Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

    Are there any children now? A thought to you question that stands would
    be what if the SO in your life turns into a child molester, or a
    druggest, or some rather strange undesirable influence? I can stay of
    what I have seen that prenuptial agreements are not worth the paper
    that they are written on. I have seen both sides who start off with one
    of these get fleeced. 

    
    
    George,
    
    I did not include any of that info in the note.  However, I would
    like to include a clause that stated that if either parent was
    a physical threat (to be defined mutually by both parents) to the
    children that alternate conditions would have to be worked out.
    We have discussed this before, and each agree on the premise.
    
    
    I think however that this would be very difficult to word on a legal
    document.  Seeing how the courts define unfit, it would be very hard
    to find the correct legal definitions that would hold up in court.
    
    BTW we do not have a child or our own yet, but he does have a soon to
    be five year old daughter.
    
    
    The disagreement that we share on the prenup is that I only want this
    to cover what would happen to the children.  I would not sign one if it
    included any type of property settlements.  Most prenups I know of do
    not include any statements as to what happens to the kids.  Just
    wondering if it is legal to do this.
    
    
    Michele

    
    Michele,
    
    To add what I have heard (from an Attorney) that a prenup will most
    likely become " VOID" in court if there are existing children by the
    two parties. I think this happens because once there are children
    involved, the whole case is treated different.
    
    Avery good question though ....
    
    
    doug

    A prenuptial agreement re custody/support of children would not be
    upheld by the courts.  The courts will decide those issues based on
    what is best for the children (In the court's opinion) and not on what
    the parties agreed to long before the children existed.
    
    This appears to be an issue of major improtance to you.  If it would
    help to clarify things for both of you, you and your fiancee may want to 
    sit down and write up how each of you feel re these issues; what your 
    expectations would be etc.  In efffect, draw up and agreement.  But, do
    it that it would not be binding in a future divorce action.
    
    Courts vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction as to how strictly they
    will uphold the validity of a prenup even when they don't contain
    provisions re support and custody.  Usually if they are not upheld it
    is because there was a lack of full disclosure of assets by one party; 
    each party did not have separate counsel; there is some glaring
    ineequity; one party or the other was under duress to sign (i.e. the
    person is presented with the prenup the day before the wedding), or
    one of the parties will be unable to support themself and may end up on
    welfare.
    
    I believe in prenups because I think they require a dsicussion of many
    of the non-romantic things that can cause problems in a relationship. 
    If done right, I think they can strengthen a marriage by removing areas
    of potential misunderstanding. 
    Polly
    
     

    
    
    To all,
    
    The reason we want to have this done is that we want to avoid putting
    our future kids through the pain of separation if it happens.  We both
    agree that the kids have a right to equal time with each parent.
    However, being as strong willed as we both are each of us know that
    if we do separate the anger will cause both of us to act like
    idiots.  We want to put this issue in writing legally to avoid having
    our children suffer from our emotions.
    
    To me this sounds like a good idea.   From what Polly said though, it
    seems as though even if we do this it will not hold up in court. As
    most of us have learned first hand, the courts rarely do what is truely
    in the best interest of the children.  Unfortunately it seems as though
    there is nothing we can do legally to assure that the children will
    remain equally active with both parents separately.
    
    
    Thanks for the inputs!!
    
    Michele

     Michele,
    
    	The best thing for any child is to have, is a relationship that
    will pass the test of time. And 'Death till we Part' is not a hollow
    jesture of the moment. 
    
    	Sounds like your on the right track. Sounds like the consern is
    there. Sounds like you have seen the bad side if it all. I hope that 
    I am not the last of a group of people whose parents are still together
    after 30+ years. I would not wish that on anyone. 
    
    George

Re .4

>    I believe in prenups because I think they require a dsicussion of many
>    of the non-romantic things that can cause problems in a relationship. 
>    If done right, I think they can strengthen a marriage by removing areas
>    of potential misunderstanding. 

I have never thought of it that way and it sounds very constructive. I do 
not believe in prenups myself, but this is an alternate view that makes 
sense (at least this is the first one I've ever heard).

I've always assumed (and I hope incorrectly) that prenups convey a sense
of mistrust. How do you get around this?

			Thanks,
			   John

    
    
    re .6
    
    I think that the most common view is that prenups are done in
    anticipation of the marriage failing.  Prenups originated with the
    wealthy who were trying to protect that assets they brought into a
    marriage and, I think, as a protection agianst fortune hunters. 
    However, I think that if you look at them as an opportunity to set
    clear expectations regarding not only what would happen if the marriage
    were to end but, how certain things will be handled during the course
    of the marriage, it can be beneficial for the marriage.
    
    A couple of examples  - A couple I represented -- who are not planning
    to be married by the way -- bought a home together.  They drew up an
    agreement that not only spells out what happens if they split up, but
    that deals sets out the agreement regarding either party's now adult
    children coming to lve with them.
    
    Another couple I know have both been taken advantage of financially in
    past relationships.  This is  a hot button for them.  One of them owns
    a home, the other owns a plane (they're both pilots).  They have an
    agreement re the sharing of household expenses, contribution to the
    mortagage etc and regarding use of the plane and how the expenses are
    split.
    
    A third couple has a prenup which states that in the somehwat remote
    possibility that the husband's son should come to live with them, he
    will provide his wife with an apt. for a given period of time. This
    type of term in writing tends to take away any misunderstandign re how
    strongly she feels about not wanting to be a resident step parent.
    
    I beleive that there tends to be a reluctance to sit down and work
    through the hard stuff like money, the other person's kids etc.  So,
    there are bvound to be incorrect assumptions made, misunderstandings
    of what is said and the inability to hear what the otehr person is
    saying.  A prenup helps to get it all spelled out ahead of time.
    
    
    It's not romantic but I don't think it has to be seen as a lack of
    trust.  In fact, by both parties putting all the cards on the table,
    it might help to strenthen the trust between them.
    
    Polly   

    Being that a legal marriage is in fact a legal contract that states
    union of couple forever, is why prenups are void or unenforceable.
     It's contradictory for one to say we marry forever but if we don't
    we do such and such.  
    
    Also, just because what you agree before marriage and what you want
    to do at any point during the course of marriage can change.  That's
    life.  The term prenup, for the purpose of which some of the noters
    refer to, to open discussion, should maybe just mean plain and simple
    open discussion and not "just in case we divorce" discussion.  
    
    cin 

    re .10
    
    I disagree with your premise as to why prenups may be void or
    unenforceable.  Jurisdictions I'm aware of do not assume that prenups
    are void per se.  They will void them if there is any hint of inequity.
    Clauses re child support/custody will be void per se due to their being
    considered contrary to public policy.
    
    Divorce is an acknowledgement that the "marriage contract" can be
    broken.  Many business contracts  have cluases spelling out what
    will happen if a contract is broken, a prenups does the same thing.
    
    Yes, I agree that it may seem as if the real answer is a frank
    discussion but putting it in writing helps to be sure that everyone
    really understands.  Yes, minds may change during the marriage and that
    is fine but at least you're starting from a common point.
    
    Polly 

		Prenups are legal and valid like any other contract but
	can be challenged and broken like any other contract. If the person
	signed under duress or without reasonable knowledge of what was being
	consented to it in a manipulative move (i.e. If Trump's ex hadn't
	had excellent legal counsel the prnups might have been declared
	void) the agreements can be challenged.
		By far the weakess agreement is anything dealing with 
	children. In a divorce the courts will look what's in their best
	interest at the time they're adressed. The children's best interest
	can not be determined aprior in advance. No custody or support
	agrrement is ever the end. The courts will always willing to review 
	things for a change in circumstances.  Even will's are very easily
	challengeable in this regard because the courts recognize that noone
	can anticipate the future well enough to guide a child's life years
	in adavance. So a prenup is like a divorce decree, it establishes
	a starting point, but is not an end.