Prenuptials

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by fotze

There are people who are dependant on an inheritance? If you are not disabled or something and are depending on an incoming inheritance.......

I would imagine there are.

Then again, it depends on the lifestyle one wishes for their children after they're gone.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by fotze

There are people who are dependant on an inheritance? If you are not disabled or something and are depending on an incoming inheritance.......

It's my only hope to get a house in this market

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Because when it works it's a beautiful thing.

According to you.

Seriously though....if you think your marriage is going to fail anyways, or if there is a chance it MIGHT fail, why even take that step?

Have we come so far as a society that marriage as a lifelong commitment isn't even important anymore?

[habernac]

unless you have a net worth approaching Paul McCartney's (and holy crap, how much weed are you smoking if you don't get your 20 years younger wife to sign a pre-nup?) I really don't see the point.

[troutman]

When you should do a pre-nup:

1) if one spouse is coming into the marriage with significantly more $ than the other spouse; 50% of marriages end in divorce

2) a second marriage, where you have children from your first marriage

Even common-law people should make an agreement - we call it a Cohabitation Agreement.

If you do one, do it with seperate lawyers (independent legal advice). A Pre-nup you make from a kit, and without ILA, will probably not be enforeceable.

[bluntus logicimus]

Originally Posted by Buff

The percentage of marriages may be close to 50% but the percentage of people who actually get divorced is much less than that. There are a tonne of people who get divorced more than once. My former boss who was divorced 4 times is a prime example.

Yeah, I was just thinking that I read a StatsCan report recently and I'm sure that the divorce rate is much closer to 34%. Multi-divorcers skew the number higher of course.

In my opinion, you should be talking about a hypothetical pre-nup way before you ever get into a crunch time situation where you've considered marrying her.
When I brought up the idea of a pre-nup with my girlfriend (laywer, but not divorce), she basically said the same thing that another poster above said. It actually is less enforceable and applicable in fewer areas than you think.

To the original poster - my opinion - your buddy can't just pop the question and slip in a little post-proposal mention of a pre-nup. It has to be out in the clear before he makes a final move. No one on this forum is going to be able to tell him if he should do it or not - he's the only one who knows his girlfriend the best. So, definitely have a conversation first but don't go in with the attitude that it is a given.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by troutman

Even common-law people should make an agreement - we call it a Cohabitation Agreement.

At what point in the relationship, time wise, does one of the parties have the ability to make a claim against the other?

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by fotze

Hope is one thing, dependence is another.

Dependence can become a much bigger part of reality in a recession/depression.

[SeeGeeWhy]

If your friend has been married and divorced before, I would think that he should think about it harder than if this is his first marriage.

And really... does he have a lot, and she have nothing? What are their plans together? Is he going to be some global billionaire playboy and she will be at home with no children? Prenups are not a one size fits all kind of agreement.

[ericschand]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

At what point in the relationship, time wise, does one of the parties have the ability to make a claim against the other?

6 months, when you are considered common-law marriage.

ers

[Buff]

With the topic of prenups I did some asking. My sister-in-law (I prefer sister-out-law) is divorced. My wife tells me that her ex husband made her sign a prenup because it was in his contract as a business owner of a franchise that he has to get a prenup if he were to get married.

Now consider that they called off a wedding and broke up a couple of years before they got back together and actually did get married. Also consider that the few days before he was telling me that she is going to change once they're married, and then on the morning of the wedding he was asking me what I know about one of her male friends (whom he later falsely accused her of sleeping with). It is no surprise that they were separated a month after they got married and divorced very soon after that. The guy had no plans to stay with her and I would likely assume that he was lying about the stipulation to have a prenup.

[prarieboy]

Originally Posted by troutman

When you should do a pre-nup:

1) if one spouse is coming into the marriage with significantly more $ than the other spouse; 50% of marriages end in divorce

2) a second marriage, where you have children from your first marriage

Even common-law people should make an agreement - we call it a Cohabitation Agreement.

If you do one, do it with seperate lawyers (independent legal advice). A Pre-nup you make from a kit, and without ILA, will probably not be enforeceable.

It was my understanding that money earned before the marriage was not subject to being divided if the marriage ends. Only the growth of that money. Is that correct?

[jamesteterenko]

I believe that prenuptual agreements are not useful for the majority of the population, but essential for a small portion of society.

As mentioned by other posters, it makes sense for people with children or the very wealthy. Another situation is for small business owners. If the company grows during the marriage, both spouses are entitled to half of that growth. This could force the sale of the company in order to settle the divorce. A reasonable prenup might be able to avoid the dissolution of the business in the event of a divorce. A forced sale of the business might not recoup the true value of the business and the entrepreneur would then be unemployed.

As for how it is approached, I would suggest trying to remove as much emotion from the discussion as possible. So, don't do it the day of the proposal or a week before the wedding or even right before going out with other people. Both sides should have separate legal councils. And in bringing it up, try to reinforce that you hope that it never gets used. e.g. "Honey, I am really excited that we are getting married and will spend the rest of our lives together. My lawyer suggested that we get a prenup to address how we deal with my business if we ever happen to divorce. I will do everything in my power to prevent that from ever being needed but in the unlikely event that we do ever get a divorce it it should help protect both of us."

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by Buff

With the topic of prenups I did some asking. My sister-in-law (I prefer sister-out-law) is divorced. My wife tells me that her ex husband made her sign a prenup because it was in his contract as a business owner of a franchise that he has to get a prenup if he were to get married.

This isn't uncommon. As a shareholder in a business, we all have agreements with our wives that if something would happen to one of us, the shares default to the other shareholders. The last thing I want is my brothers wife or my stepmom "helping" to run the business.

All other possessions are pretty much fair game.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by prarieboy

It was my understanding that money earned before the marriage was not subject to being divided if the marriage ends. Only the growth of that money. Is that correct?

In Alberta, this is true. But if I have $10 million, and my spouse has $10 thousand... who's assets are more likely to increase significantly? If I have a paltry 10% return over a 5 year marriage, that's still $1 million, and half of that could be gone.

Or say I own a $450,000 house, and it doubles in value due to a real estate boom, without a prenup, I could have to pay out up to 50% of the increase.

[Buzzard]

Dr. Phil said yesterday that the divorce rate is this:
If it's your 1st marriage its a t 50%
If its your second marriage its a 70% chance it will fail.
If you have an affair outside your marriage and end up marrying the one you have the affair with you have a 3% chance of it lasting. So says Dr. Phil anyway.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The wealthiest people I know/have known always had the craziest families... step-moms and dads x 3, step-brothers, half-sisters 15 years or more apart, siblings they don't know, screwed secretaries, banishments to boarding schools, drunken trophy wives, more divorces, fights, wrecked cars, insane jealousy. I don't know if there were ever any pre-nups involved, but dad always paid for all that.

Sigh.. so much fun.. I wish I was rich! And I'm being serious! lol

[Incinerator]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

In Alberta, this is true. But if I have $10 million, and my spouse has $10 thousand... who's assets are more likely to increase significantly? If I have a paltry 10% return over a 5 year marriage, that's still $1 million, and half of that could be gone.

Or say I own a $450,000 house, and it doubles in value due to a real estate boom, without a prenup, I could have to pay out up to 50% of the increase.

This is where a lot of people got screwed in the last couple years, guy bought the house for $150K in 2002, had to sell during the divorce in 2006 for $350K and split the $200K profit, now the guy have $250K minus his original mortgage principal and nowhere to live because everything cost $350K so he ends up paying triple the amount of his original mortgage payments in rent. (True story)

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Incinerator

This is where a lot of people got screwed in the last couple years, guy bought the house for $150K in 2002, had to sell during the divorce in 2006 for $350K and split the $200K profit, now the guy have $250K minus his original mortgage principal and nowhere to live because everything cost $350K so he ends up paying triple the amount of his original mortgage payments in rent. (True story)

I don't doubt it. I've heard similar cases where only cause of brilliant lawyers and keeping assets separate were they spared the full brunt.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by prarieboy

It was my understanding that money earned before the marriage was not subject to being divided if the marriage ends. Only the growth of that money. Is that correct?

Without boring you all with the intricacies of the Matrimonial Property Act, this is largely correct. Complications arise when you mingle that money with other matrimonial assets, or if your seperate assets increase in value during the marriage. The longer you are together, the harder it is to keep exempt property seperate. A pre-nup is still the best protection (though not an absolute guarantee).