Pre-nups

[mawilson 2,133]

Duh, if there's no money to protect, there's no need for a prenup. My point is that if there are assets to protect (and you're in no position to make specualtions about my assets or lack thereof thank you very much), that does not necessarily mean that a person will feel the need to request a prenup. I know women who have more assets than their future husbands that would not dream of asking them to sign a prenup.

So I don't know what your brilliant point is.

It does in most cases - that was my point.

If you think that it doesn't, then you probably don't have THAT much to protect.

Seems then that the superrich should probably only be marrying the superrich.

Not necessarily - even the super-rich aren't immune from thinking with their hearts

rather than their heads - but the super-rich do tend to protect their assets, especially

if it's a family business and other people are affected.

Money tends to corrupt -- when millions of dollars are involved, you can never trust

your instincts and be 100% sure about someone's intentions.

[Epiphany 0]

Lets analyze the original posters question.

Some one who has a lot of money, a business, a corporation, is a head neurosurgery at the hospital etc would have an attorney they could call. Some one who doesn't have an attorney most likely doesn't have the above items. A person that choses to ask on a free public forum instead of asking their attorney at the price of $475/hour, if they had an attorney, is spewing forth volumes of information about themselves. Also if said person gets hostile when someone calls them on it speaks volumes about themselves. Lastly I have been on this forum for over 7 months and not seen one single post, except this one, about pre-nups. So the original post is the exception to the rule not the rule. If I were either party I would seriously re-consider the marriage. The maturity level is not one that produces a healthy marriage.

I for one told my gal that everything I owned was half hers before I proposed. I know her and trust her that much.

Maybe we should forward this thread to his finance's inbox and see what she thinks?

mao' poh poh

[Pinaylang 0]

Aloha,

Yes... Very sensitive subject. But it's becoming more pertinent by the day. Many friends are imploring me to get one written, and I am so confused about what to do.

Guys - how did you handle this touchy area??

Pinays - What are your feelings on pre-nups?? You ok with them or find them insulting??

Mahalo,

Bill

I'm pinay and live in the US. I think if my future husband ask me for a pre nup even if I have known him for along time I would be insulted. I think I would back off of the wedding. I'm not marrying him for his money. I'm marrying him because I love him. Although marriage is not guarantee. Just follow your insticts. Or if you want hehehe have an agreement with your parents, or sibling or friends(people you trust) and put it under their name. Some women do this before they get married. LOL

[fish 0]

Hi Bill,

I am a filipina, I was the one who insisted about having to sign a pre-nup. When I talked to my pinay friends about this they all say "what's wrong with u girl". Well I'm happy with what I did and that's the most important thing plus I don't want his family or friends to insinuate that I married him for something. I just protected him and myself too.

[BJZags 17]

Oh but it so *does* matter to me. IMO, asking someone to sign a prenup is a sign of mistrust. To others, that may not be the case and that's fine. Two people who are not compatible on this issue may just not be suited for each other.

Why is it a matter of trust or mis-trust? Why can't it be what it is, a legal document used to protect BOTH parties. After the marriage, we all sign a marriage certificate, and thats a legal document. The couple is no more or less married in their own eyes after the church ceremony but before signing the marriage certificate that will be mailed to the court.

Of course, my opinion on the "properness" and fairness of a pre-nup is assuming that BOTH parties had independent lawyers look over the agreement so that BOTH parties had equal powers in drafting this document before it was signed. What most people forget is that such an agreement while often used to protect the "rich" persons assets, is just as easily used to protect the party with a lessor financial stake.

[Krikit 1,163]

Bill, here is an excellent post from Diadromous Mermaid on this same topic. Here is my own input into that thread as well.

There are other noteworthy posts in there also. Unfortunately, there are also judgemental accusations. As you have said, it's a very sensitive subject. It is always good practice to do your research prior to making any important decision, and I commend you for that.

One final note.... that thread was started last October so it's been compacted. You'll need to scroll down to the bottom to gain access to all posts. Or... switch "Options" (in the top right-hand corner) to "Linear" for easier viewing.

Regards,

K

Edited July 31, 2007 by Krikit

[Krikit 1,163]

switch "Options" (in the top right-hand corner) to "Linear" for easier viewing.

Sorry. That should say "switch to "Standard" for easier viewing.

[smoke20 0]

Maybe we should forward this thread to his finance's inbox and see what she thinks?

i was just thinking if i was bill, i'd pm a mod & get this locked, so she doesn't see it.

he has already said he didn't think he was going to pursue it.

At least for the moment, you have changed my mind about pursuing this. Mahalo.

we're gonna get bill in trouble.

[Lona.C. 16]

I was thinking of something , even thought I dont agrea on pre nup if you know eachother well enough , ( but go for it if you only seen eachother like 2-3 times in real during the whole relationship ) anyhow my thought where also , you signd the I 134 to be the sponser for your future wife , isnt it correct from the time you signd the I 134 application you are already considert to be fully and financualy responsible for your spouse in the future to come , ( I think thats already kinda like a prenap in its own polite way , saying I will take care of you no mather what happens as long as your in the states ,) you signd the i 134 your the soul responsibilty of your future wife regardless of pre nap , you can say yes this was mine before the wedding , but she can still hammer financuely you under the table with the prove of your signature on the I 134 , thats all I say to that , good luck , Lona

[Lona.C. 16]

I was thinking of something , even thought I dont agrea on pre nup if you know eachother well enough , ( but go for it if you only seen eachother like 2-3 times in real during the whole relationship ) anyhow my thought where also , you signd the I 134 to be the sponser for your future wife , isnt it correct from the time you signd the I 134 application you are already considert to be fully and financualy responsible for your spouse in the future to come , ( I think thats already kinda like a prenap in its own polite way , saying I will take care of you no mather what happens as long as your in the states ,) you signd the i 134 your the soul responsibilty of your future wife regardless of pre nap , you can say yes this was mine before the wedding , but she can still hammer financuely you under the table with the prove of your signature on the I 134 , thats all I say to that , good luck , Lona

[Jenn! 918]

Oh but it so *does* matter to me. IMO, asking someone to sign a prenup is a sign of mistrust. To others, that may not be the case and that's fine. Two people who are not compatible on this issue may just not be suited for each other.

Why is it a matter of trust or mis-trust? Why can't it be what it is, a legal document used to protect BOTH parties. After the marriage, we all sign a marriage certificate, and thats a legal document. The couple is no more or less married in their own eyes after the church ceremony but before signing the marriage certificate that will be mailed to the court.

Of course, my opinion on the "properness" and fairness of a pre-nup is assuming that BOTH parties had independent lawyers look over the agreement so that BOTH parties had equal powers in drafting this document before it was signed. What most people forget is that such an agreement while often used to protect the "rich" persons assets, is just as easily used to protect the party with a lessor financial stake.

You may not agree that trust has anything to do with it, but I know that I am not alone in thinking that it has everything to do with it. Whether you agree or not that it should be the case, it is what it is. People will never agree on this. My point is that if you plan on asking a fiancee to sign a prenup, let's hope she's on the same page as you about it. (the general you, that is)

[Sheriff Uling 3]

Oh but it so *does* matter to me. IMO, asking someone to sign a prenup is a sign of mistrust. To others, that may not be the case and that's fine. Two people who are not compatible on this issue may just not be suited for each other.

Why is it a matter of trust or mis-trust? Why can't it be what it is, a legal document used to protect BOTH parties. After the marriage, we all sign a marriage certificate, and thats a legal document. The couple is no more or less married in their own eyes after the church ceremony but before signing the marriage certificate that will be mailed to the court.

Of course, my opinion on the "properness" and fairness of a pre-nup is assuming that BOTH parties had independent lawyers look over the agreement so that BOTH parties had equal powers in drafting this document before it was signed. What most people forget is that such an agreement while often used to protect the "rich" persons assets, is just as easily used to protect the party with a lessor financial stake.

You may not agree that trust has anything to do with it, but I know that I am not alone in thinking that it has everything to do with it. Whether you agree or not that it should be the case, it is what it is. People will never agree on this. My point is that if you plan on asking a fiancee to sign a prenup, let's hope she's on the same page as you about it. (the general you, that is)

You are not alone. I happen to also believe that trust and faith, or should I write the lack thereof, is the primary reason why pre-nups exists (of course there are a hosts of other reasons, points, and/or excuses). To be fair, there are plenty of folks that agree with both sides, which do have valid reasons, points, and/or excuses. Also, if marriage was truly reverenced, as it should be, and not treated like some advanced dating, pre-nups would not be necessary. For the most part, most pre-nups are basically written to state that each person keeps what they had before enter the marriage and would potentially split everything accumulated thereafter. Whatever! Like I wrote earlier, within this thread, it's personal preference and/or family influence. If I were giving advise to a friend, I would tell them not to get married, if they feel a pre-nup is necessary because that is the best way to protect your assets.

Cheers!!!

Sheriff Uling

Edited August 1, 2007 by Sheriff Uling

[TinTin and Samby 11]

Lets analyze the original posters question.

Some one who has a lot of money, a business, a corporation, is a head neurosurgery at the hospital etc would have an attorney they could call. Some one who doesn't have an attorney most likely doesn't have the above items. A person that choses to ask on a free public forum instead of asking their attorney at the price of $475/hour, if they had an attorney, is spewing forth volumes of information about themselves. Also if said person gets hostile when someone calls them on it speaks volumes about themselves. Lastly I have been on this forum for over 7 months and not seen one single post, except this one, about pre-nups. So the original post is the exception to the rule not the rule. If I were either party I would seriously re-consider the marriage. The maturity level is not one that produces a healthy marriage.

I for one told my gal that everything I owned was half hers before I proposed. I know her and trust her that much.

Maybe we should forward this thread to his finance's inbox and see what she thinks?

mao' poh poh

My reaction to your post is this: I woudn't hire you as an analyst.

Warm Regards,

Samby

[jundp 191]

whats ETA mean?

If I'm not mistaken...Edited to Add

Lets analyze the original posters question.

Some one who has a lot of money, a business, a corporation, is a head neurosurgery at the hospital etc would have an attorney they could call. Some one who doesn't have an attorney most likely doesn't have the above items. A person that choses to ask on a free public forum instead of asking their attorney at the price of $475/hour, if they had an attorney, is spewing forth volumes of information about themselves. Also if said person gets hostile when someone calls them on it speaks volumes about themselves. Lastly I have been on this forum for over 7 months and not seen one single post, except this one, about pre-nups. So the original post is the exception to the rule not the rule. If I were either party I would seriously re-consider the marriage. The maturity level is not one that produces a healthy marriage.

I for one told my gal that everything I owned was half hers before I proposed. I know her and trust her that much.

Maybe we should forward this thread to his finance's inbox and see what she thinks?

mao' poh poh

Let's analyze this. Maybe Bill was just wanting unbiased opinions? And, I have a lawyer and I don't pay her $475/hour. My sister has a lawyer and she works for a huge law firm and she doesn't pay $475/hour.

Why is asking about a prenup an indication of a lowered maturity level? I really just don't understand.

Edited August 1, 2007 by jundp

[Epiphany 0]

whats ETA mean?

If I'm not mistaken...Edited to Add

Lets analyze the original posters question.

Some one who has a lot of money, a business, a corporation, is a head neurosurgery at the hospital etc would have an attorney they could call. Some one who doesn't have an attorney most likely doesn't have the above items. A person that choses to ask on a free public forum instead of asking their attorney at the price of $475/hour, if they had an attorney, is spewing forth volumes of information about themselves. Also if said person gets hostile when someone calls them on it speaks volumes about themselves. Lastly I have been on this forum for over 7 months and not seen one single post, except this one, about pre-nups. So the original post is the exception to the rule not the rule. If I were either party I would seriously re-consider the marriage. The maturity level is not one that produces a healthy marriage.

I for one told my gal that everything I owned was half hers before I proposed. I know her and trust her that much.

Maybe we should forward this thread to his finance's inbox and see what she thinks?

mao' poh poh

Let's analyze this. Maybe Bill was just wanting unbiased opinions? And, I have a lawyer and I don't pay her $475/hour. My sister has a lawyer and she works for a huge law firm and she doesn't pay $475/hour.

Why is asking about a prenup an indication of a lowered maturity level? I really just don't understand.

Well lets see who correct. Me or you.

Open question to the original poster. What do you do for a living and how much assets do you own? Whats your annual earnings? If he doesnt answer we know who is right.

My guess is he lives in his parents guest house and drives a Volkswagen van with a surfboard rack. I also think this post was a "TROLL" post to stir up controversy. Lets see what the original poster has to say about his assets.