Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I dont care about his money then I would sign it. It would be easier on my husband and I am sure it would make him happy to have his family there. Really, if you think this marriage is going to work...then why not?

Bingo! But you can be sure that his money is the reason why she is reluctant to sign the prenup.

I wouldn't assume that of the bride to be. I've been married 25 years and our finances are much different than when we started out or even anticipated. The problem with prenups, no one has a crystal ball.

What if after they have kids, he wants her to be a SAHM at the set back of her own career? By being a SAHM, she handles all child care issues, peds appointments, school meetings, etc. while he has flexibility in his own work schedule to build the business and grow his income? What if she helps in the family business after the parents passing? Her sacrifices contribute directly to her family's well being and her husband's ability to have a thriving career. Should she just be left in the cold if the marriage goes south? I say they are a young couple and a prenup demand would be ridiculous.

The family business is screwed up if there is no distinction between personal income and net worth and the worth of the business as a whole. Why do they have to be so intrusive in their son's life to protect their financial well being? Separate the net worth of the business from the net worth of the son and the prenup issue would be null and void.

This is one of my life's mottos: You can only control your actions, not the actions of others. The parents should just restructure the company, let the prenup issue go, and be supportive of the happy couple.

Anonymous wrote:Given the tensions that have already developed between bride to be and her future in-laws, I'd say the outlook for marital bliss is slim to none especially if her future husband is close to his family.

If the prenup - or rather the lack of one - is that important to her, I'd suggest that she move on. Otherwise, I have no doubt that she or someone on behalf will be posting on this forum about how her marriage has turned out to be a disaster and what should she do about it.

+1

I'd say the chances are slim to none that this marriage would last especially if her fiance is actively involved in the family business.

I suggest they value the business at the time of marriage (obviously the ILs want a high valuation and the fiance a low one) they come to a consensus somewhere in the middle. Then, if they divorce, she's entitied to half her DH's ownership portion of the growth of business since they were married.

Oh, and I'd be sure as hell to say the prenup is void in the event of cheating, emotional or physical abuse.

This, and two other issues: 1. The double standard with the other DIL not being asked to sign is a huge problem and needs to be addressed, and 2. If she does go through with this marriage she should absolutely sign a mutually agreed upon and drafted agreement for her own protection. Fiancee may be lovely but she's in dangerous territory with these IL's and should plan accordingly. Kids, a marital home, and a decade of cohabitation will change everything she can predict or knows about this relationship. Hopefully for the better. But maybe not.

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is a ridiculous scenario for one main reason: the parents presumably own all or most of the family business at this point and they can do with it as they please ...... no different than any other assets they own.

If one of my children was going to marry someone I did not approve of or had misgivings about, and he was not willing to protect my assets while I was alive, I'd just disinherit him/her. It is my money and I can do with it as I please and if I am going to bequeath it to my children it would be on terms that I decide. If the terms I establish are too onerous, they are fully within their rights to tell me to lump it.

The kids have part ownership, parents own just over half.

Anonymous wrote:One question for you prenup supporters, woould you share an inheritance of mney with a spouse.

Eg if you received say 500 000 inherance would you mingle that money and share with spouse?

DW inherited a substantial sum of money a few years ago. It was in the high six figures. She kept it separate and I had no problem with her doing so. She does pay more than her share for some common expenses such as vacations and extraordinary items like a new roof we needed.

We've been married over 20 years - and happily so. I don't interpret every action as being lack of trust, etc. Fortunately she does not do so either.

This whole thing is a ridiculous scenario for one main reason: the parents presumably own all or most of the family business at this point and they can do with it as they please ...... no different than any other assets they own.

If one of my children was going to marry someone I did not approve of or had misgivings about, and he was not willing to protect my assets while I was alive, I'd just disinherit him/her. It is my money and I can do with it as I please and if I am going to bequeath it to my children it would be on terms that I decide. If the terms I establish are too onerous, they are fully within their rights to tell me to lump it.

PP here, I would be really pissed if my spouse didn't share an inheritance, it's greedy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One question for you prenup supporters, woould you share an inheritance of mney with a spouse.

Eg if you received say 500 000 inherance would you mingle that money and share with spouse?

I am not a prenup supporter but I would not co-mingle inheritance money that I received ........ and neither would I expect my spouse to do so.

Why? Because it is not a marital asset ......... it is something that was left to one of the parties by usually family and has nothing to do with the contribution either party made towards the marital assets.

Now, if I were to inherit a substantial amount of money, I'd be more than happy to pay for the kids' college or something similar ...... but am not obligated to do so any more than my spouse would be if the shoe were on the other foot.

That is weird to me.
I am opposed to prenups but I shared my inheritance with my spouse. I didn't even think about it.

Anonymous wrote:One question for you prenup supporters, woould you share an inheritance of mney with a spouse.

Eg if you received say 500 000 inherance would you mingle that money and share with spouse?

I am not a prenup supporter but I would not co-mingle inheritance money that I received ........ and neither would I expect my spouse to do so.

Why? Because it is not a marital asset ......... it is something that was left to one of the parties by usually family and has nothing to do with the contribution either party made towards the marital assets.

Now, if I were to inherit a substantial amount of money, I'd be more than happy to pay for the kids' college or something similar ...... but am not obligated to do so any more than my spouse would be if the shoe were on the other foot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.
The grooms brother got married in January. They didn't ask his fiancé, now wife to sign.
I don't know why. But this would REALLY REALLY cheese me off.

I was the PP who said that given the tensions that seem to exist, she should just move on. With this new information, it is clear that the in-laws either don't like her or don't trust her or both. This is a match made in hell so to speak and unless her husband to be is willing to sever ties with his family or the in-laws come around, this marriage is not going to last.

The reality is that we know nothing about her and why her in-laws to be are treating her differently but something just does not smell right. May be they see her as a money-grubbing individual who will not stick by their son. May be they think their son is a difficult person to live with.

The marriage lasts. That is for sure.

The in laws don't like her because she doesn't kiss their rears and she had a mind of her own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I dont care about his money then I would sign it. It would be easier on my husband and I am sure it would make him happy to have his family there. Really, if you think this marriage is going to work...then why not?

Bingo! But you can be sure that his money is the reason why she is reluctant to sign the prenup.

NP here. Having a prenup does not allow spouses to be on equal footing. I would never sign that, never.

One question for you prenup supporters, woould you share an inheritance of mney with a spouse.

Eg if you received say 500 000 inherance would you mingle that money and share with spouse?

Anonymous wrote:If I dont care about his money then I would sign it. It would be easier on my husband and I am sure it would make him happy to have his family there. Really, if you think this marriage is going to work...then why not?

Bingo! But you can be sure that his money is the reason why she is reluctant to sign the prenup.

Anonymous wrote:OP here.
The grooms brother got married in January. They didn't ask his fiancé, now wife to sign.
I don't know why. But this would REALLY REALLY cheese me off.

I was the PP who said that given the tensions that seem to exist, she should just move on. With this new information, it is clear that the in-laws either don't like her or don't trust her or both. This is a match made in hell so to speak and unless her husband to be is willing to sever ties with his family or the in-laws come around, this marriage is not going to last.

The reality is that we know nothing about her and why her in-laws to be are treating her differently but something just does not smell right. May be they see her as a money-grubbing individual who will not stick by their son. May be they think their son is a difficult person to live with.

If I dont care about his money then I would sign it. It would be easier on my husband and I am sure it would make him happy to have his family there. Really, if you think this marriage is going to work...then why not?