Marriage question for the ladies.
 

Ok.

Say you were going out with a man with a huge monetary advantage over you. You make a decent wage but he is just rich.

He treats you great, he adores you. You are head over heels for him.

After a couple of years you realize that he won't marry you. He will live with you forever, maybe even share some things in both your names. He'll even have kids with you and draw up a contract that makes sure they are taken care of. But he won't get legally married to you.

The reason: He knows if something goes wrong that you could take a huge chunk of his net worth in a divorce. A networth that he made without your help.

The question is: Would you stay with him anyway ? Or would you let that little reason tear you apart?

Using your scenario, the man’s wealth would not automatically be protected. Several factors would come into play, including jurisdiction and what, if anything, the girlfriend/lover/whatever contributed to the relationship after they were together. The guy would also be responsible for child support. Anyways, in a case like this, there would probably be a little shifting of wealth in the direction of a few good lawyers. Setting the potential legal problems aside, if it were me, I wouldn’t stay in such a relationship. I guess I’m a bit old fashioned. This is an interesting question.

Another answer would be to see if he wouldn't mind having a prenup drawn up so then you could get married, otherwise I'd have to agree that I would leave the relationship.

Hmmm.....

Now, without the introduction of children, I can see myself not minding getting married. Because if there was children, I would demand a marriage. I wouldn't want my children growing up with the, "My mom and dad live together but aren't married" ordeal, I just couldn't do it.

Also, why would I want to be with someone who already doesn't think we will work out?

I'd be outta there!

But, we gotta sign a prenup anyway. That's life.

I'd leave his sorry ass regardless of his money.

I respect your opinion but why is he a sorry ass? And if he is a great mate, is that one piece of paper so much of a validation that you have to leave him?

I don't see anything wrong with someone wanting the traditional validation of a life long relationship. Even though I'd leave the relationship, or hopefully never allow myself to get so deeply involved in the first place, if the guy is a sorry ass, what would the girl be in this situation?

But what about a prenup?

I think he's a sorry ass because he cares more about his money than he does about us.

If he'd consider a pre-nap, I would do it, but I think that takes the romance out of things. I think a pre-nup dictates a lack of trust.

How good are they?

Also, what if the guy is entering a career where his income will dramatically outstrip his wife's.

He might not want his assets or future assets in jeopardy.

I think there is nothing wrong with wanting a traditonal life. And certainly marriage is part of that tradition.

However, romance aside, marriage has a whole other side to it caused by the State's involvement. The legal and economic aspects of Marriage have daunting and often underestimated consequences that people don't think about when they are starting out.

What if the situation were reversed?

My sister is wealthy & has two children. She has said that while she may decide to have another child, she's not sure she would get married w/out a prenup b/c of her $$$. She wants to make sure no guy is marrying her for her money.

Common law spouses in some states have the same claims to money that legally married couples do. In this case a Prenup would make sense, as the woman could prove common law marriage and still get a portion of the dough, if she so desired.

I don't understand why he wouldn't just sign a prenup.

But no, I wouldn't have a big problem with this situation.

Co-sign

It's understandable for someone with wealth to want to protect what he/she has but, in your scenario, that person is already planning for the demise of the relationship and putting his/her pocketbook first.

If a guy was that concerned about his money, I'd be out the door. Money is such a material thing. We could sign a pre-nup to take care of it all. If he still didn't trust me enough to marry me, it's not worth being in the relationship. People who are in long-term relationships going towards marriage need to trust each other. Otherwise, why bother investing the time and emotion into it?

Even if the relationship is so wonderful, why would you want to be with someone that is so skeptical about you taking his money? And why is he assuming that if something goes wrong, you're gonna want to take his money? I know there are women out there that are golddiggers, but to be with someone for so long and have kids and still not be able to trust them, there's definitely bigger problems.

"Hell Hath no Fury as a Woman Scorned . . . " ;)

I think divorces can take on a life of their own. Especially when lawyers get invovled and there are serious assets at stake.

As far as planning for failure . . . I think people enter into relationships with the greatest of good will, however, for whatever reason, most fail. I think that on the legal side of marriage that has to be taken into account.

Marriage is a two-sided coin: There is the romantic love aspect. But there is also the legal and economical relationship. I think we forget this sometimes.

In fact there might be a greater honesty to this type of relationship than an actual marriage. Why? Because the relationship has to last on its merits. Not on the perception that there is a huge penalty for leaving, or that the label marriage means that you have to stay even if you are desperately unhappy.

That last part will be the subject of a different thread lol . . .

Thats a fair question. I would sign a pre-nup if asked. But also, there is still a skew towards women when it comes to divorce settlements. Men are less likely to get the same settlement that women are in similar situations.

If he doesn't trust me and value me even more than his money, then he is certainly not worth my time. I'm not going to let something petty like money influence my decision one way or another. Rich or poor, I'd break off the relationship.

co-sign


Based on your scenario James, Mr. Magnetism says he wants to have children. If he expects me to go through childbirth, then I expect to have a engagement ring, wedding band, and wedding party beforehand. If not, then I'm gone, I don't care if the guy is Donald Trump Jr. or Joe Cop.

If he's so concerned about something going wrong, then go to couples counseling to hash out whatever concerns and expectations there maybe.

As for something going wrong, I think Catherine Zeta Jones was right to have written in her pre-nup that if there's proof of infidelity by Michael Douglas there's an automatic fine of millions of dollars. There are couples who have every possible scenario and consequences written out.

This guy is using supposed financial concerns as a reason not to get married. That's his choice. Then she also should have the option of walking away and not become kept as a concubine. He will eventually get married just not to her.

well if he thinks you are after his money - hehehe just have him buy you all kind of thing and use his credit card THEN dump his ass... hit him where it hurts (his precious pocketbook whom he is more concerned about than you )

Wow. You're mean.

But funny :)

well thats the problem with people today. money. they think in order to be happy they have to have it. and money can make people happy but what if she's hurt because of his lack of trust and leaves him? then he's got all this money but he's got a cold, empty bed and a broken heart.

i'd definately leave him. if he told me that was the reason he didnt want to get married then i would spend every waking moment thinking about why he didnt trust me. i dont want to be with someone when there is no trust. all relationships must be BASED on trust not money. people are way too materialistic.

i dont want to live with somebody and start a family with somebody but not share a last name. is that not the basis of a family? a bind?

i'm too traditional. and i want to sleep hugged up to somebody every night that i know i will be with for the rest of my life, happily, as opposed to worried about me taking his money when i leave. WHEN i leave? no, IF i leave. if i love him i'm not going to leave. i'm definately into death do us part.

sounds like this guy is paranoid about a girl leaving him and completely devestating him, not necessarily about the money. but if he is only worried about the money then he doesnt love her as much as he says. he obviously loves his money more and a guy like that is NOT worthy of my time.

i think that i would just be hurt that he didnt want to marry me - after everything that we would have gone through together. usually life changing things like what you stated as your examples, (ie kids, moving in together, things in both names..) mean that you want something deeper with that other person youre sharing with.....
id sign a prenup - if i REALLY wanted to be with him ... but then again, i guess that if in real life, i was forced with a prenup - id feel kind of bad like he didnt trust me.. and trust is pretty much the basis of any type of relationship. no trust, no relationship. hmm...

James, in that kind of situation, the fella's assetts would be more at risk (or at least just as much at risk) if he didn't marry than if he did marry with a prenup.

If I were the dude, I'd just go with the prenup.

Re: Marriage question for the ladies.
 

This is not just a little reason - it's a big one. If the guy is willing to have kids but not willing to be married, then he's got issues. Sure, I understand that marriage just isn't for some people. But having children shouldn't be for those people, either. Having a child is a much bigger deal than marriage could ever be.

Besides, if you have children together, what's to keep the children from coming after your money and giving it to the (not)wife?

As for the perception of being married and unhappy but having to stay comment, for some people divorce is not an option, because, well, they just don't believe in it.

Re: Marriage question for the ladies.
 

One word: prenup.

Also like some other posters have mentioned his assets wouldn't automatically be protected. Some states have "commonlaw marriage" laws. :)

I believe there is a type of pre-nup that not only protects one's assets from before marriage, but also specifies that each person is entitled to only what money he/she made over the course of the marriage. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but I used to work in a law firm that handled a lot of family law, and I remember seeing something very similar to this.

It is funny that you ask this question because my husband and I have been talking about this lately. We have a friend that is very Wealthy. He has a girlfriend that he has had for 9 years. They live together in her apartment (she lived there before she met him) that he pays for. She has been constantly trying to force him into marriage. He has never said that he doesn't want to marry her because of the money thing, but I think the more of an issue that she makes the more he doesn't want to do it. She also is constantly making comments about needing to get married so that if anything happens she will get 1/2 of everything.

I know I probably feel differently about this than every one but I don't believe that you have to have that piece of paperwork to prove your love to some. However, given the scenerio at hand if it was brought to me in that manner I would probably leave. BUT I also understand the need from him to want to protect himself. Especially, since there are a lot of people out there just in search of money.

I really don't believe a lot of people would start out thinking about what they get if the marriage ends. I hope that is mostly not true. Although you can't help be aware of the standard of living you will have with a wealty person.

What I am saying is that when or if a relationship ends there is often hard feelings, and the viewpoint on taking money and such can be very different than when the marriage starts.

How many stories have we seen on GC where a non-married break-up results in hard feelings and one or both EX's doind some really messed up stuff to the other person.

I am sure they didn't plan to be evil or vindictive when they first fell in love.

You're right about this. Some people even enter into agreements after they are married. To me, the legal question would still revolve around the jurisdiction and possibly which side has the best attorney.

I have no opinion on your questions James... I need more information beyond what you previously described.

I can say this... Lemme put it to you like this:

So folks need "paper" to feel important...

Others do not...

Michael Jackson is not married and is having 3 or 4 kids--I forget how many he is currently expecting now... And he's an "alleged" pedophile...

The other issue is can relationships be "purchased" in the 21st century with 26-degrees of "eHarmony"??? Or whatever number of questions they have on there...

Or is there such a thing as "rent a spouse"--try it on for size?? You get a 30-month or your money back guarentee--operators are standing by... Be ready with your credit card--VISA, Mastercard and AMEX accepted... 1-800-WANNABE-MRS...

The cavalier attitude of society toward marriage is the topic of so many articles... I do not know what to say...

But, as far as the genetics goes... Random mating helps with the evolutionary process... You are always naturally selecting newer combinations of genes and proteins for the survival of the fittest... So, as far as the human species goes, biology is not an issue...

Co-sign with James on this.

There can be different scenarios though.
-Some people don't believe in "marriage" because they're not religious.
-Some couples have been together for years and they aren't married and are perfectly happy with that arrangement.
-Marriage has legal ties for each spouse. So if the rich guy had a business and it tanked or something where he was in finaccial trouble, the government or whoever can go after the wife also.
-And with the divorce rate in America, who wouldn't be scared?!

But I definitely agree on the "Hell Hath no Fury as a Woman Scorned" because a lot of women will try to get all that they can if they're pissed off! Not that men won't either. Has anyone seen the Dr. Phil show where he's following a couple that is getting a divorce. They're both fighting over EVERYTHING!! Even down to trashcans and tupperware!

I know a couple who broke up because of a prenuptial agreement. They were negotiating terms and started to argue and called off the engagement and wedding. It was really sad. They are middle class not rich or comfortable.

It's funny. There are so many wealthy people in New York City. I have never dated anyone like that, but my friend has. These women have last names that you might recognize. He probably could have married one or two of them, but he didn't love them enough. Their millions of dollars couldn't compensate for a loveless marriage.

Since I can't ever imagine living with someone without the benefit of marriage (even if not for religious reasons - which they are - but for the sake of any children born), I probably shouldn't be answering - but I am intrigued by the pre-nup talk.

When you're in your early twenties, neither spouse is making much money at all, and sees no big change in the future, it's not very important. But when you hit your thirties and are getting married, it's a whole new ballgame. You have your current money, your pension, your assets, and probable inheritances to consider. Also, if you've been married before, you have your children to think about, to make sure that they're not "fleeced" by a greedy exspouse. If I were to marry a man with children or a lot of money, I would fully expect to sign a pre-nup - after my attorney checked it out. Similarly, if I lived in a state where inheritance was considered community property, I would insist upon one.

NO ONE goes into a marriage thinking about a divorce, but realistically, roughly half of the marriages in the United States fail. No one plans to have major hospital expenses, either, but most still carry insurance - same with home insurance, car insurance, etc. There are contingencies in life, and it's only wise to prepare for them.

First off, marriage is sacred. If he doesn't want to "marry" me because of $$$, then that is a big problem. But then again, society has changed so much that people do everything taht is typically done during marriage ie. living together, having sex, having kids, etc. So then what is the point of even getting MARRIED? I think that is sad because it devalues the concept of marriage.

Back to the question at hand: If he thinks I'm after the money, then we can sign prenuptual contracts. Nothing wrong with that. But I would probably leave him because he doesn't realize the concept of marriage, or has some underlyign trust issues.

Marriage or nothing.

one word: prenup (although this has probably been mentioned over and over again....i know i'm lazy and didn't feel like reading)

i mean whats the point.....it seems to me the guy wants his cake and eat it too. he wants the family life but doesn't want to wear the ring. that just doesn't make any sense