Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    
    Being in the middle of a nasty divorce right now, with a greedy
    ex (a marriage that I had thought would last "...till death"),
    and an unfair property law in Massachusetts (i.e. EVERYTHING under
    the roof gets divided 50-50 as opposed to what each of you brought
    into the marriage is yours and NOT to be divided if there is a
    divorce in the future), if I should decide to get married again,
    I would DEFINITELY want a pre-nuptial agreement that would include
    a property division agreement that what each brought in is NOT
    to be divided if the marriage ends.  (e.g.- My ex is trying to get part
    of the record collection I had amassed out of my own pocket LONG
    before I ever even knew her!!).
    
    While I agree that a pre-nuptial agreement feels like it is implying
    that the marriage may not last and could feel like a negative to
    lovers planning on marrying, I feel that this would be a good idea
    so others of you won't be caught in the situation I am now in.
    
    
    					Joe

    Re .1:
        I am pretty sure that EVERY state has the concept of separate
    property - property which you owned before the marriage, or a gift
    that is a "family heirloom" meant to stay in the family.  Of course,
    it gets complicated if, for example, you bought a house before
    marriage but you made any payments for that house after you were
    married.  In such cases, your spouse is generally considered to
    have contributed towards the payments.
    
        I do agree that prenuptial agreements are a good idea when
    one is bringing in valuable property into a marriage, or for
    specific deals as described in .2.  However, the Today segment
    talked about agreements as to who walks the dog, how many children
    to have, and such stuff, which I find incredulous.
    
    					Steve

     
     Pre-nuptial agreements are not always as straightforward as they
     may seem.
     
     Before a recent marriage of mine, I spoke to a shyster about a pre-nup
     agreement.  She told me that many pre-nuptial agreements do not hold
     up in court afterwards -- a common reason for trashing them is when
     each party does not have his and her own lawyer when the agreement is
     being drawn.  Also, at least in some states, a judge can override any
     or all of the provisions in an agreement; this can especially occur
     if there are any 'issues' (that what lawyers call 'kids').
     
     In general, it's a good, though maybe grisly, idea to talk to a lawyer
     first in order to understand your options.
     
     --Mr Topaz 

    Re: .3
    Not true - Mass law sez that the judge MAY but doesn't have to look
    at the source of things in the marriage. So in Mass, worst case,
    everything can be split 50-50 no matter who did what. It depends
    on the whim of the judge. From personal experience, I decided to
    capitulate to her demands rather than risk an antagonistic judge.
    Also, we weren't THAT far apart in what we each thought was reasonable
    and though there is some bitterness there for me, I decided to opt
    for peace. Since then, she's had a very serious car accident and
    will be in the hospital for a long time so I'm visiting there almost
    every day. It's amazing how a serious event can change your perspective
    and you (I) become aware of what's really important in life. My
    caring for her transcends everyday trivial things like splitting
    up and money (did I say that?). Though I expect we will stay split
    up, I care about her very much and very much want to see her make
    it.

Minor digression on MA divorce and marital property.

The MA lawyer to whom I talked said that the law provided for two "classes"
of marriage; long and short, where the cutoff seemed to be about 5 years
(I may have the number wrong, it's hard to read that part of the handwritten 
note that she gave to me).

If you had been married less than 5 years, then the marriage was deemed a
"short marriage", and there was marital property AND non-marital property.
Simply put, she said, each of you get to keep what you brought in, and to 
split what was acquired since the marriage. 

If you had been married longer than that, then there was only common marital
property, which would be split.

	And now back to the note already in progress.

    re .1:
    
    > (e.g.- My ex is trying to get part of the record collection I had
    > amassed out of my own pocket LONG before I ever even knew her!!). 

    You are lucky.  Mine tried to get ALL of my record collection (300+
    albums). 
    
    - M

    Re: .6
    I think that the long vs short distinction is subject to the whim
    of the judge and we all know how fair the court system is, right?

    RE:.0
     YES, MY WIFE AND I SIGNED ONE . WHEN WE CAME OUT OF COLLAGE AND I
    GOT MY JOB WITH D.E.C. IT MENT MOVING OUT OF TOWN .
     DO TO THE STRAIN OF STARTING A NEW JOB, IN A NEW CITY, WITH A NEW
    MARRIAGE, IT SEEMED TO MAKE SENSE .
    WE MADE AN AGREEMENT THAT
     1) SUPPORT    NONE  ( SINCE WE BOTH ARE ABLE TO SUPPORT OUR SELVES)
     2) PROPERTY   THAT ANY FUTURE PROPERTY WAS SPLIT = (WE HAD NONE )
     3) CHILREN + VISITATION WAS AGAIN  =               (WE HAD NONE )
     4) ALL PERSONAL "STUFF" BROUGHT IN AND SINCE BOUGHT WAS THAT PERSONS
    
    I AM VERY HAPPY THAT OUR WORST FEARS WHERE NOT REALIZED AND WE ARE
    STILL TOGETHER.....WE NOW LOOK BACK AT IT AS SILLY BUT THEN AT THE
    TIME YOU NEVER KNOW .
    
    HOPE TO NEVER USE IT . 
    
    -CARL-                                  

    
         Ah the ole Mass Judges!!
    My ex of 13 years went into court. WE had a house,loads of
    custom furniture designed by midgets in Mongolia,and all sorts
    of pretty charge cards.
       I left the court with the bills attached to the pretty cards
    and a barrel for clothes..No strap to hold up the barrel,just
    the barrel. She has made my life hell to this day.
    
      And to tell you the truth it's all worth it!
    
    I'm my own person, I see the kids as much as I can. Have a new life
    for myself. I was dumb,but it's only materials.
    I now have my health...Happiness and don't have to live under
    tremendous pressures that she exerted on me.
    
    Later,
    Cal.
    

    Had none,  but then we didn't need it.
    As a peace offering I packed up the truck and left with my cloths.
    She could take anything she wanted.  We did agree to split the
    proceeds of the sale of our land.  I did buy her a car since her
    old one was pretty bad and I did have a new truck.  But then I
    wasn't out to hurt her.  After the divorce I moved back to the
    apartment we had and found she had left me most all of my toys
    but she DID take my Juice Newton albums. - should have gotten a
    pre nup.

        I think pre-nuptual agreements are negative thinking and should
        be avoided. 
        
        JimB.

    
    RE: .13
    
    Jim, I agree that pre-nuptial agreements can spawn some negative
    thinking, but if they can prevent some of the bitter battling when
    and if divorce results and one partner is greedy, I feel they are
    a worthwhile effort.
    
    					Joe

    
    Re .13, I think pre-nuptial agreements are realistic and practical.
     The fact is that any marriage has a 50-50 change of lasting forever.
     I don't think that's necessarily bad; it's just the way life is.
     People grow and change and sometimes it's just time to move on.
     Even of the people who stay married forever I'd be willing to bet
    that about half of them are unhappy and feel stuck in a situation
    they can't get out of.  So, that leaves about 25% of all marriages
    *happily* lasting forever.  That's just the way life is.  If people
    are practical enough to realize that and plan for it, then people
    might not *be* so bitter when marriages end that they want to strike
    back and hurt the other party.  They might not feel so betrayed
    and let down that they want to take all the albums, etc., if they
    realized all along that the marriage was most likely not going to
    last forever anyway.  I think it's being happy that counts in a
    relationship, not whether it lasts forever.  I'm not implying that
    people should go through one another at the rate of 10 or more a
    year.  But, if two people have 5 or 10 good years together and then
    move on, that should be okay.  People shouldn't feel a relationship
    has to last 40 or 50 years in order to be valid.
    
    I'm divorced and if I ever were to marry again I would definitely
    want some things agreed upon.  What happens to major purchases that
    each person paid half for?  Who would get physical custody of any
    children?  Would both agree to sell the house and split the profit
    in event of divorce?  People can get so hurt by the these issues
    it seems to me they're worth looking into first.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    RE: .15
    
    Bob,
    
    For what it's worth, what I feel might be negative in a "premarital
    agreement" is that it is including something that discusses about
    the marriage breaking up, at a time when both people are probably
    feeling that they are making a "'till death due us part" commitment
    to each other.  This is probably why that thought never crossed
    my mind when I first got married.  Not that I wouldn't make the
    same commitment in the future, but going through what I am now,
    I would be more realistic that it MIGHT end before death (which
    doesn't say I wouldn't do my utmost to see it "work"), so that I
    would want to protect myself (and my sons) and (like insurance)
    hope and pray that I never need to "collect" on it!!
    
    Is that basically what you feel, Jim?
    
    					Joe

    "Till death do us part" can only be determined in retrospect.  You
    haven't succeeded at it until you're dead.  So throw THAT line right 
    out the window. 
    
    And as far as pre-nupts, that's what marriage IS - the quintessential
    deal.  We've just never written the terms down.  Marriage vows themselves
    are statements of the terms of the agreement.  "I will do this and you 
    will do that".  And our assumptions are pre-nupts as well.  "You will 
    work and put me through law school, and I'll take care of you when I
    graduate and start working"  or "If I get pregnant, you'll help
    me through it and in raising the child".  
    
    All kinds of pre-nuptial deals are negotiated, but they're
    traditionally done in the hazy language of love, and most of us
    just let hope and romance fill in any blanks.  Many of us find out
    later just how hazy and blank-filled these 'hidden negotiations' are, 
    and are shocked by grim reality.  Some people become very adept at 
    letting others fill in the blanks, thereby getting what they want with-
    out having to specifically spell out what they're willing to give in 
    return.
    
    Would I sign one?  Nope.  I believe that even in marriage, no one
    can take advantage of someone without their cooperation. In that respect,
    I'm well protected and don't need one.  What if he insists?  I just
    naturally would not find myself continuing to be attracted once I
    noticed this facet of his personality, and I KNOW it would show
    up long before we ever got near the signing stage!  I've never been
    one to let hope and romance fill in the blanks.  I'm content to
    let them stay blank if that's the case, and keep my freedom.
    
    Sandy
    
    

    This is a bone of contention among many of us...
    
    My S.O. has made abundantly clear that she won't sign one.  I think
    they're good in principle, since you can't trust a judge as far
    as you can throw him.  But she thinks they're negative thinking
    -- if you have one, you must think the marriage is not going to
    last, and that's not what she has in mind.  She also claims that
    they're really only meant for second marriages (that's a weird one
    today, but some TV shows or something have said it.  Too much Donohue,
    must be.)  Now she's in Law School, which means that in the event
    of a failed marriage, guess who's going to have the upper hand!
    Her counter-offer -- if I help her with the tuition, I own a piece
    of her degree and future earnings.  (that's not pre-nup, that's
    precedent.)
    
    Do we detect a split here, with males being more in favor of them
    than females?  Or is that just our situation?
        fred

    I think the split is more that those who have more to protect with
    a pre-nup are more in favor of them, and in our society, males
    typically have greater assetts.
    
    My lawyer has recommended that if I remarry that I sign a pre-nup,
    to protect the significant assets that I will bring into the marriage.
    I guess I'll just have to see what my future bride thinks of that.
    						Steve

    We never did a formal one, but wrote out in long hand our basic
    assumptions and agreements about property.  In one way it was just
    a sanity check to make sure we had the same assumptions, in another
    a future ethics check to give us each something to measure our behaviour
    against during a split if it ever came to that...
    
    Audrey

    RE: .21
    
    Good for YOU, Audrey!!  Glad to hear that there are some females
    who believe in being fair!!
    
    				Joe

    Though your SO will not sign a pre-nuptial agreement and has
    counteroffered with - you help with my tuition and I'll give you
    a portion of my future income - ask her if she'll put THAT in writing.
     If not - watch it!  The fact that she will not sign a pre-nuptial
    agreement and it bothers you enough to mention it here in notes
    - is cause, as far as I'm concenred to think twice before you commit
    yourself.
    
    I realize I sound harsh but my marriage ended after 21 years, my
    daughter's ended after 2 years and for many years I seemed to be
    the one that listened to everyone else's problems.  I know, I know,
    I allowed it to happen - and finally stopped when I realized how
    draining it was.  That's not to say I'm not there if I'm needed
    - but I'm definitely not there for anyone for long-term.  In all
    the time I listened to people - the only advise I ever gave was
    - GET THE BEST LAWYER YOU CAN.  (You did say your SO is going to
    law school?)
    

re: Suzanne,

>             Anyone who knows me well enough to marry me will *KNOW*
>          that I'd never rip him off (no matter *HOW* bad a divorce got.)
>          I just can't believe that *I* need protection from someone
>          that *I* trust enough to marry (even though I've got plenty
>          of assets of my own!)  Sorry...can't buy it...(naive, maybe,
>          or just hopelessly romantic...)


	Wanna get married?  Ooops!  I forgot, I'm already married!

							-david

re: 53.25

>	Wanna get married?  Ooops!  I forgot, I'm already married!


	Gee, what about that "Cluster Marriage" idea? 

							-david

re: .28,

	Actually, the "Cluster Marriage" was my idea!

							-davo

re:  everything,

	hmmmmm...

						-superdavo

	Well, we all think so...

						-david
						-davo
						-superdavo

    C'mon folks - propose to Suzanne by MAIL - that way you won't
    look so silly when she turns you down...  (Don't forget me, Suzanne!
    - oops!)
    						Steve

	So, who got turned down?

							-davo

	Does that mean one out of three?   :^)

    Enie, Menie, Minie,... Moe?

    
    Re .24, Suzanne, just because *your* ex was fair doesn't mean everyone
    is!  Sometimes there are complications.  For example, what if you
    hadn't had enough money to pay him back for his half of the furniture
    investment?  What if you had a child - you can't divide the kid
    in two.  What if both of you want physical custody?  What if you
    owned a home and one of you refused to agree to sell it?
    
    I think problems are likey to occur when one of the people doesn't
    want the marriage to end.  Even though that person may normally
    be a fair person, if they are now feeling rejected, used and hurt,
    they may want to strike back and cause trouble.  Prenuptial agreements
    take this into account.  People are not always at their best during
    the breakup of a relationship.  Also, it's the nicest divorces are
    not going to make prenuptial agreements sound necessary, but the
    messiest, meanest divorces will probably make prenuptial agreements
    sound like a good idea.
    
    Lorna
    

        It's probably because I was raised in a church that disapproves
        of divorce (actually they disapprove of remarriage which is
        taken on Biblical authority to be adulterous, but let's just say
        they disapprove of divorce, OK?), but I firmly believe that
        marriage should be "until death do us part", and that vows are
        solemn promises before God and man. Given that anything that
        assumes that the marriage will be allowed to fail or disolve
        is pessimistic and defeatist, and indicative that the marriage
        ought not to be entered into.
        
        I, of course, therefore disapprove of prenuptual agreements
        along with divorce and premature or ill-advised marriage. 
        
        JimB.

    Re: .38
    
    Jim... I too believe that you should never get divorced.  My religious
    upbringing also tells me that.  My vows said until death do us part.
     However he walked out on me.  Now granted that was the BEST thing
    he could have done, as he is a major number one JERK!  My father who
    is a Southren Baptist Minister helped finance my divorce.  Even
    the Bible says for everthing there is a time and season and reason.
    I don't want to argue biblical ideas here - you'd probably not
    win out 8-), however, even if we had had an agreement it would not
    have helped.  The jerk will not even go see a lawyer.  In two years
    of being separated, I have seen three child support checks only.

    If I ever decide to get married again, I will ask for one.  Why
    because all of a sudden, the world is no longer rosy.  You can love
    a person with all your heart, soul and means, but if they decide
    to up and walked out "because they forgot to be 18, and need
    to have no responsibility anymore", then I want to make sure things
    are covered NOW, and then also.  Notice, I said "I" want the agreeement
    - "I" will be the one insisting, and when they read my will after
    they bury me, then I will instruct them to burn it, but not until
    then!
    
    Jim, I am glad you "may" never need one.  I hope you never will.
     Until the EX walked out on me, I always had the EXACT (read that
    in EXACT) same thoughts as you.
    
    Now, I am living in the REAL world, welcome to it as they say!
    
    GLK

I am getting the impression that whether or not you need an agreement depends
on what kind of a person *you* are, for a couple of reasons.

First of all, you being the type of person you are will either attract the
type of person that you would need an agreement with, or you will attract
the other type that you do not need an agreement with.

Second, I agree that if you have no possessions you don't have much need
for an agreement.

On the other hand, it will not matter to me if Ric's mother ends up with
everything.  There is no real estate, and I am having quite a nice time living
with very little for a change.

Jim. 

    I has been ages since I have typed in the following two words:
    
    <FLAME ON>
    
    On a slightly different note... why is it that the guy ALWAYS cries:
    
    "I'm enjoying living with nothing", or "All I got was the shirt
    on my back, you got to keep everything", or "You have all the love
    and affection of the kids"... or some OTHER big line of BALONEY!!!
    
    I know of several guys who take big delight (my EX including), of
    saying "All I got was blah,blah,blah"... when in actualality (if
    that is not a word, it should be, and it should be spelled like
    that 8-)..) the opposite has been true - they were told to take
    anything they like, and chose NOT to take except what they took, so 
    that later they can be the marters....  NOTHING BURNS ME UP MORE!!! 
    And then they go around bragging about not having anything to live on,
    or just the bare minimum, as in .41.
    
    I don't know of ANY wife who said "I'll keep everything, you can
    have your underwear only, and only becuase it isn't the kind I wear",
    but that is what is always is bragged about....

    
    Is it supposed to make them look like the BIG man???  Are we supposed
    to feel pity for them??? Whenever I hear it, I usually know the
    guy is one of the biggest jerks around...
    
    Jim, to address your .41 in general...
    
    
    I don't attract one sort of man or another... The man I am dating
    is so unlike my EX, that it is not even funny.  The man I dated
    before that was even more different than either of them.  Had the
    relationship reached a point (or reaches a point 8-)..) where I
    was to marry any of them, I WILL insist on a pre agreement, and
    all I own is the clothes on my back, along with some early garage
    sale furniture.  I own no real-estate, and probably won't until
    the girls are all out of the house.  But, in any event, I want all
    avenues covered.  My daughter Rachel was just recently bitten by
    a wasp - now, whenever she even sees a fly she is scared to death,
    moral of that line --> once bitten, twice shy.

    Don't tell me I attact one sort of guy and that is all... That is
    a bunch of baloney...  Should I tell you that you will always attract
    the same sort of wife you just split up with - I doubt it, in fact,
    I am sure if you ever get married again, it will be to someone who
    is totally different. - Personal opinion o'course 8-). 
    
    <FLAME OFF>

    
    GLK

    re: 53.42
    
    Excuse me, but were you flaming at a particular person, men in general,
    or life, the universe, and everything? :-)
    
    No flame here; I was just wondering...
    
    
    The Mad Chinaman
    

    Re: 43
    
    I wasn't flaming at any one in particular, probably life in general.
    
    I just get tired of hearing the same ole sterotypes... yes, I know
    that EVERYONE does not fit in, but it SEEMS like 99.5% do, and that
    is what I was flaming about...
    
    GLK

    
    Re .38, Jim, I don't understand how anyone can say they do not
    *believe* in divorce.  People grow and change and not always together
    and feelings change.  When I married my ex-husband 13 1/2 yrs. ago
    I was very much in love with him.  We had 7 good years of marriage
    and 3 mediocre years and 2 1/2 bad years, and then I left.  I should
    have left sooner.  Why should he and I both waste our lives in an
    unhappy situation?  Now I live with a man whom I love very much
    (it was wonderful to experience that love again after so many years
    without it) and my ex-husband (whom I still like as a friend now
    that I don't have to play wife) is dating a woman that he is very
    happy with.  Both of our lives have been enhanced by finally accepting
    the fact that it was time to move on.  
    
    Love just doesn't always last forever and when it's gone and if
    you're not interested in trying to work something out, then what
    is the sense of wasting two lives in a miserable situation when
    each could be happy elsewhere??  
    
    I believe that it is wrong to promise someone that you will love
    them forever or that you will stay with them forever, because that
    is something that only time will tell.  If you get married at 20
    and live to be 80 it's a long haul.  It may as well be as happy
    as possible.
    
    Each divorce is different.  I hate to see people hurt and abused,
    but sometimes when a person walks out of a marriage they are walking
    out to save their life.  I was.
    
    Lorna
    

RE: .46

"I don't understand how anyone can say they do not *believe* in divorce."

"Love just doesn't always last forever and when it's gone and if you're not
interested in trying to work something out, then what is the sense of wasting
two lives in a miserable situation when each could be happy elsewhere??"

You hit the nail right there...  what "if you're not interested in trying
to work something out"?

In my mind, when you marry, not only are you making a commitment to love that
person, you aresupposedly making a commitment to "work something out".  You are
making a commitment, that if the marriage starts going sour to change *yourself*
and your marriage into something viable. 

That is why I do not "believe" in divorce.  So why am I about to?  Well, I've
been trying for a couple of years to adapt to the given situation, or to change
the situation, and I give up.  You have to have both people willing to try to
change. 

Jim.

    re .40 (Gale), .46(Lorna), .47(Jim)
    
    I too have been on this side of things (though I wasn't quite married
    to him).  I just want to say how *great* people are who go through
    these horrible, sad, tearful breakups and then come out not bitter,
    but smarter, and very *real* people.  It hurt like hell and it consoled
    me none at the time to know I'd come out okay.  But now I'm a completely
    different person and I like the person I am now much better.  My
    feet are more on the ground and I look around in the world and see
    a *lot* more than I could before.
    
    This note is meant to praise those of you who have gone through
    or are going through breakups because I know you are (or will be)
    smarter than before.  I sympathize with you too.
    
    It's those people who have never been through a heartbreaking breakup
    before that I feel sorry for.  They can live with their fantasies
    about "marriage and love should last forever" and all that.  But
    that's not the real world.

    You can bet that I'd have a prenup.  The man I marry (if/when) will
    be firmly grounded in reality too.

    	-Ellen G.
   

    > It's those people who have never been through a heartbreaking breakup
    > before that I feel sorry for.  They can live with their fantasies
    > about "marriage and love should last forever" and all that.  But
    > that's not the real world.
      
    Good heavens!  I hadn't realized just how pathetic my lot in
    life was.  I guess I should abandon my wife and child, so we
    can have a really heartbreaking breakup and start living in the
    real world.
    
    No...  I guess I'll just live with my fantasies.  It may not
    be the real world, but it's a lot more comfortable.  Well, I'm
    glad to know that someone feels sorry for me in my benighted
    condition, anyways.
    
    	- Neil

        Believe me, I ain't living no fantasy, guys. My wife and I have
        been through all sorts of difficulties. Sharing your life with
        someone is hard, very hard, but the rewards are worth it. The
        real world is no rose garden. I just refuse to give up. I take
        my promises very seriously, and so does my wife.
        
        If I thought I could just promise to love forever and to live
        happily ever after and "poof!" it would happen, it wouldn't.
        That kind of thinking will doom you from the start. When I
        married I promised to actively love Selma for ever, to fix it
        whenever I wasn't, to work out whatever problems came along.
        
        As those of you who know me either in person, or just by net
        reputation may be able to guess, I'm not the easiest person in
        the world to love or even to like. Being married to me is a
        definite chore sometimes. But my wife, God bless her, has loved
        me even when she didn't like me. In turn, although my job has
        probably been much easier, I've had to work at our relationship.
        We've both had to try hard to stick it through "richer or
        poorer, for better or worse", to keep plugging when we would
        have just as soon packed it in. 
        
        Now I don't want to make it like living together has been a bad
        thing--just the reverse, it's wonderful! But no relationship is
        easy. Complacency will blow you away if you let it. Love, trust
        and commitment are hard work, and undoubtedly irrational, but
        they're also the best things that life offers. The payback for a
        life of work, is a life of joy, a life of satisfaction, a life
        whose peeks tower (and can be seen clearly by their contrast
        with the lows). 
        
        Feel sorry for my naivete, if you must, but forgive me if I
        don't share the sentiments. I worked too hard getting here to
        under-value it or give it up.
        
        JimB. 

    In .52, Suzanne said it as well as I could.  Yes, I've been hurt,
    and yes it was by a woman, but I am a firm believer in individuality
    so I am not "down on women".  On the subject of the base note, my
    consideration of a prenuptial agreement would not be because I 
    "don't trust women" but because I know that in life there are no
    guarantees, no matter HOW hard you wish they were.  I couldn't be
    happier if I never had to use the agreement, and would certainly
    work hard to make sure I never did.
    					Steve

I've been reading this file for sometime now and feel like it's time to post 
a reply.

On the subject of pre-nups ... Yes, i believe in them.  I was recently engaged
to someone who couldn't undestand why anyone would need or want to have such 
an agreement.  "What do you think i'm going to do, anyway?  Do you think i'm 
going to suddenly change?" she said.  Well, this subject kept arising every so
often, before we were engaged.  I thought about what she had said for a while,
thinking i knew her pretty well (we've been seeing each other for about a year)
and she always appeared to be level headed and marriage & family minded (so i
thought), so i said, what the hell, forget about the prenup and let's get 
married.  

So we went about the next month making wedding plans & dreaming about our 
wonderful future together.  Then, something suddenly happened to her (and to 
this day i can't understand what) and she suddenly broke off the engagement.  
I then saw someone that i thought would be my wife for life, someone who 
wanted and needed no one else in her world but me, someone who i thought i 
could believe in and trust and always be there for me, a kind, sensitive, 
caring girl turn into someone ugly.  No longer am my anything more than a 
memory to her and it has left my life in a mess.  I thought i had experienced 
all the emotions that i was capable of in my mere 31 years of existance until 
this happened to me.  I've been to the depths of my soul and my heart still
won't leave me alone.  It's been 3 months now and i don't hear from her, 
anymore.  I guess it's better that way, anyway.  Last i heard she was dating 
some hot shot N.Y. model (certainly didn't waste any time).  So much for our 
future...

No, it dosen't console me any right now to know that i'll come out of this
okay.  I know i will, eventually, but i hope it doesn't take years, as it has 
for some of the other people i have read about in this conference.  What will 
be hard for me, after this, is that when (and if) i finally do get married, 
this event will always be in the back of my mind as a reminder of the reality
lifes uncertainties in dealing with human beings.  I guess i will always wonder
if one day this may happen again, only this time after several years of 
marriage.

Yes, Ellen, i agree with you, i do see things differently than before and I 
learned some things about myself that i didn't know before all of this 
happened.  If anything good has come out of this it has been, that.  It has 
or should i say, will) made me a stronger person,  and as its been said before,
one appreciates the good things in life so much more when they have experienced
how low it can be at times. 

But no, i don't feel sorry for the people who have never been through a heart-
breaking breakup, i envy them.  I wouldn't wish that pain & suffering upon 
anyone.  For some people, the fantasy of love & marriage lasting a lifetime, 
is the real world.  They are truly the fortunate ones.

Anyway, to get back on the subject.  What i am saying is that people change
and not always for the better.  I've seen it first hand.  There are no 
guarantee's in life as we all know (only limited warrantees) and a wedding ring 
doesn't make a darn bit of difference, it only complicates matters.  You bet 
that i'm going to have a pre-nup when the time comes and no one can change my 
mind on that, anymore.

BTW, I want to come to the party.  When is it, again?

					-jim-

    Thank you, Thank you, for your praise, Ellen.  This month I am
    "celebrating" (acknowledging is a better word) the 1 year anniversary
    of the breakup of my marriage of 10 years.  And I agree with you
    100%.  A year ago I was devastated.  I thought my life was over.
    Recovering was hell.  Today, I can see how I have grown and learned
    from the experience.  I was lucky to go thru the recovery period
    with 2 close friends in the same situation.  Without their help,
    I may not have made it.  And we discuss often what has happened
    in the past year.  I understand completely what you are saying.
    It was not a good experience, and certainly one I would not want
    to repeat.  However, I can see the postive aspects and realize that
    even when things look the most bleak, they always turn out for the
    best.
    
    Jim, when I read your reply, my heart went out to you.  As trivial
    as it may sound to you now, it really will be okay.  Someday you
    will look back and realize why that person really was not meant
    to be with you.  But to help in your immediate situation, may I
    suggest a marvelous little book called "How to Survive the Loss
    of a Love".   It helped tremendously when I was going thru my
    divorce.
    
    Finally, my (ex) husband and I have remained close friends, and
    will always love each other dearly.  In fact, he is reading this
    over my shoulder as I type!  There will always be sadness that we
    couldn't live together, but I'm thankful that we can now share our
    love without constant turmoil, anger and hurt.
    
    

Good point Sue...  There is more then one way to look in a mirror...  But
I don't think that most people are thinking of it that way.

RE: Sticking it out

Well, the people who have stuck it out, seem to be couples who both wanted to
work things out and stay together.  And if your not in that set, you might as
well hang it up.

I'll be the first to admitt that I certainly must have a log in my eye, because
I can't see it.  But I can't get it out, etc...  What I want/need is reasonable
but impossible for her to do.  What I would have to do to continue in the same
situation, I have already done once, and I will *not* do again, and would not be
doing *anyone* any favors for doing.  So, I guess that is that....

RE: Fantasy

Foo!  I'll take the fantasy any day.  I've had lots of dreams and loves, and
they've all been shot down.  Sure I'm hurt, but I'm bidding my time looking for
the next one.  May I never get cynical...!

Jim. 

    Seems to me that, among other things, the words "compromise" and
    "partnership" must be understood in similar ways by both people
    and in my case, I learned that we had quite different
    understandings of what the words meant. It took me a long and painful
    time to realize that neither she nor I could/would change in this
    area and it was time to move on. That does not deny my growth from
    the relationship in other areas. It also doesn't mean to me that
    the people that stay together no matter what are wrong. It's just
    not right for me.        

	It's a good thing we're talking about marriage here and not about
    Love.  If a Prenuptual agreement was meant to act as a guideline for a
    love relationship, then I can understand why people would feel that it
    would be a little unneccessary because ideally Love would conquer all.

	However, if you think about the whole concept of marriage for a minute, 
    you'll discover just how materialistic it really is:  engagement rings,
    wedding bands, floral arrangements, rehersal dinners, wedding dresses and
    tuxedoes, location rentals, wedding liscences, ceremonial fees, transpor-
    tation to and from the wedding, wedding presents, not to mention possible
    dowry's and inheritance's you can see that there is a heck of alot dough
    going into a typical marriage these days (on the average - sorry Suzanne,
    I'm generalizing a little here).

	Now, if you compare the cost of the actual marriage with the cost of
    maintaining the marriage, you'll see that it's only a drop in the bucket.
    As Madonna says "We are living in a material world", and unless there's
    some sort of revolution in the works that I don't know about, then I would
    expect that things aren't going to be changing much in the near future.

	My point is that if you truly want to enter into a legally binding
    contract (such as marriage), that you'd better know just what it can poten-
    tially do to your income (and ultimately lifestyle).  That's why I see no
    real problem with a Prenuptual agreement - because it's only meant to help
    the couple understand what the terms of the marriage are up front (rather
    than rely on the expensive services of lawyers to try and negotiate a
    settlement for you later on at the point of departure - should it have to
    end that way).

	I should point out that I am currently married WITHOUT a Prenuptual
    agreement, and the only thing that keeps me from worrying about my fin-
    ancial situation (should I ever get divorced) is the fact that I try to
    detach myself as much as possible from material possessions (but hey, you
    gotta eat you know?).  Sometimes I wish I had one - just to know where I
    stood.

							-davo

>              I just a had a thought that maybe I've been seeing
>         this thing all wrong -- instead of thinking of it as,
>         "*I* want YOU to sign this because I'm insecure about our
>         future" maybe it should be "*I'm* going to sign this for
>         YOU because I want to put it in writing that you can
>         count on me to be 100% fair to you no matter what may
>         happen between us."
    
>              If I were doing it to show my loved one how deter-
>         mined I was to always put his interests on the same
>         level as my own -- NO MATTER WHAT -- I'd sign it in a
>         second!

          How true!  I wish i had phrased it that way, Suzanne.  
          I'll have to remember it if the time ever arises, again.

                                    - jim -

    I went through a divorce a couple of years ago . My lawyer said
    if I got married again without a pre nuptuial agreement not to come
    to him if another divorce happened. He said a properly drawn and
    executed agreement dealing with property and finances would stand
    for a marrage of 5 years or less. Would stand a reasonable chance
    of standing in the 5 to 10 year range if the rulesof the agreement
    were being followed. It would not stand beyond 10 years.

        And that's why I think that pre-nups are insidious and
        potentially damaging to a relationship. They set the expectation
        that the marriage won't last more than 5 to 10 years. They make
        marriage a temporary thing or a contract that the other person
        is bound to live up to.
        
        The focus when you marry should be YOUR commitment, what you are
        going to do to strengthen and preserve the marriage, not the
        obligations of your spouse or the way that you'll divide the
        spoils when it fails. If you focus on those things you are
        setting yourself up to fail. 
        
        JimB.

RE: .63

Hmmm...  I have to agree with you sort of...

A Marriage is a marriage, and should not involve such considerations as a
prenuptial agreement.

One the other hand, what would you think of some sort of living arrangement
relationship defined as possibly temporary defined by such a ? agreement? 

Jim.

    I understand that the concept of a pre-marital agreement is negative
    but in certain situations I feel it is extremely important and I
    would suggest it given certain circumstances.
    
    I have relatively few assets, I have four children and two
    grandchildren.  If I were to marry a man with a home and a portfolio
    and two children I would consider those assets at that period in
    time were his and in the event of some untimely disaster they would
    belong to his children.  
    
    As time progressed and I contributed to the home, maybe added my
    Digital stock to the portfolio then I would feel that I had more
    right to our shared assets.  But even 10 years down the road my
    4 children would nor should not be entitled to as much as his two.
    
    To me this would be a positive step in molding two families.
    
    And the more I think of it the more I feel a prenuptial agreement
    is a positive way of identifying assets and the financial expectations
    of a marriage...something we often fail to do when starry eyed. 

    After the burn I got the last time(only time) I got divorced
    there will be an agreement or there wont be a marriage.
    
    I listened to the wrong person the last time i wont allow it to
    happen again.
    
    I stepped back about 5 years in lifestyle,property,assets all because
    someone said I was casting a bad shadow on "a happy thing" and thinking
    "about only the worst that can happen". Well folks the worst did
    happen and when the marbles were counted guess who lost the most.
    It was the fool that dident prepare for the worst even if it was
    just in case.
    
    -j
    

    I think the pre-nuptual agreement is a perfect example of
    the twelfth commandment in practice.
    
    XII. Thou shalt not leave thy ass uncovered.

Re:     prenuptual agreement stating that "his" assets remain his


I've known a number of people that would fail to disagree with you
less.

They feel that in a true marriage (like theirs of course) all assets
are owned together by the couple, and it doesn't matter who
entered the marriage with more.

In my marriage, I contributed most of the $50000 down payment, but
we each contribute about half to the $1500 monthly payments.  (Yeah,
Newton, not cheap)

We regard the house as equally owned by each, although we haven't
drawn up an agreement.

We do keep our money separate, although we keep talking about
creating a joint account.

But I meander from topic of agreements.  Perhap someone should
start a topic about "handling money and other assets in a marriage"

/Eric

    As with other things, I expect that a P.N.A. can be detrimental
    to a relationship, if used in an inappropriate way or by someone
    in the wrong frame of mind (If you don't behave, I'll divorce you
    and get all my stuff back).
    
    However, I tend to look at them similar to an insurance policy. I don't
    plan/expect to use it, but it can help to let me sleep at night, if I'm
    worried excessivly about the possibility of a divorce shafting me
    financially. 
    
    It would certainly be nice if every relationship went as well as
    some of the ones mentioned in this conference.  But facts would
    seem to be facts, and (unfortunately) not all relationships work
    out as well.
    
    Kak

        I would say it is effort better spent to see that the marriage
        works well than to try to second-guess the process of its
        break-up. It isn't just "nice" that a relationship gos well, it
        is a sign of hard work, love and consideration. Far better to be
        sure that you are marry the right person and for the wrong
        person and in the right manner than to try to arrange to come
        out of it better if you've got it all wrong. 
        
        If you're worrying about being "shafted" in a divorce or only
        kept from such worries by a piece of paper, then you've already
        lost the game, or are at least on the slippery slope. If you
        consider your interests against your spouse's you are already
        focusing on the wrong half of the marriage and are courting
        doom. 
        
        JimB.

    [Edited from earlier entry - Steve]
    
    A few years ago, I would have agreed completely with Jim's sentiments.
    I entered my first marriage being absolutely committed to a lifetime of
    being together.  However, having found that sometimes things are taken
    from your control, I now start to understand why an agreement may be
    useful. 

    When I marry again, I will be no less committed than I was the first
    time, and I will also have the experiences of the past to draw upon
    and will make sure I work to maintain and strengthen the relationship
    every day.  But I am no longer the wide-eyed innocent I once was.
    It happened before, it COULD happen again (though I will do everything
    in my power to prevent it), thus I will think very seriously about
    an agreement.
    
    I haven't yet had to deal with this matter directly - I'm not
    particularly looking forward to doing so - but it will have to be
    done.  I'm more interested in protecting my son's interests than
    my own.
    					Steve

    When I was married a few years ago I wanted an agreement to
    help makes things go a bit smoother if the worst did happen.
    My dear ex did not want an agreement. I held true to the plans and
    commitment I made when we were married. My ex on the other hand
    did not. I was the one the got the shaft in the end. 
    
    Now if I had planned on using it as a way of insuring a gain
    I would agree with all of the no's out there. Instead it could have
    kept me from losing many things I had worked hard for before I ever
    met my ex. Because I dident have any agreement I got shafted and
    lost many thing I owned for years before my wife ever came into
    the story.
    
    I'm very happy to hear all of you out there have had happy
    relationships and have never been shafted. But I'm afraid that
    reality DOES exist and that there are people that do have alot
    at risk. I for one will protect the fruits of my efforts or
    will stay single either is fine by me. If I should get married
    again there will be an agreement that will be forgotten unless
    there becomes a reason to remember it.
    Nobody likes to have a fist over their head and that is not the
    reason for an agreement. If you are looking for a hole card you
    shouldent bother stating a relationship. The agreement is not
    a one sided deal both have an assurance of fairness. Remember
    you both agree to and sign the terms when you are friends.
    
    Has anyone considered the possibility of the agreement allowing
    the two to part under friendly terms(if for no other reason) that
    they dident have to fight over who gets what?
    
    I dident have a chance to argue over what was who's because it was
    in the hospital at the time my wife left and she more or less took
    what she wanted. Everything she took she still has including a
    collection that had been in my family for three generations.
    Oh if I had an agreement I could have gotten it back but dident.
    
    -j
    

    When my wife and got married ( 5 yrs ago on May 1st), she was coming
    from a divorce a few years earlier, and I was coming from a
    bachelor-who-got-burned relationship 9 months earlier.  My wife's
    first husband essentially deserted her, leaving behind lots of bills
    and a young child.  Nedless to say her trust in people was shot
    to hell.
    
    I, too, was quite wary, having been ripped off by my former girlfriend
    when that relationship broke apart.  So both my wife and I were
    leery of commitment, no matter how sincere.  We were both very much
    in love with each other, and still are (much more so!), but we
    did sign a pre-nuptual agreement, outlining property ownership coming
    into the marriage, etc, so that just the circumstances described
    in earlier replies to this note couldn't happen.  We never considered
    it a sign that we were "doomed to fail"; on the contrary, it gave
    us peace of mind going into the marriage.
    
    I'm still trying to overcome some of the ghosts of her first marriage,
    but as time passes, the ghosts slip further away.  

    Al

    It is our duty to find laws we can obey
    
    			Thomas Paine - 1774

    I don't think a pre-nup is going to "jinx" a marriage, any more
    than making out a will is going to cause you to die.
    
    On the other hand, while a pre-nup isn't likely to do much harm,
    it's also not likely to do much good either. In New Hampshire,
    where I live, a judge in divorce court will generally not even 
    look at a pre-nup. And even if he/she did, chances are it would
    be redundant. All a pre-nup can really say is "what was mine
    before the marriage is still mine, what was yours before the marriage
    is still yours, and everything else gets divided equally". Which
    is exactly the same thing the law says (in this state), so why bother?
    
    The hard part during a divorce (with or without a pre-nup) is 
    defining exactly what is meant by "his before the marriage" and
    "hers before the marriage", and also deciding how to split all
    the assets aquired since the marriage. Which in any medium-term
    or long-term marriage is likely to be the majority of the assets
    anyway.
    
    The point is, pre-nups become outdated very fast. If there's been
    any buying/selling/refinancing/appreciation of real estate, any 
    major purchases, any moving around of investments, etc, then the
    pre-nup becomes meaningless.    

    Far more important than a pre-nup is a person's behavior and actions
    during the marriage. For example, I know of guys who
    discouraged their wives from working during the marriage, and then
    grumble about paying alimony after the divorce. Or, guys who are
    too busy to spend any time with their kids during the marriage,
    and then grumble about the wife winning full custody with child
    support after the divorce.
    
    The moral is: the best way to ensure an equitable division of
    property/income/etc after a divorce is to treat your spouse
    equitably during the marriage. 
    
    	- Rich

    I feel that pre-nuptial agreements have their place after the
    first marriage, in order to protect the children of that marriage.
    A pre-nuptial says "I'm so potty about you, darling, that I
    might to any foolish thing you'd ask, and then where would my
    kids be?"  And this is why these agreements `wear off':  If you're
    still potty about darling after five years, and write your kids
    out of your will (or whatever), then that's what the kids and
    darling deserve.
    							Ann B.

    [continuing to play lawyer here...]
    
    Setting up a trust fund for the child(ren) would probably offer
    better protection than a pre-nuptial agreement.
    
    	- Rich    

    re .0 yeah of course Lawyers would say such agreements cause the
    biggest Court Battles. That way less people obtain such agreements
    and when they divorce - both need lawyers longer - thus the Lawyer
    takes a bigger cut
    
    NEVER EVER TRUST A LAWYER WITH ANTHING THAT HE/SHE MAY HAVE A FINACIAL
    STAKE IN !!!!!!
    
    I am going to a lawyer this afternoon to get such an agreement drawn
    up. I would NOT being using the same lawyer should divorce ever become
    an option I chose to adopt. 
    
    I'll let y'all know what the story is here...
    

    fact: many marriages end in divorce.  (which is ok!)
    fact: far too often, sans prenuptial agreements, one or the other
    	of divorcing parties gets scewed.
    fact: a prenuptial agreement can help minimize divorce abuses.

    those who see the logic in prenuptial agreements should utilize
    them.  those who think prenuptial agreements are an insult to
    marriage should not use them.
    	and when everyone gets divorced...(which happens...and is ok...)
    we'll see who gets screwed....and who doesn't...
    who has a horrible divorce...and who doesn't....
    
    rik...who-did-get-divorced-but-did-not-get-screwed-nor-did-he-
    screw-the-person-he-divorced-even-without-a-prenuptial-agreement...
       

    Whoa...  This topic is scary as hell.
    
    Luckily, I'm not "married", and have no plans to be "married". 
    Now your asking yourself "Self, why is he using quotes around the 
    word married ?"
    
    Well, I live in South Carolina.  And as you may have noted in the
    William Hurt case, SC's laws on common law marriage are a little
    flakey.
    
    A little history:
    
    I've lived here for 3 years.  I bought a house and have a mortgage
    in my name, own all the furniture, the lawn tractor...The whole
    works.  So I meet a wonderful woman Cindi.  She's been living with
    me for a while now, and things are getting pretty serious.  We've
    got a joint checking account that we make equal payments, to cover
    our living expenses (in essense, Cindi pays me "rent" by helping
    with the mortgage payment), and I recently declared her my common
    law wife by claiming her as a dependent on my insurance from DEC.
    
    This would definately be considered marriage in South Carolina.
    Anyhow, we've both agreed to hook up with a Prenuptial agreement
    of some sort saying that the house is mine (and the tractor and
    dog :) etc...  While neither of us plans for anything to "go wrong"
    you can never tell in this day in age...  We're kind of in a weird
    situation here, ya know ?  I would also imagine that we'll be buying
    things "together" too, but probably nothing big like real estate...   
    
    Are you all going to tell me to go see a lawyer, or can you give
    me some guidelines on how to write my own ?  Anybody got a fill
    in the blanks type contract ?
    
    By the way, since we've discussed it, this is not an issue of whether
    or not PNA's are cool or are going to jinx us etc...  We're both
    very happy.  Isn't that nice ??   ;^)
    
    Any help wil lbe appreciated.
    
    jc (Who sez: How about a topic on common law marriage ??)

	 Coop.

	 I know nothing about PNAs, but I would assume that you could
	 draw up something that states exactly what you own, as of
	 now, and what would be yours still if a split happened (ie,
	 the house, the current furnishings, the car, etc).

	 Since you are both contributing to a common fund for future
	 purchases, it is important to define what is yours and hers
	 as of now, and how the future purchases would be split up.

	 I would assume the clearer the better, and the more legal the
	 better.  There are packages you can buy (I wouldn't know
	 where to point you, though) with fill-in-the-blank agreements
	 that need only be notarized (I believe).

	 No one ever wants to think about splitting, especially when
	 they are happy together, but I don't think there's anything
	 wrong with being prepared.  Some times splits are not
	 amicable, and the more you legalize now, the less problems
	 you will have later, if something should happen.

	 You might also look into the ramifications of death of one of
	 the partners in a common law marriage.  Families can fight
	 and win control of the partner's possessions much easier than
	 if a marriage certificate was available.


	 A topic about Common Law Marriages would be good, why don't
	 you start one?  I'm not sure of the legal ramifications
	 when/if you move to a different state that does not recognize
	 common law marriages.  It might be interesting to find out.


	 Good luck to both you and Cindi.


	 kath
	 	 

See a lawyer.  Definitely.  The hundred bucks or so you might save trying
to do it on your own may end up costing you tens of thousands later.

			Steve

    re: .83
    
>    The problem is
>    that while people can draw up such lists or agreements, the 
>    laws of a particular state may or may not consider those lists
>    valid and/or binding.

	 Very true.....If you want it to be as effective as possible,
	 go to a lawyer......Better to be safe than sorry...for both
	 of you.


	 kath

	 
    
    

    ... and if a lawyer is honest with you, he or she may tell you that
    since a pre-nuptual agreement can be challenged by either party, that
    all it may buy you is two legal fights instead of one in the event of a
    divorce....
    
    The lawyers have this one wired... there ain't any way out of it...
    
    

    RE: .82
    
    I agree!.. My divorce cost me just shy of $9000.00!!!...
    
    and people ask me why I'm not in any hurry to get married again :-)
    simple - I can't afford another divorce :-)...
    
    Gale

Re: .86

And mine cost $900.  It is only expensive when one (or both) of you are
determined to make the other's life miserable.

At least go talk to a lawyer.  The initial consultation is usually free.

				Steve

    Employ a lawyer now, or you may have to deal with a shark later.
    
    The Doctah

    and mine cost $50.00, the cost to file the papers.
  
    Gail

    Why couldn't I have been married to either of .88 or .89 ex's :-)

    another good reason to see a lawyer...  you can save anywhere from
    $50.00 and up :-)

    Steve is right, if she wants to make your life miserable and costly,
    there are lawyers out there that know how to help them... I was in
    court for almost 3 calendar years... If you can avoid it, I would
    recommend doing just that...