SO - did you/would you get a pre-nup?

[bigbabyblues]

Nope. We got married at 20 and 21, and we didn't have anything to protect. We have been married for 20 years and most of our money is joint. He makes a lot more money than I do, he always has, but it works for us.

Very unlikely that I would ever get married again, even if something happened to him. I can't even imagine that I would want to date anyone else.

 

[dosekies]

I don't think I will. Fiance and I really don't have any money or anything the other would try to take. Except the dog. She would be what we would fight over.

 

[NHdisneylover]

We did not. We were 23 and fresh out of college and poor. We had been dating since we were 18/19 (started dating in the two months between our birthdays) and neither of us had some family property or the like to protect.

Personally---I can understand it if one or both parties has substantial assests, especially family things that they had inherited not earned themselves (or earnings and chidlren to take care of). Not my thing, but I get why people would feel such items are not theirs to "risk" or share with someone not in the family by blood.

Also, personally, I would never marry someone who wanted a prenup which stipulated that portions of the assests built once the relationship began would remain with that person if it were dissolved (so the person earning far more wants prenup stating that 80% of all savings, or their pension or what not would be theirs post divorce). In my opinion, I would never marry someone who did not see our relationship as a full partnership in which both parties are equally vested. EVERYTHING earned/built/bought/etc while we are a couple is earned/bought/built through our joint team investment in this marraige and belongs to us both. Full stop. Any less of an emotional investment in US than that and that would have told me I was marrying the wrong person.

(BTW, we've been married 22 years---23 in March. I am totally in love with DH and I fully believe the feeling is mutual).

 

[Colleen27]

No and no. When I married DH, we were young and broke. There were no assets to protect and everything we did have was a joint effort (we actually delayed our wedding to jump at a good deal on a house and then started saving for the wedding we wanted all over again!). And if we were ever to divorce, I don't see myself marrying again. I'd date, maybe even live in sin with the right guy, but I don't attach a lot of importance to marriage for its own sake so without minor children to consider I probably wouldn't take that step.

 

[rigs32]

Divorce is not an option for many couples because they are in a committed and loving relationship.

I would guess that many people went into marriage committed and loving. If one party wants out, the other cannot stop them from leaving. If abuse develops down the line or infidelity, can you really fault someone for wanting out?

I don’t think it’s a personality fault either way. Some people are willing to trust implicitly. Others want to ensure they are protected in case the worse scenarios happens. I see a lot of judgment from either side in this thread towards those who feel differently to themselves.

A PP mentioned insurance - no one expects to get into a car accident or get flooded or have the house burn down. But no amount of food intentions or faith can stop others from making choices or acting a particular way.

 

[kirstenb1]

Nope, married at 23, young and broke. Still married 28 yrs later. I can see why wealthy people have them, especially with a second marriage.

 

[Soldier's*Sweeties]

Nope. We got married at 20 and 21, and we didn't have anything to protect. We have been married for 20 years and most of our money is joint. He makes a lot more money than I do, he always has, but it works for us.

Very unlikely that I would ever get married again, even if something happened to him. I can't even imagine that I would want to date anyone else.

Same here.

 

[FairestOfThemAll37]

I would absolutely not marry without one. I believe marriage is forever and only plan on doing it once. I also believe I truly have an impeccable judge of character, I can count the number of times I’ve been wrong about people on less than one hand lol.

That said, I’m not so arrogant as to think that I know the future. I wouldn’t stay in a marriage no matter what, there are absolutely things I will not tolerate. To me the two commited people part is true but does have some caveats (eg. both people are commited and one turns abusive-nooope that’s not really about commitment then, it’s about safety). I can trust in who I choose but I can only control myself.

I have trust and faith but am also a realist and extremely risk averse.

 

[TipsyTraveler]

I think they're a good idea and yet we still didn't get one. We started dating as teenagers and were together 17 years before we got married. By that point our lives were already so enmeshed that any assets worth protecting had been acquired together and were owned jointly anyway. Oops.

 

[pate59]

First marriage for both my husband and I (39 & 35). He had no money, and I had some due to good planning and working quite alot.
He would have been willing to sign a prenup - no issue. Me, I was good without one. Of course, no children or property were involved.
Still together after 20 years. Everything considered joint at this point as far as we are concerned anyway.

 

[disykat]

Like others here, we had no assets and were going to build all our assets together so NO. I did not and would not in that case. I would have seen it as a red flag if one of us was basically saying I don't want to share what we accumulate together.

However, if there were assets from prior commitments that needed to be protected (family money, family business, children who needed to be protected, etc.) I would not only agree to it I would insist on it.

I believe assets accumulated during a marriage are joint. However, family businesses etc. muddy the water. When DH almost went into his family's business a few years into our marriage, I definitely wanted legal protection for everyone. Not only could his family's assets have been at risk at that point, but my family's assets (inheritances, etc.) could have been as well.

I absolutely believe that people should go into marriage believing that it will be forever. Beliefs and reality don't always match and there's no need to put your head in the sand. IMO it's no different than disability insurance, etc. that we don't plan on needing.

 

[Kathryn Merteuil]

Nope, never had one.

 

[jevs]

Prenups rarely stand up in court here so I wouldn’t bother. There are other ways to protect your assets such as staying single or not moving in with others. In general, assets from before the new relationship are left untouched unless there are children from that relationship.

Amberpi you sound obsessed with money, does it keep you warm at night? Sure, it’s important but it isn’t the be all and end all of life. What is going to happen to the estate your mother owns when you’re dead, I can’t recall if you’ve stated you have siblings with children.

 

[Runnergal]

Yes, we have one. Dh has a family business. I didn't really blame them for wanting to protect it.

 

[cruisingtwins]

We don't have one but if I were to get married again for whatever reason I would get one.

 

[Sabeking]

Nope we didn't have two sticks to rub together back then!!! Now 21 years later things have changed. What we did do moving forward is interesting though. We sold a company and own properties. We put everything ina trust for or kids. If they divorce however and still have the cash from trust after our deaths there is a clause that reads only our children and grandchildren can have access to that money in a settlement.

 

[tvguy]

So you did a postnup instead.

I guess that is another name for an Estate Plan.
A pre-nup probably have cost more to draw up than we had 35 years ago!

 

[quandrea]

Nope and I wouldn't marry anyone who wanted one. To me it's planning for failure. Divorce isn't an option. Married 36 years. We married at 21 and 24 and we feel there's a lot to say for building everything together as we had basically nothing when we married. Love him to death even if he drives me freaking crazy sometimes but I would never divorce him and he would never divorce me.

I agree with this. I entered into my marriage knowing divorce wasn’t an option, save in the case of abuse (which isn’t going to be an issue for me, thank God. I know not everyone shares my good fortune). Dh and I merged all our finances upon marriage and I’d have it no other way. We both owned homes and had significant investment portfolios. Merging our assets put us ahead financially very quickly. Anyway, no prenup for us.

I just don’t like what the notion of a prenup suggests. It’s considering divorce even prior to the union. While marriage is a contact one enters into, for some it’s also a sacred faith based covenant.

 

[bdcp]

I'll add that we have two sons, both in their 30's. The youngest (32)has been married almost 5 years. When they married he had some assets and she had grad school loan debt but they merged everything and never even considered a pre-nup. They now own a house together and he makes the bulk of the income, but they don't just spend however they each want without discussing large purchases with each other first. Our oldest son is currently single, but he just started dating someone. He has a lot more assets than she does and than his brother did when he married. Our oldest owns a home with equity and has a nice 401K as well as savings. He also does not believe in pre-nups and sees marriage the same way we do. He won't ask any girl he marries to sign a pre-nup, Of course, he also won't marry someone that he hasn't discussed everything with prior to marriage, especially finances.

 

[dhardawa]

Yes, I would. My house is in my name and I’ve got decent life insurance. But, the biggest reason is that I’ve got a living trust for my kids. If I got married without a pre-nup, it would screw that all up.