Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jbcjr14
That is what I meant Schneed - not implying that it controlled how money can be spent. I was implying that it already takes care of how it will be split should something happen and the divorce rate over money issues during the marriage are lowered because there is no question on who gets what when a prenup is done. Hell, if there was an agreement on who can spend what, where and how....that would be insane, that's too much like capitalism rather than a marriage!
|
But it's the how money gets spent part that CAUSES the divorce in the first place. The argument over how money gets split happens AFTER a marriage already heads down the road to splitsville.
I don't see how having a prenup would reduce divorce rates. People don't get divorced because they think they're getting a good deal on the division of assets - some Warpath lawyers can correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge you can't just up and get divorced for no good reason and collect half the assets. You have to catch your spouse cheating, prove your spouse is abusive, or get your spouse to sign divorce papers for irreconcilable differences. So if a wife makes way less money than a husband, she can't just divorce him for nothing and take home 50% of the assets. She's got to either get his consent (and a divorce settlement for an agreed upon portion of assets), or prove he broke the marriage laws and force him to give 50% of assets.
Having a prenup would help protect your wallet once you get divorced. But it does nothing to help prevent the financial disputes that CAUSE divorce: the inability to agree upon financial priorities, ie spenders vs savers.