A friend of mine is getting married soon and faced with the infamous option to get a prenuptial agreement. You know, the one most of us would shoot down in honor of our commitment " 'til death do us part". Prenuptial agreements, or prenups, determine how valuable assets will be divided in a divorce. When there is no prenup, usually somebody leaves with more than he or she earned during the marriage. For example: Kobe Bryant's marriage. So if you believe in happily 'ever after, then you may see prenups as unnecessary or even a red flag that somebody's bracing for a divorce. But do prenups really mean you expect the marriage to end prematurely? Well, does wearing a seatbelt mean you expect to wreck? No. I understand that you don't go into a marriage entertaining the possibility that it won't work, but believe it or not...
Prenuptial agreements facilitate longevity in marriage.
When you get married, you expect certain odds to come against you; Arguments, temptations, etc. Those odds are incentives to divorce depending on the seriousness. The absence of a prenup' leaves a one sided incentive to whoever, during the marriage, is worth less(no pun intended). Of course, nobody's thinking about that at the altar. But what happens when those other odds come knocking? "For better or worse, through thick and thin" means no matter what, we're supposed to find a way to work through it. Think about those marriages that ended in huge settlements, and how much more willing someone would've been to work things out if there were millions of dollars less to gain by quitting. In cases like Kobe Bryant's, a divorce was practically a lottery ticket waiting to be cashed in. Don't you think that in the wake of a serious argument, $150 million might be an incentive to throw in the towel? Just a little
Most of the "no-prenup" advocates out there see it as a liability reliever when we want to excuse our marriage vows. This implies that we just want a safety net so we don't have too much to lose. Well, a prenuptial agreement is the least of your worries if he's more afraid of divorcing his wallet than divorcing you. Having one doesn't always have to be preparation for an inevitable "post marriage" situation, but instead it gives you a better chance of never having to worry about that.
Would you leave your extremely attractive and single girlfriend home alone with your husband for a few days while you're off on a business trip? Assuming that you said (hell) no, I'd say it's not because you don't trust him, but you wouldn't want to even have to worry about that. Leaving them there and alone is conducive to a situation you'd rather not happen. Leaving someone in the marriage to have something to gain from getting a divorce is conducive to a situation you'd.....(finish the sentence).