Butch Femme Planet - View Single Post - Prenuptial Agreements. Anyone have one? Anyone who would consider one if they married?

Kelt · 07-20-2013, 08:48 AM

I am in the same camp with Dapper and Kobi.

I think a prenup is essential for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that it would encourage, actually force, a frank and open communication about money with all cards on the table. And, like Dapper, I am in the situation of probably having a substantial inheritance in my future. I don't do my planning around that, but the potential is there. I am also finding that age has a big and immediate way of ripping the blinders off.

The specific reasons for having it have already been articulated quite well. I have not been researching this as I have no current need for it. But I did read the the document that was linked to in the OP, and it raised a question in my mind.

This part:
"Encourage" divorce. At one time, many courts viewed any prenup specifying how things would be divided up in case the couple splits as void and unenforceable because it promoted divorce. The modern approach allows such agreements, but judges in some states still take a hard look at them. If the agreement appears to offer a financial incentive for divorce to one party, it may be set aside.

It made me run some scenarios through my mind, and I found this disturbing. In the "what if" department I was wondering about this. What if you were married to a person and they had a sudden behavioral change? E.g. Your partner develops a penchant for heavy gambling, or another habit that rapidly incurs huge amount of debt for which you would be liable. This makes it seem that if you were to seek divorce because the person became something other than what you initially married, a judge could view this as trying to preserve your own assets, (and that would probably be part of it), and could overwrite the prenup. Curious.

In some ways I think that gay couples in general have not had to deal with some of these hard decisions by default of circumstances. On the other hand, I suppose it would be no different than straight couples, some people will go in fully responsible, and some will not. (Acknowledging that different people define "responsibility" differently). In any event, it is a new discussion within our community and I think an interesting one.

Thanks for the great thread Dapper!

07-20-2013, 08:48 AM	#8
Kelt Senior Member How Do You Identify?: Beach Butch Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: SoCal Posts: 2,751 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 19,765 Thanked 15,379 Times in 2,541 Posts Rep Power: 21474852	I am in the same camp with Dapper and Kobi. I think a prenup is essential for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that it would encourage, actually force, a frank and open communication about money with all cards on the table. And, like Dapper, I am in the situation of probably having a substantial inheritance in my future. I don't do my planning around that, but the potential is there. I am also finding that age has a big and immediate way of ripping the blinders off. The specific reasons for having it have already been articulated quite well. I have not been researching this as I have no current need for it. But I did read the the document that was linked to in the OP, and it raised a question in my mind. This part: "Encourage" divorce. At one time, many courts viewed any prenup specifying how things would be divided up in case the couple splits as void and unenforceable because it promoted divorce. The modern approach allows such agreements, but judges in some states still take a hard look at them. If the agreement appears to offer a financial incentive for divorce to one party, it may be set aside. It made me run some scenarios through my mind, and I found this disturbing. In the "what if" department I was wondering about this. What if you were married to a person and they had a sudden behavioral change? E.g. Your partner develops a penchant for heavy gambling, or another habit that rapidly incurs huge amount of debt for which you would be liable. This makes it seem that if you were to seek divorce because the person became something other than what you initially married, a judge could view this as trying to preserve your own assets, (and that would probably be part of it), and could overwrite the prenup. Curious. In some ways I think that gay couples in general have not had to deal with some of these hard decisions by default of circumstances. On the other hand, I suppose it would be no different than straight couples, some people will go in fully responsible, and some will not. (Acknowledging that different people define "responsibility" differently). In any event, it is a new discussion within our community and I think an interesting one. Thanks for the great thread Dapper!