Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

Anonymous wrote:How is the prenup they’re discussing different from what would happen without a prenup? Trusts and inheritance are always separate aren’t they?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

It actually sounds like you got taken advantage of. Why didn't you make him fund his own lifestyle, provide for his own child, and at least cover half of your shared kid's expenses from the trust? That way, you could save and protect some of your earnings. It almost reads like you’re a wage slave in this marriage. I don't like it for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

It actually sounds like you got taken advantage of. Why didn't you make him fund his own lifestyle, provide for his own child, and at least cover half of your shared kid's expenses from the trust? That way, you could save and protect some of your earnings. It almost reads like you’re a wage slave in this marriage. I don't like it for you.

You don't know what the stepwise system gave her each year. She could have gotten stepwise a beneficiary share in the trust each year that would cover more than what she could have saved if he used money from the trust.

Anonymous wrote:You definitely need a lawyer. Maybe look at total assets so as you earn more each year and her trust builds you remain financial equals in the marriage. Maybe she pulls out of the trust the equivalent of your salary.

No matter what you do your high six figure to seven figure salary will be a marital asset so you will have 99% of the family income and HHI. Her money is all locked away and won't be considered family assets - yours isn't.

You need a lawyer to help you figure out how to remain financial equals in the marriage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

It actually sounds like you got taken advantage of. Why didn't you make him fund his own lifestyle, provide for his own child, and at least cover half of your shared kid's expenses from the trust? That way, you could save and protect some of your earnings. It almost reads like you’re a wage slave in this marriage. I don't like it for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For heaven's sake get a lawyer. Sounds like this groom-to-be is very poorly informed -- the worry about paying alimony to someone as wealthy as this bride-to-be doesn't make much sense in 2025. A lawyer can set all of this straight for him.

I'm not a fan of prenups, and would not have signed one myself. But under these circumstances, it makes sense for this bride-to-be to get one in place.

It makes sense for the groom too.

Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar, gender swapped, situation on a /much/ smaller scale. Even down to meeting my husband when I was finishing subspecialty training and just starting a lucrative partnership track job in my early 30's. Husband didn't want to touch trust, so we basically live off my income while his savings remains premarital assets and untouched and he works a modestly paid public interest job. In our case, we created a stepwise system where I gradually become his beneficiary of that trust to a max 1/3 after 20 years. We are currently at year 17! The remainder is split evenly between his son and our son. It makes my husband feel better because his premarital assets remain intact with the majority passing to our kids. And I'm fine with being the breadwinner and saving less because it functionally acts like savings for me.

If anyone thinks this is too much, especially when there are step kids involved, I'll point out my income funded private school, college, and grad school for my stepson. Things my husband would have had to dig into the trust for had I not been in the picture. He stopped the big law lifestyle when he met me and was also able to spend much more time at home and with both kids.

Anonymous wrote:For heaven's sake get a lawyer. Sounds like this groom-to-be is very poorly informed -- the worry about paying alimony to someone as wealthy as this bride-to-be doesn't make much sense in 2025. A lawyer can set all of this straight for him.

I'm not a fan of prenups, and would not have signed one myself. But under these circumstances, it makes sense for this bride-to-be to get one in place.

Anonymous wrote:This marriage seems to be in trouble already based on your description. We are leaving our child mid-eight figures (as you would describe it). You can bet there will be a prenup.

If I were in DD’s parent’s shoes, I would probably agree to fund grandchildren’s education and chip in on a house but insist on a prenup.