While there is this natural tendency to romanticize marriage, it’s important to remember that it is also a socio-legal concept. As such, rules and conditions will apply no matter how you look at it. Even if they are coming from personal experience and boundaries.
Despite this, it can still cause a problem in a relationship. A woman recently asked if she was wrong to make her fiance sign a prenuptial agreement because she is well off and she wants to keep it that way because life can be unpredictable.
Marriage is a serious commitment—one that only benefits from clearly set rules and boundaries
Image credits: Tima Miroshnichenko / pexels (not the actual photo)
This woman wanted to establish some formalities, but her soon-to-be husband didn’t take it all that well
Image credits: Anna Shvets / pexels (not the actual photo)
Image credits: Gustavo Fring / pexels (not the actual photo)
Image credits: AdvisorSea4600
So she turned to the internet for some perspective, asking folks on Reddit if she was wrong to push it
This one Redditor recently asked folks on r/AITAH, a subreddit for judging human conflicts and dilemmas, if she was wrong to want her fiancé to sign a prenuptial agreement before marriage.
For those unaware, a prenuptial agreement is a contract two partners can make before marriage which typically lists who owns what and what will happen with it in case of a divorce.
At first, he agreed, but he didn’t seem to realize how serious OP was as the next time the topic was brought up, the hubby-to-be was handed a draft of the agreement for review with his lawyer. Needless to say, he wasn’t thrilled.
While he did end up agreeing in the end, he still got offended, even more so with an infidelity clause included in it. He thought it was disrespectful and felt like he was expected to fail. OP, however, just wanted to protect her wealth which she worked hard for.
And folks were all in support of OP. Many argued that the agreement would give OP peace of mind and expressed their worries over the husband’s reaction, saying that OP should probably work that out first before the marriage.
Image credits: Sora Shimazaki / pexels (not the actual photo)
A prenuptial agreement, however, has more uses than just drawing the line of who owns what
NOLO, a resource for legal information, explains that prenuptial agreements can also be used to pass separate property to children from prior marriages, clarify financial rights, and even get protection from debt.
A prenup is not mandatory as, if there is no such contract concluded, state laws and regulations come into force. These differ depending on the state, but generally, spouses share ownership of property and debt they acquire within a marriage—and it’s all divided up during divorce.
As prenup agreements are becoming more common today (mostly because of the prevalence of divorce and remarriage), courts and legislatures are becoming more and more willing to uphold these agreements. They do, however, need to be fair and legally sound.
It is strongly recommended for each spouse to have consulted with an attorney. While it isn’t a requirement, most judges often question prenups that were drafted by the partners, but not reviewed by folks who are fluent in legalese.
So, what are your thoughts on any of this? Who do you side with and why? Share your thoughts and stories in the comment section below!
Image credits: cottonbro studio / pexels (not the actual photo)
The author of the post also elaborated in the comment section on some of the nuances in the story
The general consensus was that the woman was not wrong to want a prenup, and was actually supported for it
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
You May Also Like
Woman Refuses To Chip In For Babysitting Because She Doesn’t Even Have Kids, Asks If She’s A Jerk
Do you think childless individuals should be expected to chip in for group babysitting costs during friend gatherings?
17 Y.O. Is Done Sharing Her Birthday With Her Late Twin, Parents Are Not Having It
Do you think the girl should be allowed to celebrate her birthday without the remembrance of her deceased twin?
People thinking nothing/people will ever change are delusional... Prenups are insurances, like for your car, even if you're a good driver.
Some people find it difficult to separate emotion from rational decisions, especially when it comes to things regarding your relationship. It's not wrong, but can be difficult when one person likes to take worst-case scenarios into consideration when it comes to protecting assets, because you can never really know how life turns out (regardless of infidelity), but the other one wants to use love as a trustworthy foundation for everything (which is romantic and sweet, but also naïve).
I agree. I dont think OP is an a*****e, but I also dont automatically think the worst of the partner for getting upset at being asked. She didnt say that hes prone to anger, or was abusive. He didnt refuse either.
Load More Replies...
It’s comes down to whether or not one can allow a relationship to be defined as transactional on any level or not. For some, marriage may need to be an “all in” with everything each has to offer, including assets. It’s a romanticized idea of the concept, but definitely not out of the ordinary. For most of history there wasn’t an option for a prenup. Which incentivized the reasons for getting married and the actions once married. Marriage can be seen as the ultimate trust in one another. Just as it can be seen as a gamble. Unless there’s an imbalance of assets going into it, it’s easy to see if this way. If there’s both an imbalance of relationship/homemaking labor (emotional & mental included) that needs to be compensated for should they divorce. I came into my marriage with 10 times the money & assets as my husband. He offered a prenup, I said “no” & supported him thru med school/residency. If we divorce, he’ll get 1/2 my assets & I’ll be ok with that. That’s the risk I took.
Of course there wasn't an option for a prenup for most of history, all assets defaulted to the man! Good grief...
Load More Replies...
Marriage is a contract between two individuals. Two companies joining up don't expect there to be a severance in the future, but they do have it spelled out in the contracts before they sign. Marriages should be the same, especially when there are personal assets to protect.
His lawyer advised him it was fair, so yes, I expect there was.
Load More Replies...
makes sense to me. when you are together in a relationship you share resources. when the relationship ends the sharing of resources ends. and no one should have to give someone half their money just because they were married if the other person did nothing to help you build your wealth.
His reaction would have me running for the hills. Everyone knows what a prenuptial is. And what it's for. More importantly, everyone knows someone who probably wishes they had one. Most marriages fail eventually. That's just life. The fact that he wants to feel betrayed that you're aware of and wish to protect yourself from the reality suggests that he may hope that in that reality, he could benefit from it. And his angst over the infidelity clause? Seriously? If you have no intention of cheating, this shouldn't even be difficult. The only way that clause disrespects your relationship is if you already had intent to disrespect it yourself.
Not necesserly. If somebody has this romantical conviction that "all you need is love", and is deeply loving their partner, and is really willing to spend rest of their life together, in good and bad, with trust, love and care - then they could feel very offended and betrayed by the fact that their beloved person doesn't share this point of view. Which, for them, means that their partner doesn't love them as much as they love them.
Load More Replies...
Personally my partner requesting a prenup would be a relationship breaker for me as it screams lack of trust and why would you want to marry someone you don't trust? Now, that said, I can understand why people view it as a good idea. I find people marry without ever discussing the big things much less coming to an agreement about them and a prenup does that, or should.
Red flaaaaaaaaags, so many red flags. 'he only said it so I would accept' nope, get out of there girl.
I remember getting the same pushback comments (and this will probably generate more) when I confirmed to family and friends (ex) husband and I maintained separate finances. One joint account we both paid into to cover bills. Our salary went into our accounts; neither had access to the other’s except for recorded in case of emergency or death. People said, you’re planning to fail, you don’t trust each other, that’s not a real marriage. No, no, and no. But when things went south over a decade later, it cost us less than $4K total to get divorced. We went through mediation, split mutual possessions and the profit from our home 50/50, what was ours stayed ours. “See,” they said, “we told you!” I asked one especially vindictive person, “So, tell me again, how long has your divorce from X been dragging on? How much has it cost you so far? How did you going all in prevent your marriage from failing? Or are you just bitter mine took the minimum time possible and cost a 1/4 of what you, personally, have already spent on lawyers?”
I don't really have a say so on this matter. Just go with your gut instincts. I've seen great relationships exist with and without a prenup. And I've seen terrible relationships exist with and without a prenuptial. Go with the gut really.
If the situation was reversed you can bet he would want her to sign a pre-nup.
It's called "covering your âss". If he were really so offended he'd come up with a prenup of his own...
Seeing first hand the devastation of infidelity in a close family member's marriage and family I am 100% certain he wished he'd had a prenup with an infidelity clause.
I am actually a fan of prenups. Is there such a thing as kind of a graduated prenup? Like first ten years, definite infidelity clause, then that part gets suspended or has some kind of percentage or something? I'm just thinking, a lot can go down in 40 or 50 years of marriage, but if you've been married for 20 years and they have one dumb night, are you really going to throw it away? Everyone has different acceptable parameters, seems silly to not build some contingencies in there for humans being humans. Build in some gray, because decades of life together are never black and white. Imagine being a stay-at-home for 50 years, being drunk and stupid one night, and being left destitute the next day. This applies to more than just infidelity, there are a million things that can happen in decades of marriage.
Well, if you're stupid enough to risk everything over a drunken one night stand, then yes, you get what you deserve. If you're unhappy or unsatisfied, communicate that and either work it out or leave.
Load More Replies...
I agree that infidelity clauses are a necessary evil, but I also think infidelity needs to be -defined- in the contract in terms of the relationship, because there are poly relationships that can and do include marriage. You wouldn't want one partner trying to leverage their relationship with the other against the spouse if they divorce... Not likely, but possible.
The common theme I notice with any prenup dispute stories is that it is always the person with fewer assets and income potential who objects and gets upset. Maybe I (63m) am old-fashioned but, if you truly loved your fiance wouldn't you want to give them that peace of mind? The real red flag for me is that he was most upset with the infidelity clause! It's almost as if he was upset about losing the option to cheat without penalty.
Considering he DID sign it, she sounds nitpicky at this moment. He is allowed to feel she's signalling she doesn't trust him, while still taking her concerns seriously. She doesn't get to control his feelings and require he be happy if every single thing.
Two things stick out here. First she didn't spring this out of nowhere, she was clear about wanting a prenup long before she actually got one. Second they're coming into the situation with unequal assests to begin with. Dude has no standing to object when it became a reality. OTOH, adding the infidelity clause without prior discussion is shady. That's got nothing to do with assets prior to marriage. You can still add it, of course. But you have to talk about it before springing it in the prenup. This shows she's entering the marriage with really low expectations.
I personally wouldn't feel the need for an infidelity clause (and I'm a lawyer). it makes it like a punishment rather than asset protection. But I'm all in favour of asset protection. You come into marriage with certain assets? Those are your separate property. If you have investments prior to marriage, those are yours and the income is yours. But if you add to them while married, the partner will claim a share! So the prenup protects those investments. If it's a house, you don't want the other person claiming it if you split up. And lots of partners do try to claim the house! To the point it's better to go rent someplace to live with them, to get them to pay their fair share, and then rent out your own house for the separate income.
It's recommended that you engage in an honest and open conversation with your husband about your concerns. If needed, seeking professional counselling can provide a supportive environment to address these issues together. Discovering that your suspicions were accurate with evidence backing it up ,and he indeed cheated on you, this is undoubtedly a painful experience.help can be gotten from (theprimehack@gmail.com), While you may have sensed it deep down, the confirmation can be overwhelming. Now that you have evidence, and he has admitted his infidelity, apologised, and expressed a desire to remain married while promising it won't happen again, navigating through this difficult situation requires careful consideration and open communication.You have your choice to make after this physical evidence of him.
Be careful when showing someone who you really are, they may not like the real you.
This story doesn't tell if it's a one way agreement about him cheating (STA) or a two way agreement about either of them cheating (HTA).
I'm pretty sure his lawyer would not have considered the prenup fair if it were only a one-way clause and no sane person would accept a one-way clause.
Load More Replies...
Anyone who insists on NOT having a prenup is sus. Dude is a cheater, 100%.
It's a sad state of affairs that anyone considering marriage needs to even think about such things. Whatever happened to "til death us do part"? Edit: that's a purely rhetorical question, BTW. I perfectly understand what happened to it, but it doesn't make it any less sad.
Load More Replies...
Wow, I’m surprised by the support this woman got. I get she wants to protect herself financially but it seems very front and centre of her mind, and screams insecurity and a lack of trust. Throwing in an infidelity clause without discussing it first would compound that. Depending on the location they are getting married that would likely be grounds for a divorce anyway. I get that people need to be practical, but this is basically giving up before you start, and saying you expect your partner to behave like a d**k if you do break up
Don't be so naive the sooner pre nups become mandatory, the better imo. It's as if, in your mind half of all marriages didn't either end up in divorce or separation. Take those odds to a casino and you are basically putting everything you've ever worked for on red or black...would you do that? Should people be allowed to do that when entering a legally binding contract? No, and that's why the law needs to include it. That way it isn't about the relationship it's about the legal steps required to get a marriage license.
Load More Replies...
People thinking nothing/people will ever change are delusional... Prenups are insurances, like for your car, even if you're a good driver.
Some people find it difficult to separate emotion from rational decisions, especially when it comes to things regarding your relationship. It's not wrong, but can be difficult when one person likes to take worst-case scenarios into consideration when it comes to protecting assets, because you can never really know how life turns out (regardless of infidelity), but the other one wants to use love as a trustworthy foundation for everything (which is romantic and sweet, but also naïve).
I agree. I dont think OP is an a*****e, but I also dont automatically think the worst of the partner for getting upset at being asked. She didnt say that hes prone to anger, or was abusive. He didnt refuse either.
Load More Replies... It’s comes down to whether or not one can allow a relationship to be defined as transactional on any level or not. For some, marriage may need to be an “all in” with everything each has to offer, including assets. It’s a romanticized idea of the concept, but definitely not out of the ordinary. For most of history there wasn’t an option for a prenup. Which incentivized the reasons for getting married and the actions once married. Marriage can be seen as the ultimate trust in one another. Just as it can be seen as a gamble. Unless there’s an imbalance of assets going into it, it’s easy to see if this way. If there’s both an imbalance of relationship/homemaking labor (emotional & mental included) that needs to be compensated for should they divorce. I came into my marriage with 10 times the money & assets as my husband. He offered a prenup, I said “no” & supported him thru med school/residency. If we divorce, he’ll get 1/2 my assets & I’ll be ok with that. That’s the risk I took.
Of course there wasn't an option for a prenup for most of history, all assets defaulted to the man! Good grief...
Load More Replies... Marriage is a contract between two individuals. Two companies joining up don't expect there to be a severance in the future, but they do have it spelled out in the contracts before they sign. Marriages should be the same, especially when there are personal assets to protect.
His lawyer advised him it was fair, so yes, I expect there was.
Load More Replies... makes sense to me. when you are together in a relationship you share resources. when the relationship ends the sharing of resources ends. and no one should have to give someone half their money just because they were married if the other person did nothing to help you build your wealth.
His reaction would have me running for the hills. Everyone knows what a prenuptial is. And what it's for. More importantly, everyone knows someone who probably wishes they had one. Most marriages fail eventually. That's just life. The fact that he wants to feel betrayed that you're aware of and wish to protect yourself from the reality suggests that he may hope that in that reality, he could benefit from it. And his angst over the infidelity clause? Seriously? If you have no intention of cheating, this shouldn't even be difficult. The only way that clause disrespects your relationship is if you already had intent to disrespect it yourself.
Not necesserly. If somebody has this romantical conviction that "all you need is love", and is deeply loving their partner, and is really willing to spend rest of their life together, in good and bad, with trust, love and care - then they could feel very offended and betrayed by the fact that their beloved person doesn't share this point of view. Which, for them, means that their partner doesn't love them as much as they love them.
Load More Replies... Personally my partner requesting a prenup would be a relationship breaker for me as it screams lack of trust and why would you want to marry someone you don't trust? Now, that said, I can understand why people view it as a good idea. I find people marry without ever discussing the big things much less coming to an agreement about them and a prenup does that, or should.
Red flaaaaaaaaags, so many red flags. 'he only said it so I would accept' nope, get out of there girl.
I remember getting the same pushback comments (and this will probably generate more) when I confirmed to family and friends (ex) husband and I maintained separate finances. One joint account we both paid into to cover bills. Our salary went into our accounts; neither had access to the other’s except for recorded in case of emergency or death. People said, you’re planning to fail, you don’t trust each other, that’s not a real marriage. No, no, and no. But when things went south over a decade later, it cost us less than $4K total to get divorced. We went through mediation, split mutual possessions and the profit from our home 50/50, what was ours stayed ours. “See,” they said, “we told you!” I asked one especially vindictive person, “So, tell me again, how long has your divorce from X been dragging on? How much has it cost you so far? How did you going all in prevent your marriage from failing? Or are you just bitter mine took the minimum time possible and cost a 1/4 of what you, personally, have already spent on lawyers?”
I don't really have a say so on this matter. Just go with your gut instincts. I've seen great relationships exist with and without a prenup. And I've seen terrible relationships exist with and without a prenuptial. Go with the gut really.
If the situation was reversed you can bet he would want her to sign a pre-nup.
It's called "covering your âss". If he were really so offended he'd come up with a prenup of his own...
Seeing first hand the devastation of infidelity in a close family member's marriage and family I am 100% certain he wished he'd had a prenup with an infidelity clause.
I am actually a fan of prenups. Is there such a thing as kind of a graduated prenup? Like first ten years, definite infidelity clause, then that part gets suspended or has some kind of percentage or something? I'm just thinking, a lot can go down in 40 or 50 years of marriage, but if you've been married for 20 years and they have one dumb night, are you really going to throw it away? Everyone has different acceptable parameters, seems silly to not build some contingencies in there for humans being humans. Build in some gray, because decades of life together are never black and white. Imagine being a stay-at-home for 50 years, being drunk and stupid one night, and being left destitute the next day. This applies to more than just infidelity, there are a million things that can happen in decades of marriage.
Well, if you're stupid enough to risk everything over a drunken one night stand, then yes, you get what you deserve. If you're unhappy or unsatisfied, communicate that and either work it out or leave.
Load More Replies... I agree that infidelity clauses are a necessary evil, but I also think infidelity needs to be -defined- in the contract in terms of the relationship, because there are poly relationships that can and do include marriage. You wouldn't want one partner trying to leverage their relationship with the other against the spouse if they divorce... Not likely, but possible.
The common theme I notice with any prenup dispute stories is that it is always the person with fewer assets and income potential who objects and gets upset. Maybe I (63m) am old-fashioned but, if you truly loved your fiance wouldn't you want to give them that peace of mind? The real red flag for me is that he was most upset with the infidelity clause! It's almost as if he was upset about losing the option to cheat without penalty.
Considering he DID sign it, she sounds nitpicky at this moment. He is allowed to feel she's signalling she doesn't trust him, while still taking her concerns seriously. She doesn't get to control his feelings and require he be happy if every single thing.
Two things stick out here. First she didn't spring this out of nowhere, she was clear about wanting a prenup long before she actually got one. Second they're coming into the situation with unequal assests to begin with. Dude has no standing to object when it became a reality. OTOH, adding the infidelity clause without prior discussion is shady. That's got nothing to do with assets prior to marriage. You can still add it, of course. But you have to talk about it before springing it in the prenup. This shows she's entering the marriage with really low expectations.
I personally wouldn't feel the need for an infidelity clause (and I'm a lawyer). it makes it like a punishment rather than asset protection. But I'm all in favour of asset protection. You come into marriage with certain assets? Those are your separate property. If you have investments prior to marriage, those are yours and the income is yours. But if you add to them while married, the partner will claim a share! So the prenup protects those investments. If it's a house, you don't want the other person claiming it if you split up. And lots of partners do try to claim the house! To the point it's better to go rent someplace to live with them, to get them to pay their fair share, and then rent out your own house for the separate income.
It's recommended that you engage in an honest and open conversation with your husband about your concerns. If needed, seeking professional counselling can provide a supportive environment to address these issues together. Discovering that your suspicions were accurate with evidence backing it up ,and he indeed cheated on you, this is undoubtedly a painful experience.help can be gotten from (theprimehack@gmail.com), While you may have sensed it deep down, the confirmation can be overwhelming. Now that you have evidence, and he has admitted his infidelity, apologised, and expressed a desire to remain married while promising it won't happen again, navigating through this difficult situation requires careful consideration and open communication.You have your choice to make after this physical evidence of him.
Be careful when showing someone who you really are, they may not like the real you.
This story doesn't tell if it's a one way agreement about him cheating (STA) or a two way agreement about either of them cheating (HTA).
I'm pretty sure his lawyer would not have considered the prenup fair if it were only a one-way clause and no sane person would accept a one-way clause.
Load More Replies... Anyone who insists on NOT having a prenup is sus. Dude is a cheater, 100%.
It's a sad state of affairs that anyone considering marriage needs to even think about such things. Whatever happened to "til death us do part"? Edit: that's a purely rhetorical question, BTW. I perfectly understand what happened to it, but it doesn't make it any less sad.
Load More Replies... Wow, I’m surprised by the support this woman got. I get she wants to protect herself financially but it seems very front and centre of her mind, and screams insecurity and a lack of trust. Throwing in an infidelity clause without discussing it first would compound that. Depending on the location they are getting married that would likely be grounds for a divorce anyway. I get that people need to be practical, but this is basically giving up before you start, and saying you expect your partner to behave like a d**k if you do break up
Don't be so naive the sooner pre nups become mandatory, the better imo. It's as if, in your mind half of all marriages didn't either end up in divorce or separation. Take those odds to a casino and you are basically putting everything you've ever worked for on red or black...would you do that? Should people be allowed to do that when entering a legally binding contract? No, and that's why the law needs to include it. That way it isn't about the relationship it's about the legal steps required to get a marriage license.
Load More Replies... 
27
62