DW and I don't have a prenup because we both came into the marriage with nothing in our names. But in case of a second marriage, I would no doubt ask for a prenup now that I have significant assets. It might not be very romantic, but it's just too important. But in all likelihood I would never marry again.
Pre nups ?
- Thread starter Moemg
- Start date
CuppaJoe
Moderator Emeritus
That's why I suggest discussing it with a lawyer. Calif. is a community property state, but pre-marital assets are considered separate property. I would assume any potential spouse would know that and it need not be discussed.
It's gets complicated really fast, you might marry in a community property state and divorce in a state with different ideas.
CuppaJoe
Moderator Emeritus
--
I think this has already been discussed; I just wanted to link off it. Another thing to wonder about is how many people do the polar opposite of pre nup which IMO is not having no pre nup but transmuting all their separate property into community property at the time of marriage. Now, that is a gigantic leap of faith. I'm 99% sure I would never sign a pre nup but doubt very much i would do the total opposite.
dex
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,105
Good point - it is like how people make risk decisions.
I am 26 and got married at 22. My wife and I have a pre-nup that basically says that any assets in her name are hers, any assets in my name are mine, and any jointly named assets are ours.
If I choose, over time I can put her on the house or share assets with her. Works out pretty good.
If I choose, over time I can put her on the house or share assets with her. Works out pretty good.
While discussing similar stats a year ago with my older sister, who like me is also 20 years into a second marriage, she made a good point:
"Those are the people who didn't learn anything the first time."
Moemg
Gone but not forgotten
Thank everybody for responding . I'm surprized that the no's and maybe's are ahead . If I were to marry again (highly unlikely ) I would definetely go for a pre -nup and I'm a romantic fool .
limpid lizard
Recycles dryer sheets
- Joined
- May 26, 2007
- Messages
- 121
Walt34, prehaps your sister is either myopic or or unaware that as an individual one has little choice as to whether or not a marriage lasts. There are two individuals in the marriage, and one may have learned well the first time around, may wish to remain married and still end up divorced.
Additionally, not all those who remain married are happy. Is it better to be abused than divorced?
Additionally, not all those who remain married are happy. Is it better to be abused than divorced?
Married to DH #1 thirty years in December, and when we married, we each had a car payment - that's all. If I should ever be single again, I would love to have someone to date, travel with, and care about, but cannot imagine ever marrying again, or for that matter living full-time in the same house with someone else. What we have (when we are finished with it) is for our only child (son), and I would not put that at risk. Frankly, I know more than one person who either gave everything away in the first divorce, or squandered their young years away (regarding asset accumulation) and now need a place to land. Not interested in a set up like that or someone popping off about what I choose to do or not do for my son with assets that belong to me.
She is well aware that either one could decide to end it, and there are two people in the marriage. Every day that both come home is a decision to continue. Perhaps not a conscious one, but a decision nonetheless.
Relationships can be/are infinitely complicated, and I suppose it all comes down to "Am I better off staying in it or would life be better elsewhere?" But then one has to be able to live with the decisions.
I wouldn't expect anyone to remain in a marriage that was either physically or emotionally abusive.
