2011 April 30 Saturday
Marriage And Prenuptial Agreements
Guys, if you feel compelled to get married against my better judgment then check out PrenuptialAgreements.org.
I came across that site in an LA Times article entitled Six situations in which you may need a prenup.
Vastly disparate income: Earning more or less than your spouse generally isn't an issue while you're married, because there's a presumption that both people share and share alike. But in the event of a split, a prenuptial agreement can set a limit — either a minimum or a maximum — on the amount the higher-wage earner pays or the lower-wage earner would get. One caveat is that state court judges have been known to toss out prenuptial agreements that appear patently unfair to the lower-wage earner, particularly in long-term marriages, according to PrenuptialAgreements.org. You can write an agreement that says "no alimony under any circumstances," but enforcing it could be another issue.
Even if you sign a prenup today that is compatible with court rulings in your state that does not mean the prenup will still be respected by courts 5, 10, 20 years from now. So there's a risk with prenups no matter what you put in them. Conventional business contracts are much less risky.
In some countries like Mexico, all marriages are -unless specified otherwise- under the "wealth separation" term automatically, which means that in case of a divorce, each one keeps what is to his/her name.
Now if at the time of divorce there are children under age, and the woman is unemployed and keeps the children, the man is required by law to continue giving child support for the children only, not for the woman since he has no responsibility for the woman anymore. Same works the other way around: if the man is unemployed and for some reason gets to keep the children the woman would be required by law to give child support -for the children only, that is-.
If at the time of the divorce there are no underage children or it was a childless marriage, then neither does the woman have to give anything to the man, nor the man has to give anything to the woman, (simply because slavery was abolished long time ago in Mexico, including the form of slavery in which a man is forced to continue supporting or "give half" to a parasite woman or vice-versa) In the end every party gets to keep what is under their respective names, and perhaps say: "Nice living with you, bye-bye"
But of course, that's in backwards third-world shithole Mexico.
Sounds like I would like to get married in Mexico!
But even if US citizens get married in Mexico, once they move to the United States and they divorce, maybe the courts will ultimately require the wealthier spouse to pay alimony or 50 % of the personal wealth. The solution is not to get married at all. Within 25 years children will be designed in laboratories anyway.