Would you sign a prenup?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"I think prenups make a mockery of wedding vows. "

Prenups/marriage contracts go back to ancient times, nitwit.

Perhaps I would have said the same thing in ancient times-I'll have to get in my way back machine to see. I was actually referring to the words that I spoke when I got married. If I remember correctly those vows did not include "the part of the richness that I chose to share with you."

Also, hope your day gets better (you might need a smiley emoticon, but I just can't bring myself to do it).

[Anonymous]

Planning for divorce means divorce is inevitable and the less will be a doormat and will not feel equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No.

I think prenups make a mockery of wedding vows. If you can't share everything you have with the person you plan to marry, you shouldn't get married. These days, there's really nothing wrong with just living together.[/quote



Exactly

[Anonymous]

I think the bigger issue are the parents trying to force their values on the couple. They are threatening to boycott the wedding??? But I assume they will keep him in the family business all the same if he marries the woman??? Major relationship red flag there and I question the priorities of the parents.

I commend the groom for sticking up for his wife to be. If I was him, I would contact a lawyer to investigate other ways for the family business and his parents assets to be protected besides just a prenup. Then he could go to his parents with a proposal of other options to ease their concerns. His individual assets are shared between him and his future wife and his parents should mind their own beeswax regarding those. The joint family asset should be their only concern and I believe those could be protected under a trust or corporation entity.

[Anonymous]

Why doesn't fiance just forgo his interest in the family business? It appears that the concern of the parents is that in the "unlikely" event of a divorce the business will be able to remain whole for the rest of the family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the bigger issue are the parents trying to force their values on the couple. They are threatening to boycott the wedding??? But I assume they will keep him in the family business all the same if he marries the woman??? Major relationship red flag there and I question the priorities of the parents.

I commend the groom for sticking up for his wife to be. If I was him, I would contact a lawyer to investigate other ways for the family business and his parents assets to be protected besides just a prenup. Then he could go to his parents with a proposal of other options to ease their concerns. His individual assets are shared between him and his future wife and his parents should mind their own beeswax regarding those. The joint family asset should be their only concern and I believe those could be protected under a trust or corporation entity.

OP here, the DIL suggested other ways of keeping herself of out of the business without a prenup.
FIL stated that he won't be told how to run his business by a young twenty something.
FIL wants a prenup.

I believe the children have part legal ownership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sign the pre-nup!

Reverse situation here: my family owns a business and when it came to marriage, DH had to sign a pre-nup forgoing rights to my interest in the family business. He did so and did not even have a concern about doing so.

The reality is that half the marriages in the US end up in divorce and although we all think it will not happen to us, it does ...... just the complaints about spouses on this forum and advice from posters to end the marriage is anecdotal evidence of how many marriages end up in trouble.

What some posters who have argued against signing the prenup and offering ways to protect OP's interests may not realize is that making a financial settlement in the event of divorce when it comes to a family business, is very difficult. Many such businesses don't have the liquidity to do so and this results in serious complications and ramifications.

I have three siblings and our parents made it clear that if an iron-clad pre-nup was not signed, the child would forgo his/her rights to any equity in the family business. It was our choice and if signing a pre-nup was something that went against the grain, then the child needed to accept that there was a consequence. After all, it is their business/property and they are free do with it as they will.

A clarification to my comments above: my parents had only one concern .... that the family business did not get dismembered because of a divorce which without a prenup would require a potentially large settlement being made to the ex-spouse. They were indifferent to what we chose to do with other assets and so in my case the prenup addressed only the issue of the family business.

To those not familiar with the complications that can result without these safeguard, the very issue of valuation is itself complex and two competent professionals can differ in terms of the valuation of a business raising the potential for litigation on just the issue of valuation. As a further illustration, the family business is today conservatively worth around $25 million - and possibly as high as $40 million. If each sibling's share was worth $6-10 million, and there was a divorce where a settlement of $3-5 million would need to be made, we'd have to sell part or all of the business if we could not raise the amount that would be due an ex-spouse.

Two of my siblings are married and they had prenups similar to mine. Our parents made the prenup requirement known to us well before any of us were seriously contemplating marriage. There are other elements to the prenup as it pertains to the family business: for example, if one of us predecease the spouse, the deceased sibling's interest would go into a trust for the children and the surviving spouse would receive an annuity for a specified number of years. So the spouse is not left out in the cold.

OP's in-laws, if they have the flexibility, should just make it a condition of inheritance that a prenup is signed as it pertains to the family business.

[Anonymous]

This is one of the few circumstances where I might sign up a pre nup - family business or farm. A divorce can ruin a family farm lr business. However, I would make sure I was guaranteed a certain amount of cash, depending on number of years married, adjusted for inflation.

However, the parents are approaching it the wrong way. Typically parents say "if u do not get fiancé to sign pre nup, them you cannot own or inherit the business."

My family has a farm. Neither of my siblings got a prenup. It makes me nervous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, does your husband work in the family business? Do the parents plan to leave it exclusively to him? If so, does he plan to work in it at that point?

I'm not a specialist in divorce law, but I believe that in many cases, money inherited by one spouse from his or her parents is not considered part of the marital estate unless it is comingled with marital assets. So, if the parents sold the business and left the proceeds to your husband during your marriage to him, I don't think you would necessarily be entitled to share in them. If he took those assets and combined them with money from other sources to buy your marital residence, that would be another story.

Anyway, I think there should be a way to draft a prenup that says the family business shall remain your husband's exclusive property as long as he does not spend more than __ hours a year overseeing or working in it. The agreement could also say that any streams of income he receives from the businesses (profit distributions, dividends, whatever) are marital property to be shared in by you, but the going concern value (provided he doesn't cross the __ hours per year noted above) remain his alone. If he does end up working full time in the business, then I think it would be fair for his interest to become part of the marital estate. Otherwise, think of this as being analogous to them leaving him a trust fund that is set up so that you can never claim the principle, but you can share in whatever annual income is thrown off by that principle.

In general, I would have the reaction you had to a prenup in the context of a first marriage where neither party to the marriage had kids or major assets to protect. But in this case, you're not talking about DH's assets, you are talking about the parents' asset. I'm just not sure you have any real basis for feeling entitled to that.

In fact, I suspect the parents could get a lawyer to set up a trust so that the business passes to their son and then his children in a way that you can never claim it anyway, even without a prenup.

As for the parents threatening to boycot the wedding, they will probably come around. But don't underestimate the toll this will take on your fiance. For his sake, consider getting a lawyer to help you understand what you'd be entitled to without a prenup and also to help you work out something that would be fair to you while meeting the parents' needs.

Really good advice here.

[Anonymous]

OP, you've received some good advice. Here is my story that perhaps adds another angle. 30 years ago DH came w/ debt and I with assets. But he was headed for a high paying career, and I a low paying career. We signed a prenup (both had legal reps) and kept assets separate (something key - if you comingle them after marrying, they are joint - or so I'd assume). 30 years later he has millions and I have a bit. If we divorce, I get nothing assuming the prenup stands up. The point is, if the future wife thinks she can make it on her own after let's say 15 years, maybe she can sign it. Or if not, esp if she has foregone working to raise kids, it may not be in her interest. There must be a reasonable way to assuage the parents' current interest in making sure DW is not going to steal the family business and still protect her interests as they would appear down the road (not right at the moment).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the bigger issue are the parents trying to force their values on the couple. They are threatening to boycott the wedding??? But I assume they will keep him in the family business all the same if he marries the woman??? Major relationship red flag there and I question the priorities of the parents.

I commend the groom for sticking up for his wife to be. If I was him, I would contact a lawyer to investigate other ways for the family business and his parents assets to be protected besides just a prenup. Then he could go to his parents with a proposal of other options to ease their concerns. His individual assets are shared between him and his future wife and his parents should mind their own beeswax regarding those. The joint family asset should be their only concern and I believe those could be protected under a trust or corporation entity.

OP here, the DIL suggested other ways of keeping herself of out of the business without a prenup.
FIL stated that he won't be told how to run his business by a young twenty something.FIL wants a prenup.

I believe the children have part legal ownership.

If I was her, I would think long and hard about marrying into a family like that. Imagine trying to deal with in laws like that for 20-30 years. Whoa. I see a whole lot of crap hitting the fan other than this prenup issue unless a stand is made now.

For the groom to be, is he willing to walk away from the family business in support of his future wife? He has terrible parents if they want to destroy his happiness over money. The fiancé was just offering alternatives, not telling the father how to run his business. The parents are also using purse strings to control the life of their children. Horrible people.

If they are not even open to suggestions, I wouldn't marry the guy unless he was willing to sever his ties with the business and draw a clear boundary with his parents. If they chose not to come to the wedding or future important events like grandchildren, I would say they made their bed and let them lie in it. They can die as miserable, lonely, old people with no family. Nursing homes are full of them.

[Anonymous]

No. My husband's family owned a business and when his father died, I went to Georgia with him for several years and helped keep the business running. Based on this experience, I would not sign anything saying I had no rights to any part of a family business, since I have experience being part of the reason that a family business survived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you've received some good advice. Here is my story that perhaps adds another angle. 30 years ago DH came w/ debt and I with assets. But he was headed for a high paying career, and I a low paying career. We signed a prenup (both had legal reps) and kept assets separate (something key - if you comingle them after marrying, they are joint - or so I'd assume). 30 years later he has millions and I have a bit. If we divorce, I get nothing assuming the prenup stands up. The point is, if the future wife thinks she can make it on her own after let's say 15 years, maybe she can sign it. Or if not, esp if she has foregone working to raise kids, it may not be in her interest. There must be a reasonable way to assuage the parents' current interest in making sure DW is not going to steal the family business and still protect her interests as they would appear down the road (not right at the moment).

Wow, thanks is certainly a cautionary tale. Do you regret the prenup? Do you feel insecure, or do you think that after 30 years, you think you'll be fine?

[Anonymous]

No, we're headed for divorce. I am totally screwed. But that might not be the case for OP.

[Anonymous]

Of course. I would think that it could maybe protect her, to not be liable for the business in any way. I would want to have a lawyer look at it before i signed, though. All sorts of crap could be in there.

I would expect anyone who married me to sign a prenup, and I would happily sign a prenup. I have a daughter, so I want to make sure that in the event of my death, that the assets I've worked for go to her. I look at a prenup as similar to fire insurance - if you have a fire, it sucks that you have lost everything but at least the insurance allows you to rebuild and start over. A divorce would suck and you'd mourn the loss of your husband the the life you had, but at least you'd walk out of the marriage with the stuff you had before the marriage, and you could start over without having to start over from square one. Buying fire insurance doesn't say you expect a fire - it says you acknowledge that a fire could happen and you're prepared for it. A prenup doesn't say you're expecting a divorce, but that you acknowledge the possibility and want to make things cleaner in that event.

Obviously the prenup would treat a 1-year quickie marriage differently than a 20-year marriage with shared children and property involved. And in Virginia, which is a non-common property state, they do look at what each partner brought into the marriage, so a prenup might not even be necessary.