5 ms·
I mean if you have this kind of concerns, isn't it better to get a prenup? Doesn't it solve the problem?
by hiq 4y ago
I mean if you have this kind of concerns, isn't it better to get a prenup? Doesn't it solve the problem?
- yodsanklai 4y agoOr just not getting married... in my part of the world getting married is the exception rather than the norm.
- abdabab 4y agoWhere is that?
- belter 4y agoIn most parts of the world, married or not married, will give your partner the same rights and responsibilities.
- hiq 4y agoWhich part of the world? Even without civil partnership? Does it mean that there's a legal battle to define whether a certain person can be considered a partner?
- belter 4y agoIt's called a de facto union. Example: "Unmarried Couples ...This page is about partners in a stable relationship who are not married or registered with any authority..." - https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/family/couple/de-facto-unions/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/family/couple/de-facto...
- nradov 4y agoGenerally speaking pre-nuptial agreements in California mainly cover assets and income sources that a spouse had before the marriage. They wouldn't impact how a family law judge calculates imputed income for alimony or child support due to taking a higher paying job during the marriage. There are some additional complexities there so talk to an attorney if this is a concern for you. A post-nuptial agreement can also be an option.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rmk 4y agoLife changes. People can often grow in their careers, and also grow apart. And even if you work in FAANG, self-respecting spouses will demur or reevaluate the relationship if you go asking for a prenup. This kind of thing is almost unheard of for people who work for wages and do not have an agent, legal team or other type of representation already.
- krageon 4y agoPrenup should be the default, any other agreement is fundamentally adversarial IMO.