How to structure a prenup to protect the lower earner to a reasonable extent?

[Anonymous]

If you've had a prenup- how was the lower earner protected in it? How does this change if they continue working or stop working to raise kids?

There is an extreme income disparity- mid 7 figures to under $100k.

[Anonymous]

I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

[Anonymous]

This is a question for the lawyer representing the lower earner, not a question for strangers on the internet who can say anything and proclaim to be anyone in any profession or situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

We both already have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

We both already have kids.

Alright, there you go. The higher earner is trying to protect their children’s inheritance. Most spouses - particularly men - just go along to get along, and their kids end up losing their entire inheritance to stepmom and her kids. As a breadwinning DW it is my biggest nightmare that I pass away early and everything I worked hard for ends up going to some golddigger’s brats.

Premarital assets are off limits, provided they are kept separate. You can claim some entitlement to the money grown on those assets during the marriage, but even then it’s hard to imagine why you’d feel entitled to that. It predated you and had nothing to do with whatever you contributed.

New assets are a different story. You should demand your share of those. Same with any assets you had coming in and any growth on those assets, provided they are kept separate.

If you insist on staying home and being kept, demand alimony and settlement/inheritance in an amount that will keep you sustained in the event of divorce or widowhood. Otherwise, you continue to work. If your spouse wants to treat you like the help they need to pay for it.

Also consider a life estate in a marital home in case spouse passes away first if you don’t co-own the property.

You should also come to some agreement about how expenses for your respective kids will be paid for. If spouse does not want to pay for your kids to go to the same fancy schools or the same fancy activities you should think twice about marriage. It’s just a recipe for resentment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

We both already have kids.

Alright, there you go. The higher earner is trying to protect their children’s inheritance. Most spouses - particularly men - just go along to get along, and their kids end up losing their entire inheritance to stepmom and her kids. As a breadwinning DW it is my biggest nightmare that I pass away early and everything I worked hard for ends up going to some golddigger’s brats.

Premarital assets are off limits, provided they are kept separate. You can claim some entitlement to the money grown on those assets during the marriage, but even then it’s hard to imagine why you’d feel entitled to that. It predated you and had nothing to do with whatever you contributed.

New assets are a different story. You should demand your share of those. Same with any assets you had coming in and any growth on those assets, provided they are kept separate.

If you insist on staying home and being kept, demand alimony and settlement/inheritance in an amount that will keep you sustained in the event of divorce or widowhood. Otherwise, you continue to work. If your spouse wants to treat you like the help they need to pay for it.

Also consider a life estate in a marital home in case spouse passes away first if you don’t co-own the property.

You should also come to some agreement about how expenses for your respective kids will be paid for. If spouse does not want to pay for your kids to go to the same fancy schools or the same fancy activities you should think twice about marriage. It’s just a recipe for resentment.

You don't want a life estate in the marital home - then you're stuck in an ongoing relationship with stepkids after your spouse's death. They probably already hate you, even if they haven't said it out loud. I wouldn't want to live in a home I didn't own as joint tenants with rights of survivorship. If you get married, get a new house together that feels like home. The house shouldn't matter if this guy is super rich.

Figure out college costs - if your kids would qualify for aid if you stay single, then you stay single or he agrees to pay for their college. It should be a binding claim against his estate if he dies.

So many things in this situation are likely to breed resentment. Is this marriage really worth it?

[Anonymous]

Talk to a lawyer. That's what you pay them for. They should be able to help you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

We both already have kids.

Alright, there you go. The higher earner is trying to protect their children’s inheritance. Most spouses - particularly men - just go along to get along, and their kids end up losing their entire inheritance to stepmom and her kids. As a breadwinning DW it is my biggest nightmare that I pass away early and everything I worked hard for ends up going to some golddigger’s brats.

Premarital assets are off limits, provided they are kept separate. You can claim some entitlement to the money grown on those assets during the marriage, but even then it’s hard to imagine why you’d feel entitled to that. It predated you and had nothing to do with whatever you contributed.

New assets are a different story. You should demand your share of those. Same with any assets you had coming in and any growth on those assets, provided they are kept separate.

If you insist on staying home and being kept, demand alimony and settlement/inheritance in an amount that will keep you sustained in the event of divorce or widowhood. Otherwise, you continue to work. If your spouse wants to treat you like the help they need to pay for it.

Also consider a life estate in a marital home in case spouse passes away first if you don’t co-own the property.

You should also come to some agreement about how expenses for your respective kids will be paid for. If spouse does not want to pay for your kids to go to the same fancy schools or the same fancy activities you should think twice about marriage. It’s just a recipe for resentment.

In a 2nd marriage, I do get "protecting" your assets so your kids still get their share. But I don't understand how you can want to marry someone else and not feel a need to provide something for them and their kids. How can you say you "love someone" yet want them not to get anything financial from you?!?!?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

We both already have kids.

Alright, there you go. The higher earner is trying to protect their children’s inheritance. Most spouses - particularly men - just go along to get along, and their kids end up losing their entire inheritance to stepmom and her kids. As a breadwinning DW it is my biggest nightmare that I pass away early and everything I worked hard for ends up going to some golddigger’s brats.

Premarital assets are off limits, provided they are kept separate. You can claim some entitlement to the money grown on those assets during the marriage, but even then it’s hard to imagine why you’d feel entitled to that. It predated you and had nothing to do with whatever you contributed.

New assets are a different story. You should demand your share of those. Same with any assets you had coming in and any growth on those assets, provided they are kept separate.

If you insist on staying home and being kept, demand alimony and settlement/inheritance in an amount that will keep you sustained in the event of divorce or widowhood. Otherwise, you continue to work. If your spouse wants to treat you like the help they need to pay for it.

Also consider a life estate in a marital home in case spouse passes away first if you don’t co-own the property.

You should also come to some agreement about how expenses for your respective kids will be paid for. If spouse does not want to pay for your kids to go to the same fancy schools or the same fancy activities you should think twice about marriage. It’s just a recipe for resentment.

You don't want a life estate in the marital home - then you're stuck in an ongoing relationship with stepkids after your spouse's death. They probably already hate you, even if they haven't said it out loud. I wouldn't want to live in a home I didn't own as joint tenants with rights of survivorship. If you get married, get a new house together that feels like home. The house shouldn't matter if this guy is super rich.

Figure out college costs - if your kids would qualify for aid if you stay single, then you stay single or he agrees to pay for their college. It should be a binding claim against his estate if he dies.

So many things in this situation are likely to breed resentment. Is this marriage really worth it?

+1000

I get protecting your kids from a previous marriage so they get an inheritance. But why marry someone, do you really love that new someone if you don't want to help provide for them? I mean you make 10x what they make. Why would she want to be in a realathionsip with someone who doesn't really care for her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

This

[Anonymous]

Is the new husband willing to help with college expenses? Once you are married, new husband’s salary and net worth will be added to your salary which will mean 0 financial aid. Or perhaps, the kid’s father pay for college.

[Anonymous]

The reality is, if you’re a low earner , you’re not gonna live the same life as the high earner if you divorce.

Just get that straight.

One thing I think is reasonable is to ask to have enough money to afford a home in the same school area as your kids go to school through college so that they can come home to a home know.

You should fully fund your retirement.

I’d make sure that you put into the prenup that your children college will be fully funded by the high earner.

I don’t think there’s anything you can put in the prenup that will stop him from cutting your children out of an inheritance and leaving it to his new family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, it all depends on what the higher earner wants. Are they trying to say their earnings and investments during the marriage won’t be marital property? In that case the lower earner is screwed no matter what. If the higher earner is pushing this then lower earner needs to get a certain amount per year married/per kid. High earner is likely not going to accept low earner spending time on her career instead of his career and household so she needs to be compensated

+1000

ALso, the lower earner really needs to consider why they would want to be married/have kids with someone who cares so little about them. What do they get from being in this relationship? Because I don't see much but a self centered spouse

This

Well, the low earner really needs to consider why they need somebody else else’s money so much instead of their heart and soul.

And once you stop giving your heart and soul to somebody, why would they give you their money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is the new husband willing to help with college expenses? Once you are married, new husband’s salary and net worth will be added to your salary which will mean 0 financial aid. Or perhaps, the kid’s father pay for college.

Even if the kids' father pays for college, the mother's income / household wealth is counted against the kids. This definitely needs to be figured out.

All of this is to say, OP, that, as I and several others have written, you really do need to talk to your lawyer about this. Don't just sign what's put in front of you. Otherwise you have the option to just keep dating and then get married after your kids are out of college. Or just never get married and live together at some point.