Prenuptial agreements

[Shant]

I'm in the Pacific northwest. It's easier to slip into property division than many people think. There's some pretty loosey goosey triggers for common law marriages in many states:
https://www.unmarried.org/legal-info...rces-by-state/.

Have the "reputation" of being married? What are you going to do, run around actively reminding people that you aren't really married to your partner?

Then in states that don't recognize common law marriages you get court-recognized rights to property division such as Washington's "committed intimate relationship" that entitles you to a share of property acquired during the relationship: https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/family...-law-marriage/

The takeaway is that if you think you might need a prenup talk to a local family lawyer before you move in together. Waiting til you get engaged might be too late.

[MPMD]

the hardest thing about pre-nups is that they inherently create some degree of pressure that might make their need more likely.

i totally get it for families with a large amount of wealth. esp if that wealth is felt in the couple. anecdotally it seems like a lot of divorce settlements focus on the lower-earning spouse being kept at the same lifestyle. please don't think this is gendered, the worst divorce settlement i personally know of involved a professional dude hiding assets and artificially deflating his income so that now his professional ex-wife has to pay him a bunch of money in alimony.

i am peripherally involved in a VERY interesting pre-nup negotiation. John is a heir to some truly generational wealth (weekends take the family gulfstream to family compound in Caribbean type wealth), Jane is a professional but kind of just normal position. John's family prenup was shockingly strict to where if Jane divorces John or there is infidelity she gets a one time payment of $50k, returns all gifts, has no rights to house etc etc. In some ways I think it's easy when the family is so obviously part of the aristocracy b/c it comes down to what the family will allow and you aren't going to successfully argue with that. The thing that sucks is that Jane doesn't have much recourse if John cheats or makes her life miserable.

[Shant]

I'd be ashamed to offer that to the person I want to marry.

[Larry Ragman]

My wife and I are at 30+. We did not have a pre-nup and have cheerfully shared alike all this time. I can understand the value proposition when there are family issues (kids, significant property), but that was never an issue. More than I should probably say, but I genuinely think those who force a pre-nup from a position of strength in terms of earning power undermine trust in the relationship.

[xraygoggles]

I'd be ashamed to offer that to the person I want to marry.

Not me, I'm definitely getting a pre-nup. It's just the wise thing to do when there's a relatively large wealth gap (mid-7 figures).

[Shant]

I would not be ashamed to ask for a prenup if circumstances warrant it. I would be ashamed to ask for that prenup. The things being requested show an utter contempt for the welfare of the one you "love", and demanding the return of every birthday Christmas Valentine's wedding and anniversary present you ever give your spouse is just being a jerk.

[AR]

I'm in the Pacific northwest. It's easier to slip into property division than many people think. There's some pretty loosey goosey triggers for common law marriages in many states:
https://www.unmarried.org/legal-info...rces-by-state/.

Have the "reputation" of being married? What are you going to do, run around actively reminding people that you aren't really married to your partner?

Then in states that don't recognize common law marriages you get court-recognized rights to property division such as Washington's "committed intimate relationship" that entitles you to a share of property acquired during the relationship: https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/family...-law-marriage/

The takeaway is that if you think you might need a prenup talk to a local family lawyer before you move in together. Waiting til you get engaged might be too late.

I looked into Washington state a few years ago when the topic came up. It's almost impossible for one party to successfully assert a "committed intimate relationship" if finances are not comingled, and there is no ring. All the cases I found where the court determined a "committed intimate relationship" had one of those two elements. Obviously having a cohabitation agreement would be better, but in the absence of one it's pretty unlikely that a court will find you defacto married. Of course, if that is an actual concern for anyone, consulting an attorney is the way to go.

[Larry Ragman]

the hardest thing about pre-nups is that they inherently create some degree of pressure that might make their need more likely.

i totally get it for families with a large amount of wealth. esp if that wealth is felt in the couple. anecdotally it seems like a lot of divorce settlements focus on the lower-earning spouse being kept at the same lifestyle. please don't think this is gendered, the worst divorce settlement i personally know of involved a professional dude hiding assets and artificially deflating his income so that now his professional ex-wife has to pay him a bunch of money in alimony.

i am peripherally involved in a VERY interesting pre-nup negotiation. John is a heir to some truly generational wealth (weekends take the family gulfstream to family compound in Caribbean type wealth), Jane is a professional but kind of just normal position. John's family prenup was shockingly strict to where if Jane divorces John or there is infidelity she gets a one time payment of $50k, returns all gifts, has no rights to house etc etc. In some ways I think it's easy when the family is so obviously part of the aristocracy b/c it comes down to what the family will allow and you aren't going to successfully argue with that. The thing that sucks is that Jane doesn't have much recourse if John cheats or makes her life miserable.

You’d think her lawyer could negotiate $500k per year or something like that. This is ridiculously one-sided.

[Tim]

Where is Prince Harry and Meghan? I would really like their opinions. When family gets involved, well.....

[Anne]

the hardest thing about pre-nups is that they inherently create some degree of pressure that might make their need more likely.

i totally get it for families with a large amount of wealth. esp if that wealth is felt in the couple. anecdotally it seems like a lot of divorce settlements focus on the lower-earning spouse being kept at the same lifestyle. please don't think this is gendered, the worst divorce settlement i personally know of involved a professional dude hiding assets and artificially deflating his income so that now his professional ex-wife has to pay him a bunch of money in alimony.

i am peripherally involved in a VERY interesting pre-nup negotiation. John is a heir to some truly generational wealth (weekends take the family gulfstream to family compound in Caribbean type wealth), Jane is a professional but kind of just normal position. John's family prenup was shockingly strict to where if Jane divorces John or there is infidelity she gets a one time payment of $50k, returns all gifts, has no rights to house etc etc. In some ways I think it's easy when the family is so obviously part of the aristocracy b/c it comes down to what the family will allow and you aren't going to successfully argue with that. The thing that sucks is that Jane doesn't have much recourse if John cheats or makes her life miserable.

Imagine yourself as a kid born to these parents. Can you imagine your dad’s family treating your mom this way? You would just end up hating grandma/grandpa.

[Tim]

Imagine yourself as a kid born to these parents. Can you imagine your dad’s family treating your mom this way? You would just end up hating grandma/grandpa.

I am not so sure I would discuss this with children. Probably would wait until estate planning and see what those documents contain. Might be tons worse.

[fatlittlepig]

Imagine yourself as a kid born to these parents. Can you imagine your dad’s family treating your mom this way? You would just end up hating grandma/grandpa.

It’s not exactly a believable anecdote.

[Anne]

I am not so sure I would discuss this with children. Probably would wait until estate planning and see what those documents contain. Might be tons worse.

You don’t need to discuss it with children. Children are perceptive, they will figure it out. And if the divorce happens and mom gets 50k and has to return everything with no rights to any property etc of course the kids are going to see that.

[Anne]

It’s not exactly a believable anecdote.

Lol you don’t think this sort of thing actually happens?

[Tim]

You don’t need to discuss it with children. Children are perceptive, they will figure it out. And if the divorce happens and mom gets 50k and has to return everything with no rights to any property etc of course the kids are going to see that.

The blame in a divorce will fall on the DAD or MOM.
But Dad might take them off to the Caribbean island for weekend getaways.
Kids deal with a divorce on an emotional basis.
Rich or poor. It is a “what might have been” process later in life.
The financial implications would result in a “she sure got xxxxx”.
Of course Mom could bad mouth the whole in-law side of the family. Of course Dad could bad mouth the other side. Those actions are harmful to children. Yes they will see different levels of wealth, I doubt they even need to know the details of a divorce settlement. Most would not make the connection to the grandparents unless they were told. The only know the results.

Different situation if they are adults and Mom seeks advice. Dad selfish? They would already know that.