Welcome to reality, ladies. Love and marriage can be measured on a financial statement. This is the case in the Associated Press article, “Married…with assets” in the Sept. 30 Herald – a “warning” to those considering marriage later in life to mitigate financial baggage beforehand.
Protecting children and previous contractual agreements were spotlighted as reasons to sign a prenuptial agreement. How does one bring up a prenuptial agreement without perceived as being heartless? The article answers the question with obvious objectivity. If the woman has assets to be gained/lost, then it’s in her best interest to have a prenuptial.
Take the typical scenario that most considering marriage will face. Generally, it’s the man with the assets who will be targeted for redistribution in a divorce. He will also be faced with paying alimony – the exceptions rare. He can even be held responsible for paying child support for children from another father. It makes one wonder why men get married without a prenuptial agreement. Oh yes, I forgot, there is that love thing.
Equal opportunities, pay and respect are now assumed to be the norm and unquestionable. If you are a woman with a dowry, then you should work very hard to insure you don’t lose it should your marriage fail. It’s only fair that women should also respect a man’s wishes to do the same. No, I am not an attorney or a scorned misogynist. The advice to seek a contractual agreement before the blissful day is sound for both sexes.
When your future husband brings up a prenuptial agreement, don’t be mad and think he doesn’t have confidence your marriage will last. This agreement is worthless if it does. Instead, welcome the discussion as a start to a long and happy life together. Being equal as men and women must be applied across the board or it diminishes the entire concept. I welcome all the women to reality; it can bite…take out the trash.
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
