'm not rich, I'd like to keep these intact. Presumably whomever I marry would have his own investments. If we kept them separate, could we just make off with what's in our own name or would they have to be divided up?

again, this is my point about reliance on the default laws of the state. of course, if you were to divorce in the future, there is no reason why you couldn't split your assets however you pleased (if you come to an agreement on your own, the state laws will generally be irrelevant, except for child support which is considered from the point of view of the child, so a parent cannot give that up without a court's consent). the idea of a pre-nup is to come to such an agreement while you are happy with one another. say, for example, that it is your intent to split as you suggested but it turns out that you want to leave your husband for another guy. at that point, your husband might not be so keen to let you have your way. or vice versa.

for something as vanilla as 50/50 of all assets with a carve out for retention of personal retirement accounts, there is no reason why you couldn't draft it yourself.

thin naked and alone wrote:

My second marriage was to a younger woman with very little money. I own a small corporation with about 80 employees. Sadly, she cheated on me, dumped me and we got a divorce. I would have lost my business and my long time employees would have lost their jobs without the pre-nup.

I never thought I would need it, sad I had to use it but there are certain times and situations they are a big time lifesaver.

Great post... While not necessarily romantic or unromantic (maybe non-romantic), the pre-nup is a lot like an insurance policy. You don't buy car insurance because you plan on crashing your beautiful new car, or you don't buy health insurance because you plan on getting sick. You won't know you need it until it's too late, and then you'll either have planned ahead or screwed yourself...

kaitainen wrote:

pure speculation on my part, but i don't you'd see much of a raw correlation (perhaps a better connection if you do a regression analysis). only wealthier, more educated folks will even consider a prenup. those people are probably far less likely to divorce than poorer, less educated people.

I would guess pre-nups are more common in 2nd, 3rd, etc. marriages, and those are much more likely to end in divorce. But, as always, you have to be careful about equating correlation and causation. There's no reason to believe getting a pre-nup would cause you to end up divorced, even if the two are correlated.