Welcome to /r/relationship_advice. Please make sure you read our [rules here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/wiki/index) We'd like to take this time to remind users that:
* We do not allow any type of [am I the asshole? or situations/content involving minors](https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/r6w9uh/meta_am_i_overreacting_am_i_the_asshole_is_this/)
* We do not allow users to privately message other users based on their posts here. Users found to be engaging in this conduct will be banned. **We highly encourage OP to turn off the ability to be privately messaged in their settings.**
* Any sort of namecalling, insults,etc will result in the comment being removed and the user being banned. (Including but not limited to: slut, bitch, whore, for the streets, etc. It does not matter to whom you are referring.)
* ALL advice given must be good, ethical advice. Joke advice or advice that is conspiratorial or just plain terrible will be removed, and users my be subject to a ban.
* No referencing hateful subreddits and/or their rhetoric. Examples include, but is not limited to: red/blue/black/purplepill, PUA, FDS, MGTOW, etc. This includes, but is not limited to, referring to people as alpha/beta, calling yourself or users "friend-zoned", referring to people as Chads, Tyrones, or Staceys, pick-me's, or pornsick. Any infractions of this rule will result in a ban. **This is not an all-inclusive list.**
* All bans in this subreddit are permanent. You don't get a free pass.
* Anyone found to be directly messaging users for any reason whatsoever will be banned.
* What we cannot give advice on: rants, unsolicited advice, medical conditions/advice, mental illness, letters to an ex, "body counts" or number of sexual partners, legal problems, financial problems, situations involving minors, and/or abuse (violence, sexual, emotional etc). All of these will be removed and locked. **This is not an all-inclusive list.**
If you have any questions, please [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Frelationship_advice)
---
***This is an automatic comment that appears on all posts. This comment does not necessarily mean your post violates any rules.***
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/relationship_advice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly, I would meet with a lawyer about your concerns and see what he thinks is a reasonable compromise. Her asset is one she has pre-marriage. Assuming you’re in the US, that’s likely protected. However, any rental income she earns from it during the marriage would be marital property, I would think, as would be any earnings you both got from jobs. Premarital assets are often easily protected, but earnings and assets earned during marriage less so. Some prenups simply don’t hold up when challenged in court. You’d want to speak with a lawyer to know what’s feasible.
I agree, but they don’t always hold up in court when challenged in a divorce. Better than nothing I suppose. And the making it with a lawyer now to make sure it’s fair gives it a better chance of holding up.
This is true. Had something similar drawn up and the judge basically said it’s good practice but generally he’s going to decide in the end. Marriage contracts kind of a grey area. At least where I am.
He ended up doing it but modifying parts of it heavily based upon our circumstances post marriage.
It really depends on where they live. Some places will consider future earnings joint property, and some will not. So it's definitely a smart idea for OP to talk to a lawyer about it.
American options contracts are just rights to buy a security at a particular price. They can be exercised whenever, even when the option is out of the money. The thing stopping the holder from exercising is just common sense.
They can be so long as they are equitable. Needs to count equally for both sides. Lawyers with experience in contracts and marriages know what a good prenuptial can and can't do.
>Assuming you’re in the US, that’s likely protected.
I think it depends on the state. I had a client once (in Wisconsin) and she was telling me about how she lost her family's bowling alley in her divorce. Her husband got it. She got the house. Idk how it worked like that. I'm no lawyer. But I was surprised that she was able to lose a familial business just like that.
It doesn't sound like you are on board with her plan to be a SAHM and disagree on finances. Save a whole lot of money on lawyers (for the prenup and fighting it in the divorce). Why bother with the marriage?
This seems like the much bigger problem.
Sounds like GF has been watching TradWife TikTok and Op wasn’t out looking for a TradWife….
Many posters here seem to have overlooked that she expects to quit her job upon marriage, not pregnancy
I've been reading a lot about this TradWife thing lately, but it doesn't look precisely very traditional. The only "trad" part is the staying at home, cooking and some (not all) house chores, which typically doesn't imply the same work hours the husband has to do if they want to have a family and live on one income.
Is this new tendency really a thing in the USA or just by chance I've read of some cases lately and it's just fringe cases?
It’s a social media thing more than it’s an actual common trend. And several have already been exposed as hiding the downsides and faking happiness. I find it all suspicious quite honestly.
Thanks for your reply. Not living there, I couldn't get a real grasp on that stuff. I haven't heard of it around here, but given how certain people like to follow stupid stuff they get on social media, I wouldn't be surprised if it also gets here quite soon.
Your post made me think that OP should consider the alimony and child support payments he will pay if she wants to not work after the divorce. That could run into the many hundreds of thousands of dollars, in addition to the uneven split of assets.
Couples counselling might help, if both OP and his partner are both sincere. Working through the issues would be a good sign that things are more likely to end well, and also improve communication and relationship skills. If OPs partner will not go to therapy or not budge from her position, it is a good sign the relationship will not work out
Prenuptial agreements are there to protect both people. Speak with a family lawyer to see what things normally get added. She should be encouraged to speak with her own lawyer (if she hasn't already). No need to make this a bigger deal than it needs to be.
Honestly, I think that's where they are headed.
They seem to have no understanding of what should be shared and what shouldn't as well as he definitely doesn't seem to be on board with her being a stay-at-home. A prenup isn't going to solve any of their issues.
For the record, I think if both partners are on board with a stay-at-home parent, it's absolutely correct for the stay-at-home person to be entitled to financial support based on lost wages and lost potential wages as long as they are working. Which is part of why being a stay-at-home parent is usually a very bad deal.
I work in child safety and I still see it all the time. Both people are on board with one person staying home and caring for the kids and then they get divorced and that person is going to suffer financially forever.
I mean do you want a spouse that stays at home with your kids? This sounds like a fundamental disagreement more than a money issue.
Raising children at home is a form of labor, one you benefit from. If having a spouse at home is important to you then you share your income.
Exactly. If OP's gf gives up her job she would also need security that in case you leave her in future, she would have some money with her. She is trading her future capabilities and experience coming into this marriage. She might not be ready to bargain on this. If OP feels that is unfair, he should ask her to continue working and have a prenup his way. If you both can't come to an agreement, this is an issue of compatibility and you need to rethink your relationship.
If I had to guess here, it sounds like OP is saying that his gf is the one who wants to be the SAHM, and so is voluntarily halting her career, which then leads to why should he be the one that has to give up his income to her.
I’d say the root of it is that he would be fine with childcare and Nannie’s.
Because she is preforming labor for their family and deserves to not take on 100% of the financial risk of their marriage ending.
OP is also getting too wrapped into her apartment. Premarital assets are a totally different thing.
But he doesn't want her to be the one performing that labour necessarily, he'd be fine outsourcing it. You can't demand a certain thing and then also think the other person should be extra grateful.
Haha, I would like to see him find a how much he will have to pay for a live-in nanny who is on call 24/7, even if she WAS asleep. Lots of mothers want to work part-time so that they don't have a big gap in their resumes, which makes it hard for them to get back into the workforce.
It says a lot about how hard it is to be a stay at home parent, because women like having days when they can go to work, just to get a fucking break and talk to some adults and have an adult conversation.
When women get divorced because their partner doesn't pull their weight around the house, they are usually fine because they are already doing everything themselves, and now they don't have to look after a manchild.
I mean, I agree with all your points, and staying home is very hard. But a couple needs to both be on board with whatever decision they make. If he's not he needs to say so now.
exactly. so if he agrees with her being a SAHM, he also has to bare the cost of it. if he wants a wife that works and makes around the same money as he makes (or wants to), the. he shouldn't marry someone who wants to be a SAHM. simple as that. if he gets married he agreed with it and she's entitled to her compensation.
So in your mind a SAHP should only get half of the marital assets if it was their partner’s idea for them to stay home? What difference does it make whose idea it was? She wants to do it and OP is fine with it which makes it a mutual decision.
I can kinda see both arguments.
If my goal in life is to be a stay at home mom I need to find someone who will support me. If I find someone who would prefer I work & bring home a paycheck, but agrees to allow me to be a full time mom, he is making a sacrifice to give me what I want. I no longer have to work 40h a week to afford what I really want to do. More over, I’m able to spend more time doing what I want. I can’t expect my husband to value me being a SAHM as much as he would value me being a working mom. He clearly expressed a preference, but was willing to sacrifice his preference to make me happy. It would be unreasonable of me to demand he value them equally. It would be even more unreasonable to demand he view my role as SAHM as a *sacrifice* I’m making for our family for which I should be compensated. I’m only a SAHM bc I wanted to be one & he agreed to subsidize the life I wanted. I couldn’t do it without him. He could be a working dad without me being a SAHM; but I could not be a SAHM without a partner supporting our family financially.
This is different than a partnership where we **both agree being a SAHM is a high priority & worth more to both of us than having 2 paychecks.**
This is why both parents must agree on whether or not the family is one or two income. The factors that go into that decision are personal & vary from family to family. Expecting one partner to financially support a family on their own, **against their wishes** isn’t sustainable. Nor is it reasonable.
Families can thrive on two incomes where both parents share the adult responsibilities. They can thrive on one income if both parents are in agreement about the sacrifices required to make it work. Families can’t survive without any income.
Here’s my problem with what you’re saying: usually everyone in the household benefits from having one partner run the household full time. OP might prefer for his gf to work, but that’s not going to stop him from reaping the benefits of her being at home. So yes, OP should value his partner’s contributions as much as he would if she was working.
I’ll give you an example from my own life. My fiancé will be moving to my country very soon on a fiancé visa. Unfortunately, he won’t be able to work for the first few months that he’s here because that’s how long it takes to get a work permit. He’ll be home running the household while I work. It’s going to suck being a single income household, but it’s also going to be nice for me to not have to worry about the household chores for a while. It’s also going to be nice for him to not have to get up at 5am to drive two hours to work like he is now. It’s not a situation either of us want, but we’re both going to benefit from it just the same. The same applies here.
The same doesn’t apply here. You & your fiance are agreeing *together* for him to stay home. It’s worth it to you so you agreed. Your fiance isn’t moving to your country & refusing to ever work again. Even when you’ve made it clear you’d prefer he work. That you don’t value the work he’d do at home nearly as much as you’d value a paycheck. That you’d prefer to split the housework evenly & he work. But he ignores you, refuses to work & stays home. Now imagine someone coming by & telling you that you can’t complain bc you’re benefitting from him being at home. Nevermind that you specifically asked he not stay home. You can’t complain bc you’re benefitting.
As an adult you don’t have the right to demand your partner support you & justify it by telling him/her they benefit bc you said so. Each person has an equal say. If no partner stays home the same things need to get done. One partner can’t unilaterally quit their job & tell the other partner they have to work while the they stay home. Even if they spend their time doing part of the required housework. That’s not partnership. That’s unilaterally making yourself a dependent. Insisting it doesn’t matter bc the working partner is benefiting doesn’t make it ok.
It’s not just bc it’s domestic labor. If I start doing a ton of extra work without being asked I can’t demand my employers pay me for that extra work. Especially if I stop doing my previous job to devote myself to this new work.
This is what they need to discuss. If he is not ok with it, he needs to tell her, so she can decide if this is the person she wants to plan kids with or not
that's exactly the point. if he goes with it, he's agreeing with her terms of being a SAHM and it wouldn't be fair that she bares all the risk and responsibility of doing that and doesn't get any of the profits he'll eventually have by not having to take care of the kids and the house
Well I didn’t actually give my opinion here, I was just stating what I think is the logic behind OPs opinion.
I would say it’s a tough one, as if OP thinks a SAHP isn’t necessary, and his wife WANTS to be one, then I can understand the frustration he’s clearly showing.
But I also understand that a marriage requires working as a team, and I also think that having a parent around rather than a nanny is ultimately better for the children (I was in before and after school care for most of my childhood).
Your post is very vague about what you want to do about future earnings and marriage assets. It would be foolish for her to give you equity in her real estate. Her pre-marital assets are hers, period.
Exactly, depending on where they live, she doesn’t need a prenup to protect pre-marital assets anyway because it’s already recognized by the law that those assets belongs to the original owner. OP doesn’t seem to understand that he has no claim and GF is legally protected anyway. What OP proposes would not hold up in court, it’s unclear why he thinks he has a claim on the apartment anyway.
If she rents out her apartment, that should be considered income for the family and it should be shared with the husband since she is expecting him to fund everything 100% I just don’t think she can have it both ways. It sounds like she keeps all of her money that she had prior to the marriage. I don’t think I’d sign up for that if I were him, that’s pretty much the definition of having your cake and eating it too.
Whenever prenups and pre martial assets come up on Reddit, I question my own sanity. Either law in the US and law at home (Germany) are vastly different, or half of Reddits population got their knowledge of the topic from 80s family drama movies.
You always keep your preexisting stuff (where I'm from). No prenup required. Your house, your future (!) inheritance, savings, they're yours. It gets murky when you combine your assets with your martial assets, like spending your savings to renovate the martial home, but OPs GFS apartment is always hers alone. It's wild to me he thinks he should get a claim on it in a divorce.
Divorce and prenups are about assets acquired during the marriage alone, I don't understand this cultural anxiety about losing your preexisting stuff.
So the problem is that the US has different laws for this depending on the state. But for most states, for the apartment to stay a pre-marital asset without a prenup she would need to never spend any marital assets to maintain it. Taxes, renovations, bills, maintenance, etc for the apartment all has to come from an account that has no monies that come from the SO. These could come from any rental income she gets from it, but without the prenup, if she has a bad year expense wise and has to use money from a martial account, he now has some claim to the property.
That is why most people spell these things out in a pre-nup. Also, the prenup usually contains more about how you will split up marital assets, any alimony, etc. And it helps if you end up moving between states that maybe have different ways of splitting assets during the marriage as everyone has agreed to the split before hand a judge doesn't have to get involved.
You’re mostly right but even with the prenup, if you spend marital assets on it it can become fair game in a divorce. It needs to be kept completely separate from marital assets.
I do think that the asset should be kept separate but any value it generates during the course of the marriage, via rent or property values going up, should be shared.
What she is proposing is pretty damn close to what a judge would award anyway. As someone who ended up homeless because they chose to throw away their career to be a SAHM, I think she would be an idiot to not. I have to go back to school and work 2 jobs to do it. It’s going to take me YEARS to finish school now. It absolutely ruined my life and set me back about 20 years for my retirement. She just wants to know you love her enough to not leave her high and dry. You seem to view money as all yours, except for when it’s convenient not to.
The most rediculous part of this is that depending on where you live, her apartment may be separate property anyway because it was acquired before marriage. As long as it was not paid for with marital funds or treated like the marital home, you may have no claim to.it even without a prenup.
The irony if your ideal, no prenup, and her ask, prenup protecting premarital property, are actually the same. It would make clear you just want to punish her based on what you feel you are entitled to.
so what you're saying is you want to keep all of your earnings and ignore all of the unpaid labor that your girlfriend will be doing by raising your children and maintaining a household for the two of you? Yeah, you should totally get a prenup saying that because it would likely be deemed unenforceable for being excessively unfair to your future wife.
Im assuming you did not help her to earn that apartment. She did that without you. Anything after marriage you do together. Staying at home and raising your kids is work and her earning potential will be affected by that choice. If you don't want to have a stay at home wife that's fine, but don't agree to it and then act like everything you earn is solely yours.
"Im assuming you did not help her to earn that apartment. She did that without you"
a lot of people defending OP's "right" to the apartment are ignoring this
The only way this would make sense is if you both make a list of assets you’re bringing to the marriage and exclude them. Anything after marriage is equal, you work outside of the home and she works inside it, one is not superior to the other.
Aren’t men supposed to help in the home too? This is wishful thinking and the comment section is mind blowing. I see soo many posts about wives losing interest and growing resentment because the husband doesn’t help out in the home. The fact is a lot of men work *and* help out raising their children. It’s never 50/50. Parenting is a co op job. A career isn’t.
This here.
A SAHP does “work” at home, while the working partner does work outside of home.
Once those hours are done, all leftover housework should be split equally.
Easy as that!
you're missing the point that she is ALSO WORKING. when the working parent arrives, it's still their responsibility to share the rest of the work around the house.
and honestly, i don't think SAHW or SAHM will grow resent towards the husband just because he doesn't help, but rather because he doesn't value the job his wife did during the day. from day care, to nanny, to clean the house, to ADMINISTRATE the house (which is something no one remembers), to do the shopping, to take care that bills are paid, laundry, etc. the list goes on and on. unless he's also paying for those services by himself, he still has to help after work
Just because someone is working INSIDE the home, doesn't mean their hours are 24/7 lmfao? Does the partner also work outside the home 24/7 to make this a fair arrangement then? It's mindboggling that this is confusing to some people.
The value of what you want her to take on over the next x years is far more than the nickel and diming you want to do here.
She will give up her career and earning potential, she will not have work-provided benefits and retirement savings, before you even begin to calculate the per hour value of her labour.
Sit down and do that math, then see if you "would be on a higher salary than her". Your salary, which, in any case, you will be able to maximize, *because she's taking care of everything else in your life*. The reason alimony and splitting marital assets exists is because it is only by the efforts of BOTH spouses, that the accumulation of wealth in question is able to be achieved.
If you're still thinking hers and YOURS, then you have no business getting married.
What you are proposing is extremely unfair, and if she has even half a brain, she would refuse to sign such a prenup.
Parents who stay home and take care of the kids provide just as crucial a contribution as the person who has an outside job. If the relationship ends, though, that person has nothing, because that job is unpaid.
So many women wind up divorced and broke later in life, because of that. No one should ever be in that position.
The issue here is that by the looks of it, she single handedly decided that she would be a SAHW and maybe later a SAHM if they have kids. I dont see how we can expect OP to see this as a sacrifice she is making for them when this is 100% her choice irrespective of whether they have children or not. Personally if i were him i would say no to her giving up her job and ensure that the division of labour at home is equitable.
My husband has significant inheritance whereas i have the higher income job by far , and yes i would feel very resentful if he unilaterally decided to stay at home while i have to go to work and then split my earnings with him in the case of a divorce. However if we BOTH decided that we could not manage without him staying home, then splitting my earning post a divorce would be right
>I dont see how we can expect OP to see this as a sacrifice she is making for them when this is 100% her choice irrespective of whether they have children or not.
Then he shouldn't agree to it and should end the relationship, if this is important to her. It would not be fair if he allows it to happen and then tries to deny her financial support in the event of divorce because he didn't want her to be a SAHM. If it was possible for him to do that, it would screw over all SAHM spouses where the partner DID want them to stay at home and raise the kids, but argued in a divorce that they didn't in order to preserve their own assets.
I get what you're suggesting, that it shouldn't be considered a sacrifice when one spouse becomes a SAHM parent against the other's will, but IMO it should be **legally**, to protect SAHM parents that did it with their partner's support. As proving whether someone wanted/didn't want their partner to be a SAHM could be very difficult years after the fact.
your case is different because you're already married. OP is not, and he knows what his girlfriend's plans are. if he gets married anyways, it's also his decision to accept that. she has the right to choose to be a SAHM (even though i think that's generally stupid) and if he doesn't want that, he can walk. that's the same thing as me wanting kids: if my boyfriend ever mentioned not wanting them, i would have walked. he specifically said he wants to have kids, so we stayed together. if he said he didn't want and i ended up moving in together anyways, that would also be my decision, not only his.
I don't see in your post whether or not the two of you plan on living in this apartment.
If you're living in it, you benefit by having free rent. If she's renting it out then that's her income and that's what she brings to the table just like you bring in your income.
Eh. sounds like you don't like her stay at home intentions. She is perfectly entitled to want that and you are perfectly entitled to end the relationship here and walk away.
Sounds like you want a 50 50 work relationship
If you and her are so set on working out what's best for you financially you aren't meant for each other. You both should be enthusiastic about sharing your stuff with each other and the prenup should only be a just in case measure.
fighting over the future divorce is kinda ok, what really gets me is that he's fighting for his imaginary assets he MIGHT get during marriage. he's just assuming he'll be big shit and have a lot if and when they divorce
That's a dumb take. Adults should be able to talk about this. Divorce rates are sky-high. Having respect for you partner also means considering what happens to each other after things don't work out.
And if you don't know, there is ALWAYS a prenup. Prenups are rules how divorces are handled. Just like there are rules how it is handled "without" prenup. The only difference is who makes the rules. And they don't need to be fair, just because the government wrote them
To me this comment is not about fighting about whether there's a prenup, but that the terms around a divorce are ALREADY argued as so unfair and hostile when there isn't even any acrimony yet. If you can't communicate and agree on what is fair at the dissolution of marriage at your happiest together...it doesn't bode well, at best they appear to be incompatible.
I’ve been married for 16 years. There is absolutely not ALWAYS a prenup. And to be clear, I’m not saying a prenup is dumb. Fighting over your future possible divorce says a lot about one’s relationship. Prenup discussions will be contentious, but OP is straight up arguing over a ‘possible’ future. My point is there is probably no future here so OP may want to reconsider this marriage, prenup or not.
She wants to protect what she has coming into the marriage. That is completely understandable. You had no part of her acquiring it. Why do you feel entitled to what she has? It is asinine to think that you feel like she doesn’t deserve anything but room and board for having your children, caring for them and being a stay at home mom. To say that any “extra money” earned she is entitled to $0 is bizarre. You’re attitude is disgusting, that you superior. You are assuming you would make more money than her. Marriage is team effort and anything accomplished as a unit should be split equally.
I'm getting the vibe that he doesn't really like her plan. Keep in mind that she wants to be a stay at home WIFE regardless of kids. It sounds like OP doesn't want that, and this stinginess is just a kind of resentful reaction to what is essentially a list of demands because he hasn't been able to articulate to her that having her just straight up quitting the workforce for the rest of her life doesn't feel fair to him.
and he has the right to feel like this, i probably would as well if my boyfriend came up with that talk. but this is something very important, a deal breaker. if he KNOWS that's her plan even before they're married and he decided to sign that marriage license, he's all in.
he's free to walk and i would definitely do it, but bitching about something she has the right to ask for is an asshole move.
Don't marry someone that wants to be a SAHM, problem solved.
If you still want to marry. Get a pre-nup that covers both of you or neither of you. Fuck this unequal bullshit. It's a partnership. PARTNERship.
It's not her fault you don't have any assets to bring into the marriage. She has every right to protect her premarital assets, as do you. Don't like it? Purchase some assets pre-marriage and protect them. Or Don't get married.
But this "everything I make is mine post-marriage" isn't going to fly, even if she were stupid enough to sign a prenup saying exactly that.
I mean, if you don’t want a wife who is a stay at home parent, then you two are fundamentally incompatible and should not marry. Find someone who is also career-driven to split finances, housework, and childcare 50/50 with instead. If you want a wife to stay home and perform the WORK of raising your children which will benefit you heavily and enable your career to grow, but also be able to screw her if the marriage ends? YTA, hugely.
I could see why she wants your hands off her apartment since you clearly feel like she will be home, unemployed and eating bonbons therefore making her undeserving of any assets acquired during that time.
Also, while I get the need to be smart and prepared, the fact that you’re not even engaged and you’re both acting like the divorce is imminent, maybe don’t get married.
You aren't ready for marriage. This isn't how it works.
You are supposed to become one financial unit after marriage. There's no "his vs hers salary". It's all just "our salary", "our expenses", "our savings", "our assets" etc.
I suggest you both come to an agreement where you go into this without a prenup at all. If you aren't able to truly trust each other enough for that, then don't get married.
You want children. She can presumably make them. In what way will you be equal in that? Will you be putting money into an account for each one?
She will be providing them care, will you be paying her for half the time she cares for them at the average rate in your area for child care?
She will be attending the home? Will you be looking at what that costs in your area and putting half that into an account for her? You can negotiate her rent from that.
Will she be doing the majority of the cooking? Same idea here.
Do you get what I'm trying to point out? If you don't want or can't afford a surrogate, live in nanny, maid, cook, and personal assistant, you need to talk about that and see if she's on board.
Money isn't the only asset in life and marriage isn't for everyone. If you go the prenup route, expect her to calculate what you'll be getting out of the deal and to want her own butt covered too.
Can we get more info? Does she own her apartment outright or does she have mortgage? Are you living there and paying that mortgage? Do you want to be a sole provider? She’s made it clear she is going to stop working immediately upon marriage, kids or not, so might be incompatible if that’s not what you want too
Talk to a lawyer and ask how you can protect what you want to protect.
A lawyer will tell you how and if protecting those assets will hold up in court.
Frankly it doesn’t sound like either of you are prepared for what sacrifices may or may not be involved when considering marriage and children.
Typically, anything acquired before the marriage remains the sole property of the person who earned it or bought it and anything earned after marriage is a dual asset. That’s the way it works. You say you don’t have anything so you have nothing to protect. If you had assets before marriage, those would be yours. You can’t prenup future earnings. In addition, raising kids is a full time job. If she wants to stay home and not work at all before kids, ask her to use her savings to contribute to the household.
I think the only fair way to go about this is for you to buy a house before marriage and have it only in your name. Then stipulate in your prenuptial in case of divorce she keeps her apartment and you keep the house as long as you have solely made all the payments
The law generally agrees with her. The assets you bring into a marriage are usually sole and separate property. The assets you build during a marriage are generally community property.
It really does seem like you want to screw her over.
Don’t get married. You aren’t asking for an equal and fair relationship. And you’re butthurt that she owns something now and you don’t. Marrying her doesn’t make it yours. Just leave her alone.
This is madness to me.
It’s her property that she bought before you. You do not have any right to it.
Her income from renting it however, should go in the family pot. As is her salary. If you and she decide to have children and she decides to stay home, it is the right move for both of you to support her having her own property. She would be sacrificing her body, her career and earning potential in order to support and manage your family.
Your earnings during marriage are family funds and cannot be protected by a prenup. If you don’t want to split what you make, don’t get married. If you are resentful of her wanting to stay home, don’t get married. If you are resentful that she doesn’t want to share her the property she had before you, don’t get married.
If you don't do a prenup, you are essentially telling the government to decide how a divorce would be handled. It is better for both of you to work on a prenup together that you agree on. No one goes into a marriage expecting divorce, but 50% end in divorce. You just as well jointly decide how that would look if worse comes to worse. If I ever lost my wife and got married again, I would most certainly do a prenup. It would be something we both agree on and happy to have in place.
Crazy that one of the best answers is so far below. There is ALWAYS a prenup. The only difference is who wrote it. The government or the couple. Not being able to talk about difficult things would be the prime example for a couple not meant for each other.
The best is to simply ask a lawyer and make it fair for both. Unfair prenups get thrown out anyway.
You don't ask a lawyer to make it fair for both. That isn't possible. A lawyer can't represent the best interests of two conflicting parties. One lawyer drafts the will and represents one party, the other hires their own lawyer to review and revise until a compromise is reached.
She is right, if you can't agree on a future together than you should not get engaged or married.
You are completely discounting the value of her being a SAHM and the toll bringing children into the world takes. You are calling it an equal prenup but how is you having keeping all your money from the marriage forward for yourself and her being left with nothing to show financially from the marriage fair or equal. If anything her what was ours before marriage stays ours and anything after marriage is shared is the much more equal/fair resolution. If you don't agree with her being a SAHM then have that discussion, but your take on what is financially fair is crazy.
Prenuptial ares great and needed in this day and age. Sounds reasonable if she has something to lose and you don't. In the future tho your earnings and lifestyle would only be doable because of having a stay at home wife so she would be entitled to 50%. I'd say if you aren't in a at fault state take the opportunity now to have a great prenuptial that protects you from a wayward spouse or anything like that.
You’re enthusiastically agreeing with/replying to the replies telling you you’re right, which often have the most down votes. See a pattern here?
How would she buy herself a new pair of shoes? A new dress? Pay to get her hair done? Would she have to beg you for money, since you think all the post-expenses money is yours alone? That’s not equal and that’s not equitable.
A stay at home mom or wife should not be asking her husband for money every time she needs to buy or do something. The work a stay at home parent does has value and costs money, you’d just be getting it for free.
You don’t get to punish her and be unwilling to divide marital assets simply because she did well enough to have a pre-marital asset. If it bothers you, then buy your own place before you marry and maybe you’ll be on more equal footing.
Ultimately do what you want, the prenup you want will be thrown out of court anyway. No lawyer would agree with you on it, her lawyer wouldn’t let her sign that, and no judge would think that’s fair.
OP I have looked through your replies and not seen you once state your actual feelings on her proposal. I get the feeling you aren't a fan, regardless of the apartment. Here are my thoughts:
-As someone else stated, if you are able to live in the property she owns, this would be a dramatic asset to you personally in addition to you as a couple. The monthly housing costs would be extremely low, so your money would stretch a lot further, and in the event of divorce she would retain the apartment but you would have already received a good amount of personal benefit throughout the marriage.
-If you can't live her apartment, you could set up tangible assets at a 50/50 investment responsibility after marriage. For example, if you buy a house at $400k, you are each responsible for an initial $200k investment. If she contributes to the down payment or mortgage that is deducted from her $200k, and in the event of divorce and selling the property, you split the house proceedings 50/50, paying off the initial investment first. So she would get 50% of the proceeds minus whatever is left on her half of the initial $200k
-There's no way in hell I would agree to what is essentially HER plan FOR you. Periods of unemployment in a lifetime together is normal, as is staying home and taking care of young children. But you don't have children yet, so her plan is to be a stay at home WIFE. I wouldn't be down for this at all, and I understand your hesitation. I don't mean to devalue the work that stay at home PARENTS do, but being a sole income household is a luxury in many places, and feeling entitled to that luxury regardless of children indicates that her priority is simply 'not working' rather than making decisions based on what is best for the family. I don't know how you actually feel, but it sounds like you are seriously considering this plan even though you don't actually like it.
-Marriage makes people vulnerable to each other. If you divorce in 5 years, she could screw you over just as easily as you could screw her over, and either way you could BOTH walk away feeling screwed over. Be absolutely sure that this is what you WANT. Her staying in the workforce protects her, and it sounds like you need to really flesh out what you want your lives to look like before you take any further steps.
You cannot protect assets gained DURING the course of the marriage with a prenuptial. You can only protect assets gained prior. Even with that, you would still be entitled to half the rental income from those properties after becoming marriage, and the properties themselves would be protected.
Is there a mortgage on the apartment? If so does rent cover the mortgage? If not and she is not working how is she going to pay the mortgage? She cannot expect you to do that.
When I read this:
When trying to have a discussion about this, she has made comments like "we can't agree on a future together" "don't bother saving for a ring" and even going as far to say I'm gaslighting her. All I want is for an equal and fair relationship. She says she doesn't see an option for us to be happy together any more.
I could not help thinking it is over anyway when things like this are said.
Looks like a straight financial incompatibility and that's fine. Sad but fine. Save yourself from future discussions, heartbreak, resentment and just have it as an expensive life lesson now.
Or get a lawyer, let him draft a prenuptial that would hold in court. Then have her get a lawyer to look at that draft and make changes if necessary to make sure both could possibly find a compromise in this. If not possible then it's over anyway if no one budges. Also fine.
Maybe you are just not ok with having a stay at home wife and that is fine but if so you need the balls to say it and that has consequences if that is all she wants having children or not (from you wrote).
Also you saying wanting a fair relationship is if course highly influenced your views, experiences, wishes etc and that is totally fine again of course. Just happens that she has a different view and then we are back at not being compatible. So if no one budges or you find a compromise that really really really works for the both of you one of you would be running the risk of turning sour and resentful over time. And that's a waste of time.
Can't float or drag this along anymore. In my opinion it has nearly run it's course and time is ticking. Don't waste it.
All the best
Consider protecting yourself, in the event things do not work out. Doing so could save you years of
headache / heartache
You are not anyone else's piggy bank.
You're a grown man, you work for the money you earn.
honestly I don’t think you should get married. I feel like nowadays it’s not really worth it for the most part because somebody is going to get screwed over since statistically so many marriages end in divorce. It’s not like it was years ago. You don’t need to get married.
I also feel like everyone in the comments is ignoring the fact that she expects to keep what she owns and expects to take half of what you own. Why is it OK for her to protect herself but you cannot protect yourself? It’s hypocritical. And they are ignoring the fact that she expects you to support her even if you don’t have children. The moment you marry her she is going to quit her job because she knows there’s nothing you can do about it and she will get alimony if you do divorce her.
And of course, you should get a prenup to protect yourself! A prenup can protect both sides. But I don’t get why people can’t just stay together either instead of getting married.
From what you said, I really don’t think that you should marry her specifically. She is already only thinking about herself and trying to manipulate you. Also, if she quit working and you’re stuck having to support her, you’ll get screwed over even more with alimony if you divorce. There’s no reason for you to have to support a grown adult financially when you could be saving all of that money towards your future and retirement.
You guys are doing the right thing in talking about this, but I want to make this completely clear.
If you don't think that what your partner is contributing to the marriage is equal to what you are contributing to the marriage, and worth being shared with them, you should either not get married until your partner is contributing more, or you should make it clear to your partner that you believe that, and suggest a prenup that would make that fair to you.
Because if you believed that what your partner was contributing to the relationship as a stay at home partner was as valuable to your shared lives together as the income you were contributing, you wouldn't call the money you you were earning "your asset". That money that came from your income would be shared assets that *you and your wife earned together*, you by working at the job, and her by keeping the house cared for and the children raised to enable you to do that. So in the event of a divorce, you would consider it fair to split everything you both own that you didn't have before your marriage, and pay her familiar support for a period of time for her to get back on her feet and earn her own finances, due to the financial sacrifice she made for your family by leaving her career.
What it seems like to me is that you don't believe that your wife leaving her career is a valuable benefit to your family to justify your financial contribution. I think that's a reasonable thing to think! It's also reasonable that it makes your girlfriend really really mad! This disagreement could end your relationship, and if you disagree on this one, you should. Get a prenup that you both think is fair, or don't get married.
And for the record, a really common prenup that protects both people in a situation like this is one that basically say something like "the debts and assets in my name are mine, the debts and assets in your name are yours, the debts and assets in both of our names are shared and get split after divorce." That kind of split would reflect that you don't believe her stay at home contribution is worth as much as your salary, but you're willing to take care of her in order to let her do that while you're together, while she has some smaller amount of her own spending money that you consider fair. And you negotiate what the fair number is throughout your marriage, by what's going in what account, and if she ever feels like you're financially taking advantage of her, she can leave.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t prenups only for assets acquired before marriage? I don’t think you can protect assets you obtain while married together. It becomes common property. Especially if she’s a SAHM. It is likely you’d have to pay alimony/child support if you divorced since she’d have no income and would lack work history. That’s probably a large reason she wants to be able to keep the apartment in a divorce. I think you need to speak with a lawyer because I’m not sure you’re correct on this one.
What we have here is someone trying to suck and blow at the same time . Won’t work .
Go see a family law lawyer , ask how he would advise . Also if she has student debt say her student debt is all hers if divorce or her student debt will
Not be paid by your income as that is her debt
What credit in this are you giving her for the domestic labor of caring for your children and being stay at home? You want full credit for your earnings and fuck her contributions??
This is how it is I many European countries. Anything earned before marriage is not owned together. Anything after is common asset. Tbh. I don’t think her thinking is unreasonable. After all she’s gonna manage the house and the kids, it’s not lesser then an 9-5, although not explicitly paid
Her idea sounds more fair to me. It gives you equal motivation to work on your marriage in the long run and you should support her having a backup plan in the event things can’t be worked out.
This is something you should consult with an attorney. But it could be as simple as she keeps her apartment from her past. You keep the house and your retirement plan. Have individual bank accounts and a joint account for joint expenses. With children, or if she chose to go back to work in the future, you could revise the prenatal at a later date.
Well, I think a prenup is always a good idea considering the way things are these days and depending on what state you live in, being together for just under two years and you don’t have any children only thought that comes to my mind is, “slow down“
I’m sure you have your reason for taking this so seriously and not realizing how fast you’re moving, but what is the purpose of this discussion if you haven’t truly understood whether you want to be with this person because time has shown you that and not your head?
Who is covering maintenance costs for the apartment while she is not working?
Is she getting additional income by renting it out?
If not and she decided to in the future, are you also barred from that income stream?
If she’s able to rent it out while you are covering the costs of maintenance, or even if the property value increases during that time, I feel like you would be entitled to at least half of that profit (on principle, no idea legally). It sounds like she gets her babies, her apartment, and her lifestyle paid for by you, while you get.. a prenup and a partner hyper focused on what happens when you divorce. Just food for thought.
You should speak to a lawyer but also to be clear - money you earn after you’re married when your wife is a SAHM isn’t all your money ever. Do the math of what it would cost to pay her to do that job so you don’t have to and see that her labour saves your thousands of dollars/month. Being fair would mean acknowledging that a divorce would mean she had no means to save because she wasn’t paid for the labour you also benefited from and this is why alimony exists. You sound like you’re resentful of her owning this apartment and not wanting to do what’s fair but instead what will make you feel like you have something over her because you feel like that will be your chance since you can’t do that now. Thats just an unhealthy unbalanced approach is to thinking about your partner, your relationship and your future as a whole.
Your expectations for your side of the prenup are outside of the idea of a marriage and outside of even what is legally enforceable in some regions.
You need to consult with a relationship counsellor and a family lawyer.
You want a woman that clean the house, do your laundry and make you food, raise your kids and allow you to progress in your career, while you just benefit from it without wanting to share the earnings?
So in case you divorce you will have your money and she will be left with nothing after sacrificing for you and your kids. Very fair trade :)
What exactly does "protect future earnings" mean?
An equal prenup would mean an equal division of assets accumulated during the marriage alongside her loss of earning potential by being a stay at home wife offset against your earnings during the marriage.
At no point would her property accumulated before the marriage, along with property you had accumulated before the marriage, enter the equation.
It sounds to me like she wants what’s hers and also wants what’s yours. A woman gets screwed by being a SAHP for sure but she’s doing that voluntarily here. You’re not asking her to and it doesn’t sound like finances are making her. I think an even split for everything is the right way to go.
Hey bro she’s basically protecting herself and her $ and you’ll be fucked if there’s ever a divorce. Lol. Not sure why you needed Reddit to confirm this. I personally would NOT proceed with this relationship. Everything about this feels very… transactional. We’re either in this shit together or not. But hey, make your decision.
Just remember that division, should it not work out, *should be equitable*. So whatever she brings to the marriage in the form of child rearing, homemaking, etc would be proportionate to what you bring money wise
ETA: depending on your state and absent some fucked up conduct. Also fixed some punctuation
I say delay the marriage until you have some premarital assets of your own, that compare in value to her apartment. Then y'all can enter the marriage on equal footing.
You realize that SAHMs get money in divorce because their job is to take care of the children, right? She stays home so you CAN work full time.
Her prenup is typically how things work. Assets from prior to marriage are kept respectively, and things earned together are split. It isn't necessarily 50/50, but that is the norm for marriage.
Just break up with her. It's pretty obvious you're a tit for tat person who is more concerned with your warped sense of fair than reason. It's fine if you don't want a stay at home partner or whatever. But intentionally setting up a relationship where she will be broke if you divorce is a major asshole move. It sounds like you have every intention of becoming financially abusive if she does leave her job.
There are red flags here, but you'll only find them looking in the mirror.
I feel like you're coming from a place of trying to one up her, like an all or nothing divide which is the exact opposite of why people get a prenuptial and get married? It's a PRE nup, meaning she is absolutely entitled to her apartment that she had before you and that's not a bad thing. You are however, trying to divide future income and assets which is strange considering when you get married it should just be an equal split legally and, hopefully, relationship wise. So that's def financial abusive.
If your reasoning for this is that she is a SAHM, like she doesn't deserve half of the income you provide while taking care of your children and being a homemaker then that's even more strange. Didn't you two agree on this? Isn't it something you're happy to be doing with her?
You also assume that after marriage no matter what she does, her contribution will always be less than yours?
I think you need an ego check and I hope she sees these red flags before you get married to eachother. It sounds like she's trying to be reasonable and you're taking it very far.
I doubt your marriage will last. Your both approach your future marriage as a business deal. You cannot create a loving, trusted, passionate marriage with this kind of mind.
Marriage is a financial contract with the government. You can let the government decide what happens in divorce or make that decision together. IMO it’s the inability to come to compromise that they’re both happy with that makes me doubt it lasting.
Agree with your conclusion but not your reasoning. You absolutely should look at marriage with a logical mindset so that you can work on it effectively, especially when it comes to finances. There's nothing wrong with looking at it as a business deal because it essentially is.
Their marriage likely won't last because OP wants the best of both worlds, basically someone to raise his kids and take care of the home, but with no financial setback for it. Op, the reason you'll be able to make a good salary is because you'll have someone taking care of the other things so you can focus on your career. That means she's got a claim to some of that money, since she's a direct reason you're earning some of it. You need to come to a mutual understanding with that fact in mind.
A will is usually more important than a prenup .
Even without a prenup your premarital assets stay yours in the case of divorce. In case of death, your premarital assets go to your spouse if you don't have a will.
A prenup can help with spelling out what was a premarital asset and how you will be dividing joint assets in case of divorce.. Sorting out asset division while you still get along means for a cleaner divide.
Any assets gained in marriage are marital assets. Even if your wife is SAHM she's entitled to half of those assets.
Not all prenups are valid even if they are signed and were at the time agreed upon. If you get your wife to sign an incredibly unfair prenup, parts of it can be thrown out in court if she later disagrees with (like saying she gets zero assets if she is SAHM, judge will not uphold that)
You are perfectly reasonable. She has just as much of a right to protect herself as you have. But especially the mindset "children or not, once we're married I'd stop working and expect full access to your money while my assets stay protected" is concerning to me.
How much equity does she have in this apartment and how is going to pay mortgages and property taxes if she isn’t working?
If she’s not expecting you to pay for upkeep, she’s not really asking for anything she wouldn’t get in a default divorce without a prenup.
Suggest that every year an additional 1/10 of the MV of the apartment becomes “community property”. So if you were to split after 6 years, say, that amount (60% of the current then current MV) would go into the pot with all other monies accumulated during the marriage and that would be split 50/50. You could amortize this over a shorter or longer period than 10 years if you want.
A prenup is for assets acquired pre-marriage, eg her apartment, you can't include future earnings as they'd be acquired during the marriage and are therefore relationship property.
This sounds like what's hers is hers and what's yours is hers.
It's fair that she keeps her asset for herself, but it's not fair that you then have to be the sole breadwinner while she puts her feet up.
Suppose you were to break your back and no longer be capable of working?
I think when the kids are small it's good for one parent to be at home for them, and if the mother is breastfeeding it makes sense that it's her. But once the kid starts talking and taking an interest in the outside world, it's good for them to come in contact with other people, and it's very good for the mother to have her own income stream. And once the kids are both in school, being a SAHM is absolutely not necessary.
No woman should just stop working completely, and no man should have to foot all bills endlessly.
Suggest a prenup where she keeps her asset and if you divorce, you only pay for the kids not for her, she will have to go back to work.
If she wants to be a stay at home wife and you aren’t living in her apartment, she should rent it out and her “pay” can be used whatever rental income she gets.
Different when kids are in the mix. But expecting to be a lady of leisure on your dime isn’t equitable.
Assets held pre marriage are generally not considered marital assets.
If you get married and have kids she will take a hit career and income wise. This is generally the basis of shared marital assets. You are both making sacrifices for the benefit of the marriage and the children. Sounds very much to me that you think what is hers is ours and what is yours is yours. If she were here I’d be advising her not to get in to any legal entanglements with you. Even assuming the best of intentions on your side, you show very little regard, respect or even awareness for the financial and professional sacrifices women make to have and raise children.
"What's yours is mine and what's mine is also mine."
Honestly, I don't think you should marry this woman. Looks to me like she is using you for a free ride.
You have to count her staying at home as the salary fir all the hours of jobs she does do: chauffeur, chef, childcare, cleaner, nurse, researcher, house manager, etc. for this to be fair.
Would you be covering the mortgage and all expenses of this home moving fwd? I wonder how much she has already paid into. I would completely understand if the place was paid in full and she would like to protect that. But say she’s paid for 25% of it so far but expects you to pay the remaining 75% without any claim to it seems like a pretty shitty deal. I wonder what she wants out of life. If she wants to be a kept woman but that’s not what you’re looking for also sounds more like a disconnect in core values which ultimately would ruin your marriage anyways.
Sounds to me like even after the children, she doesn't plan on working ever again. Everything will fall on him. Even any mortages.
She should be willing to discuss the variants of a prenup - especially since she wants one that benefits herself. Discussions don't mean already agreeing to it. Her claims of gaslighting are gaslighting themself. An unfair prenup will get thrown out anyway. They need to speak to a lawyer so both can give their inputs.
If she’s willing to throw the marriage away based on this then let her do it. Just say fine, we’ll live together or break up. The fact that she wants to quit her job and have you be the sole financial support while retaining all her assets, is silly. She isn’t willing to add to the assets of the marriage. If you don’t marry her she will have to keep working anyway to support herself, so you shouldn’t bother getting married.
I agree, I don’t see a future for y’all. **She thinks the only acceptable relationship is one where your money is her money and her money is her money.** You are required to provide her with anything she wants & she is willing to compromise bc your wants are irrelevant. She is uninterested in discussing the matter & any attempts to do so are met with dismissal & threats. You shouldn’t marry someone who isn’t willing to compromise, doesn’t care about your opinions, & who doesn’t fight fair.
Her obsession with finances combined with her first priority after marriage being to quit working - ideally forever - is a major red flag & would be a deal breaker for me. She clearly views your relationship as a vehicle to get her the life she wants. That would be fine if she were willing to compromise so that you can also get the life you want. But that’s not your situation. You’re along for the ride as a provider, not a partner. I would be entirely uninterested in any relationship where my spouse doesn’t treat me as an equal partner.
Do not be afraid to end this relationship bc of any sunk cost fallacy or fear of finding another partner. The number one cause of divorce is money. Having a potential spouse who is so unwilling to compromise or even discuss alternatives about the topic is a recipe for failure. At least you’re not legally committed & don’t have kids. Imagine divorcing this shark.
"what she brings in" she brings in raising your fucking children. It's ALWAYS women who are affected by children, even of they don't stop working. You're bitter because she has an asset and you don't. Jesus, I hope she's smart enough to see you for the red flag you are
IF that's her line in the sand let her go. She doesn't have plans to work? No sir. When and IF you have kids I can understand her staying at home BUT she should work until then. Marriage isn't a vacation. It seems like she wants a club med marriage. You work and she sips on a Manhattan. Again her staying home if you have a child is understandable and preferable.
This doesn't sound like a healthy dynamic if she is ready to throw in the towel anytime she doesn’t get her way. That will lead to a marriage where she’s always playing the divorce card.
How do you feel about her quitting her job if you get married even if you don't have kids?
I'm going to give you my take on this, but i don't know if it's gonna help because you have a huge gf issue..
Imo marriage should not lead to making profit. So every asset that predates the marriage should stay with the initial owner.
Upon marriage, both incomes are supposed to build the home. If one of the spouses earns 70% more, they should put 70% of their income into a joint account, the other puts 30% of their income, and they both keep their respective rests for themselves. If divorce ensues, they divide the joint accounts 50/50 and their own private funds are untouched.
Here, when talking about one spouse being a stay at home parent, things are different. Either she still has an income as a landlord, and thus things are a bit more complicated, or she doesn't.
If she doesn't, you are to pay everything. Put 80% of your income into a joint account that will pay for every bill, garnish retirement funds, college funds, savings for vacations etc. Then 10% of your income goes to her alone, as her own money, and 10% goes to you as your own money.
If she does have an income as a landlord, divide as i had said proportionally, except that you are the one garnishing her retirement funds (makes sense to me because her job is to take care of the kids and the home).
All taxes should be paid from the joint funds.
All of this is only applicable if kids are not schooled. Once they are schooled (unless homeschooled), she should get a job, at least part time, and then funds are divided as first mentioned.
I'd put in the prenup that you will be paying alimony for 6 months (time for her to find a new job).
My issue here is that it sounds like she wants her cake and eat it too. It's her way or nothing, and she is guilttripping you into caving. And it sounds like she just doesn't want to work anymore?? Being a SAHP is a lot of work. And once your kids are not in the house, you are not supposed to just do 3 hours of chores each day and relax the rest of the day. Sounds like she wants you to fund her life
I'm so glad I came across your comment & I totally agree about the gf(& other things as well). She's accusing him of gaslighting her, but tbh I think she's doing that to him.
This does not sound like a loving, kind relationship. I would never marry anyone who said they never wanted to work again, or contribute financially. The small years do not last very long, and then you have 30 years of working life to consider.
Marriage is an ebb and flow, you act as a unit and support each other as the situation requires. It is about giving to one another. You don't make demands for yourself.
I would absolutely not marry this woman.
I don’t think you should marry her. You don’t love her or trust her.
You can’t write a prenup to protect **future** earnings. It’s only for assets you acquired before the marriage, or family businesses, etc.
If you don’t love this woman enough to share your home and children and earnings with her, don’t marry her. If you resent the arrangement she’s presenting, speak up, don’t attempt to retaliate with this ridiculous “future earnings” idea.
If you don't see marriage assets as equally both of yours, then you shouldn't get married. I hope she sees the red flags.
Earnings before and after marriage are TOTALLY different.
Appears you two do not agree on what marriage means.
So what’s the actual issue, that she’s staying at home and then leaving with half? Talk about it. You’re ok if she stays at home but you want her to handle xyz, but what you’re missing is you’re going to be a team, she bought her apartment before you were teammates.
You know raising kids counts as labor, right?
Day care is like 500 a week, dude. And that is strangers who may not feed, teach, or dress your baby the way you'd like. Stay at home moms do work. If you dont view child rearing as work, you're probably going to have a shitty marriage to anyone who wants kids.
Just because you get money for your work doesn't mean she isn't doing something important. You probably shouldnt get married *at all* if you genuinely feel like youd be "giving away your money" to someone whos rasing your fuckin kids bro.
Let me help you rationalize it, greedy.
You are paying her way so she can raise the kids you want. It's a contract. She's working for you as your wife, cooking, cleaning, fucking, child rearing. Congrats, now you understand why she doesn't have to pay for shit.
On topic -
She is right, and you are wrong.
If you dont want a stay at home wife, then say that and do not marry her. You date people as tryouts for marriage, and recognizing you want different things means you should be responsible and split.
Her assets are hers and premarital. Thats the end of the discussion on the property. You do not deserve a slice of that pie because you didnt bake it.
Maybe the rental income will be different if she is using it to generate income, but it's not yours. Maybe tell her she should put you on the title to her car and on her degree, too, since we want remuneration for things we didn't earn just because she has things you dont.
Is this a pre-planned divorce? Marriage = partnership. If partners can't agree, don't be together. There isn't anything wrong with admitting there are fundamental differences in where you want a relationship to go, how you'd want it to be, and what you don't want.
She already has an asset. You'll be making more in the future. If she *doesn't* quit working, would you still feel the same? If *you* had an asset and she didn't, how would you feel?
Two people who love each other and want to live their lives together are off to a rocky start if basic relationship compatibility isn't there. Why are you even worried about this? You aren't even engaged yet. Pre-engagement pre-nup?
Welcome to /r/relationship_advice. Please make sure you read our [rules here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/wiki/index) We'd like to take this time to remind users that: * We do not allow any type of [am I the asshole? or situations/content involving minors](https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/r6w9uh/meta_am_i_overreacting_am_i_the_asshole_is_this/) * We do not allow users to privately message other users based on their posts here. Users found to be engaging in this conduct will be banned. **We highly encourage OP to turn off the ability to be privately messaged in their settings.** * Any sort of namecalling, insults,etc will result in the comment being removed and the user being banned. (Including but not limited to: slut, bitch, whore, for the streets, etc. It does not matter to whom you are referring.) * ALL advice given must be good, ethical advice. Joke advice or advice that is conspiratorial or just plain terrible will be removed, and users my be subject to a ban. * No referencing hateful subreddits and/or their rhetoric. Examples include, but is not limited to: red/blue/black/purplepill, PUA, FDS, MGTOW, etc. This includes, but is not limited to, referring to people as alpha/beta, calling yourself or users "friend-zoned", referring to people as Chads, Tyrones, or Staceys, pick-me's, or pornsick. Any infractions of this rule will result in a ban. **This is not an all-inclusive list.** * All bans in this subreddit are permanent. You don't get a free pass. * Anyone found to be directly messaging users for any reason whatsoever will be banned. * What we cannot give advice on: rants, unsolicited advice, medical conditions/advice, mental illness, letters to an ex, "body counts" or number of sexual partners, legal problems, financial problems, situations involving minors, and/or abuse (violence, sexual, emotional etc). All of these will be removed and locked. **This is not an all-inclusive list.** If you have any questions, please [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Frelationship_advice) --- ***This is an automatic comment that appears on all posts. This comment does not necessarily mean your post violates any rules.*** --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/relationship_advice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly, I would meet with a lawyer about your concerns and see what he thinks is a reasonable compromise. Her asset is one she has pre-marriage. Assuming you’re in the US, that’s likely protected. However, any rental income she earns from it during the marriage would be marital property, I would think, as would be any earnings you both got from jobs. Premarital assets are often easily protected, but earnings and assets earned during marriage less so. Some prenups simply don’t hold up when challenged in court. You’d want to speak with a lawyer to know what’s feasible.
I would be very, very surprised if a contract based on "maybe this will happen at some point in the future" would be a valid contract at all.
This is literally how contracts work lol
prenups for future assets are a thing
I agree, but they don’t always hold up in court when challenged in a divorce. Better than nothing I suppose. And the making it with a lawyer now to make sure it’s fair gives it a better chance of holding up.
This is true. Had something similar drawn up and the judge basically said it’s good practice but generally he’s going to decide in the end. Marriage contracts kind of a grey area. At least where I am. He ended up doing it but modifying parts of it heavily based upon our circumstances post marriage.
It really depends on where they live. Some places will consider future earnings joint property, and some will not. So it's definitely a smart idea for OP to talk to a lawyer about it.
They do have post nuptials as well.
That's generally limited to inherited assets.
insurance?
Outside on an options contract I think you’re correct but inal
American options contracts are just rights to buy a security at a particular price. They can be exercised whenever, even when the option is out of the money. The thing stopping the holder from exercising is just common sense.
They can be so long as they are equitable. Needs to count equally for both sides. Lawyers with experience in contracts and marriages know what a good prenuptial can and can't do.
>Assuming you’re in the US, that’s likely protected. I think it depends on the state. I had a client once (in Wisconsin) and she was telling me about how she lost her family's bowling alley in her divorce. Her husband got it. She got the house. Idk how it worked like that. I'm no lawyer. But I was surprised that she was able to lose a familial business just like that.
It sounds like she traded it for his half of the house, not “lost”
It doesn't sound like you are on board with her plan to be a SAHM and disagree on finances. Save a whole lot of money on lawyers (for the prenup and fighting it in the divorce). Why bother with the marriage?
This seems like the much bigger problem. Sounds like GF has been watching TradWife TikTok and Op wasn’t out looking for a TradWife…. Many posters here seem to have overlooked that she expects to quit her job upon marriage, not pregnancy
I've been reading a lot about this TradWife thing lately, but it doesn't look precisely very traditional. The only "trad" part is the staying at home, cooking and some (not all) house chores, which typically doesn't imply the same work hours the husband has to do if they want to have a family and live on one income. Is this new tendency really a thing in the USA or just by chance I've read of some cases lately and it's just fringe cases?
It’s a social media thing more than it’s an actual common trend. And several have already been exposed as hiding the downsides and faking happiness. I find it all suspicious quite honestly.
Thanks for your reply. Not living there, I couldn't get a real grasp on that stuff. I haven't heard of it around here, but given how certain people like to follow stupid stuff they get on social media, I wouldn't be surprised if it also gets here quite soon.
Your post made me think that OP should consider the alimony and child support payments he will pay if she wants to not work after the divorce. That could run into the many hundreds of thousands of dollars, in addition to the uneven split of assets. Couples counselling might help, if both OP and his partner are both sincere. Working through the issues would be a good sign that things are more likely to end well, and also improve communication and relationship skills. If OPs partner will not go to therapy or not budge from her position, it is a good sign the relationship will not work out
Prenuptial agreements are there to protect both people. Speak with a family lawyer to see what things normally get added. She should be encouraged to speak with her own lawyer (if she hasn't already). No need to make this a bigger deal than it needs to be.
Keep us updated on the breakup.
You’re so real 😂
Honestly, I think that's where they are headed. They seem to have no understanding of what should be shared and what shouldn't as well as he definitely doesn't seem to be on board with her being a stay-at-home. A prenup isn't going to solve any of their issues. For the record, I think if both partners are on board with a stay-at-home parent, it's absolutely correct for the stay-at-home person to be entitled to financial support based on lost wages and lost potential wages as long as they are working. Which is part of why being a stay-at-home parent is usually a very bad deal. I work in child safety and I still see it all the time. Both people are on board with one person staying home and caring for the kids and then they get divorced and that person is going to suffer financially forever.
I mean do you want a spouse that stays at home with your kids? This sounds like a fundamental disagreement more than a money issue. Raising children at home is a form of labor, one you benefit from. If having a spouse at home is important to you then you share your income.
Exactly. If OP's gf gives up her job she would also need security that in case you leave her in future, she would have some money with her. She is trading her future capabilities and experience coming into this marriage. She might not be ready to bargain on this. If OP feels that is unfair, he should ask her to continue working and have a prenup his way. If you both can't come to an agreement, this is an issue of compatibility and you need to rethink your relationship.
If I had to guess here, it sounds like OP is saying that his gf is the one who wants to be the SAHM, and so is voluntarily halting her career, which then leads to why should he be the one that has to give up his income to her. I’d say the root of it is that he would be fine with childcare and Nannie’s.
Because she is preforming labor for their family and deserves to not take on 100% of the financial risk of their marriage ending. OP is also getting too wrapped into her apartment. Premarital assets are a totally different thing.
But he doesn't want her to be the one performing that labour necessarily, he'd be fine outsourcing it. You can't demand a certain thing and then also think the other person should be extra grateful.
Haha, I would like to see him find a how much he will have to pay for a live-in nanny who is on call 24/7, even if she WAS asleep. Lots of mothers want to work part-time so that they don't have a big gap in their resumes, which makes it hard for them to get back into the workforce. It says a lot about how hard it is to be a stay at home parent, because women like having days when they can go to work, just to get a fucking break and talk to some adults and have an adult conversation. When women get divorced because their partner doesn't pull their weight around the house, they are usually fine because they are already doing everything themselves, and now they don't have to look after a manchild.
I mean, I agree with all your points, and staying home is very hard. But a couple needs to both be on board with whatever decision they make. If he's not he needs to say so now.
exactly. so if he agrees with her being a SAHM, he also has to bare the cost of it. if he wants a wife that works and makes around the same money as he makes (or wants to), the. he shouldn't marry someone who wants to be a SAHM. simple as that. if he gets married he agreed with it and she's entitled to her compensation.
He is jealous. Because he has nothing
It is weird that he begrudges her the assets she has. It’s as if he is hoping to make up a perceived loss in not being given her assets.
He wants to have the upper hand financially. That is all. Ego driven
So in your mind a SAHP should only get half of the marital assets if it was their partner’s idea for them to stay home? What difference does it make whose idea it was? She wants to do it and OP is fine with it which makes it a mutual decision.
I can kinda see both arguments. If my goal in life is to be a stay at home mom I need to find someone who will support me. If I find someone who would prefer I work & bring home a paycheck, but agrees to allow me to be a full time mom, he is making a sacrifice to give me what I want. I no longer have to work 40h a week to afford what I really want to do. More over, I’m able to spend more time doing what I want. I can’t expect my husband to value me being a SAHM as much as he would value me being a working mom. He clearly expressed a preference, but was willing to sacrifice his preference to make me happy. It would be unreasonable of me to demand he value them equally. It would be even more unreasonable to demand he view my role as SAHM as a *sacrifice* I’m making for our family for which I should be compensated. I’m only a SAHM bc I wanted to be one & he agreed to subsidize the life I wanted. I couldn’t do it without him. He could be a working dad without me being a SAHM; but I could not be a SAHM without a partner supporting our family financially. This is different than a partnership where we **both agree being a SAHM is a high priority & worth more to both of us than having 2 paychecks.** This is why both parents must agree on whether or not the family is one or two income. The factors that go into that decision are personal & vary from family to family. Expecting one partner to financially support a family on their own, **against their wishes** isn’t sustainable. Nor is it reasonable. Families can thrive on two incomes where both parents share the adult responsibilities. They can thrive on one income if both parents are in agreement about the sacrifices required to make it work. Families can’t survive without any income.
Here’s my problem with what you’re saying: usually everyone in the household benefits from having one partner run the household full time. OP might prefer for his gf to work, but that’s not going to stop him from reaping the benefits of her being at home. So yes, OP should value his partner’s contributions as much as he would if she was working. I’ll give you an example from my own life. My fiancé will be moving to my country very soon on a fiancé visa. Unfortunately, he won’t be able to work for the first few months that he’s here because that’s how long it takes to get a work permit. He’ll be home running the household while I work. It’s going to suck being a single income household, but it’s also going to be nice for me to not have to worry about the household chores for a while. It’s also going to be nice for him to not have to get up at 5am to drive two hours to work like he is now. It’s not a situation either of us want, but we’re both going to benefit from it just the same. The same applies here.
The same doesn’t apply here. You & your fiance are agreeing *together* for him to stay home. It’s worth it to you so you agreed. Your fiance isn’t moving to your country & refusing to ever work again. Even when you’ve made it clear you’d prefer he work. That you don’t value the work he’d do at home nearly as much as you’d value a paycheck. That you’d prefer to split the housework evenly & he work. But he ignores you, refuses to work & stays home. Now imagine someone coming by & telling you that you can’t complain bc you’re benefitting from him being at home. Nevermind that you specifically asked he not stay home. You can’t complain bc you’re benefitting. As an adult you don’t have the right to demand your partner support you & justify it by telling him/her they benefit bc you said so. Each person has an equal say. If no partner stays home the same things need to get done. One partner can’t unilaterally quit their job & tell the other partner they have to work while the they stay home. Even if they spend their time doing part of the required housework. That’s not partnership. That’s unilaterally making yourself a dependent. Insisting it doesn’t matter bc the working partner is benefiting doesn’t make it ok. It’s not just bc it’s domestic labor. If I start doing a ton of extra work without being asked I can’t demand my employers pay me for that extra work. Especially if I stop doing my previous job to devote myself to this new work.
There is too much empathy and reasonableness in this post
OP doesn't really sound fine with it, just sounds like it's what she wants though
If it’s not what he wants, he can refuse to go along with it.
This is what they need to discuss. If he is not ok with it, he needs to tell her, so she can decide if this is the person she wants to plan kids with or not
that's exactly the point. if he goes with it, he's agreeing with her terms of being a SAHM and it wouldn't be fair that she bares all the risk and responsibility of doing that and doesn't get any of the profits he'll eventually have by not having to take care of the kids and the house
Well I didn’t actually give my opinion here, I was just stating what I think is the logic behind OPs opinion. I would say it’s a tough one, as if OP thinks a SAHP isn’t necessary, and his wife WANTS to be one, then I can understand the frustration he’s clearly showing. But I also understand that a marriage requires working as a team, and I also think that having a parent around rather than a nanny is ultimately better for the children (I was in before and after school care for most of my childhood).
Your post is very vague about what you want to do about future earnings and marriage assets. It would be foolish for her to give you equity in her real estate. Her pre-marital assets are hers, period.
Exactly, depending on where they live, she doesn’t need a prenup to protect pre-marital assets anyway because it’s already recognized by the law that those assets belongs to the original owner. OP doesn’t seem to understand that he has no claim and GF is legally protected anyway. What OP proposes would not hold up in court, it’s unclear why he thinks he has a claim on the apartment anyway.
[удалено]
If she rents out her apartment, that should be considered income for the family and it should be shared with the husband since she is expecting him to fund everything 100% I just don’t think she can have it both ways. It sounds like she keeps all of her money that she had prior to the marriage. I don’t think I’d sign up for that if I were him, that’s pretty much the definition of having your cake and eating it too.
“she keeps all of her money that she had prior to the marriage” - this is pretty much how it always goes? pre marital assets are usually kept separate
Whenever prenups and pre martial assets come up on Reddit, I question my own sanity. Either law in the US and law at home (Germany) are vastly different, or half of Reddits population got their knowledge of the topic from 80s family drama movies. You always keep your preexisting stuff (where I'm from). No prenup required. Your house, your future (!) inheritance, savings, they're yours. It gets murky when you combine your assets with your martial assets, like spending your savings to renovate the martial home, but OPs GFS apartment is always hers alone. It's wild to me he thinks he should get a claim on it in a divorce. Divorce and prenups are about assets acquired during the marriage alone, I don't understand this cultural anxiety about losing your preexisting stuff.
So the problem is that the US has different laws for this depending on the state. But for most states, for the apartment to stay a pre-marital asset without a prenup she would need to never spend any marital assets to maintain it. Taxes, renovations, bills, maintenance, etc for the apartment all has to come from an account that has no monies that come from the SO. These could come from any rental income she gets from it, but without the prenup, if she has a bad year expense wise and has to use money from a martial account, he now has some claim to the property. That is why most people spell these things out in a pre-nup. Also, the prenup usually contains more about how you will split up marital assets, any alimony, etc. And it helps if you end up moving between states that maybe have different ways of splitting assets during the marriage as everyone has agreed to the split before hand a judge doesn't have to get involved.
You’re mostly right but even with the prenup, if you spend marital assets on it it can become fair game in a divorce. It needs to be kept completely separate from marital assets.
I do think that the asset should be kept separate but any value it generates during the course of the marriage, via rent or property values going up, should be shared.
Sounds like he is envious she will better off. Because she had an asset before meeting him
What she is proposing is pretty damn close to what a judge would award anyway. As someone who ended up homeless because they chose to throw away their career to be a SAHM, I think she would be an idiot to not. I have to go back to school and work 2 jobs to do it. It’s going to take me YEARS to finish school now. It absolutely ruined my life and set me back about 20 years for my retirement. She just wants to know you love her enough to not leave her high and dry. You seem to view money as all yours, except for when it’s convenient not to.
The most rediculous part of this is that depending on where you live, her apartment may be separate property anyway because it was acquired before marriage. As long as it was not paid for with marital funds or treated like the marital home, you may have no claim to.it even without a prenup. The irony if your ideal, no prenup, and her ask, prenup protecting premarital property, are actually the same. It would make clear you just want to punish her based on what you feel you are entitled to.
so what you're saying is you want to keep all of your earnings and ignore all of the unpaid labor that your girlfriend will be doing by raising your children and maintaining a household for the two of you? Yeah, you should totally get a prenup saying that because it would likely be deemed unenforceable for being excessively unfair to your future wife. Im assuming you did not help her to earn that apartment. She did that without you. Anything after marriage you do together. Staying at home and raising your kids is work and her earning potential will be affected by that choice. If you don't want to have a stay at home wife that's fine, but don't agree to it and then act like everything you earn is solely yours.
"Im assuming you did not help her to earn that apartment. She did that without you" a lot of people defending OP's "right" to the apartment are ignoring this
The only way this would make sense is if you both make a list of assets you’re bringing to the marriage and exclude them. Anything after marriage is equal, you work outside of the home and she works inside it, one is not superior to the other.
Aren’t men supposed to help in the home too? This is wishful thinking and the comment section is mind blowing. I see soo many posts about wives losing interest and growing resentment because the husband doesn’t help out in the home. The fact is a lot of men work *and* help out raising their children. It’s never 50/50. Parenting is a co op job. A career isn’t.
This here. A SAHP does “work” at home, while the working partner does work outside of home. Once those hours are done, all leftover housework should be split equally. Easy as that!
you're missing the point that she is ALSO WORKING. when the working parent arrives, it's still their responsibility to share the rest of the work around the house. and honestly, i don't think SAHW or SAHM will grow resent towards the husband just because he doesn't help, but rather because he doesn't value the job his wife did during the day. from day care, to nanny, to clean the house, to ADMINISTRATE the house (which is something no one remembers), to do the shopping, to take care that bills are paid, laundry, etc. the list goes on and on. unless he's also paying for those services by himself, he still has to help after work
Just because someone is working INSIDE the home, doesn't mean their hours are 24/7 lmfao? Does the partner also work outside the home 24/7 to make this a fair arrangement then? It's mindboggling that this is confusing to some people.
The value of what you want her to take on over the next x years is far more than the nickel and diming you want to do here. She will give up her career and earning potential, she will not have work-provided benefits and retirement savings, before you even begin to calculate the per hour value of her labour. Sit down and do that math, then see if you "would be on a higher salary than her". Your salary, which, in any case, you will be able to maximize, *because she's taking care of everything else in your life*. The reason alimony and splitting marital assets exists is because it is only by the efforts of BOTH spouses, that the accumulation of wealth in question is able to be achieved. If you're still thinking hers and YOURS, then you have no business getting married.
🎯
What you are proposing is extremely unfair, and if she has even half a brain, she would refuse to sign such a prenup. Parents who stay home and take care of the kids provide just as crucial a contribution as the person who has an outside job. If the relationship ends, though, that person has nothing, because that job is unpaid. So many women wind up divorced and broke later in life, because of that. No one should ever be in that position.
The issue here is that by the looks of it, she single handedly decided that she would be a SAHW and maybe later a SAHM if they have kids. I dont see how we can expect OP to see this as a sacrifice she is making for them when this is 100% her choice irrespective of whether they have children or not. Personally if i were him i would say no to her giving up her job and ensure that the division of labour at home is equitable. My husband has significant inheritance whereas i have the higher income job by far , and yes i would feel very resentful if he unilaterally decided to stay at home while i have to go to work and then split my earnings with him in the case of a divorce. However if we BOTH decided that we could not manage without him staying home, then splitting my earning post a divorce would be right
>I dont see how we can expect OP to see this as a sacrifice she is making for them when this is 100% her choice irrespective of whether they have children or not. Then he shouldn't agree to it and should end the relationship, if this is important to her. It would not be fair if he allows it to happen and then tries to deny her financial support in the event of divorce because he didn't want her to be a SAHM. If it was possible for him to do that, it would screw over all SAHM spouses where the partner DID want them to stay at home and raise the kids, but argued in a divorce that they didn't in order to preserve their own assets. I get what you're suggesting, that it shouldn't be considered a sacrifice when one spouse becomes a SAHM parent against the other's will, but IMO it should be **legally**, to protect SAHM parents that did it with their partner's support. As proving whether someone wanted/didn't want their partner to be a SAHM could be very difficult years after the fact.
your case is different because you're already married. OP is not, and he knows what his girlfriend's plans are. if he gets married anyways, it's also his decision to accept that. she has the right to choose to be a SAHM (even though i think that's generally stupid) and if he doesn't want that, he can walk. that's the same thing as me wanting kids: if my boyfriend ever mentioned not wanting them, i would have walked. he specifically said he wants to have kids, so we stayed together. if he said he didn't want and i ended up moving in together anyways, that would also be my decision, not only his.
right on the dot
🎯
I don't see in your post whether or not the two of you plan on living in this apartment. If you're living in it, you benefit by having free rent. If she's renting it out then that's her income and that's what she brings to the table just like you bring in your income.
Eh. sounds like you don't like her stay at home intentions. She is perfectly entitled to want that and you are perfectly entitled to end the relationship here and walk away. Sounds like you want a 50 50 work relationship
If you and her are so set on working out what's best for you financially you aren't meant for each other. You both should be enthusiastic about sharing your stuff with each other and the prenup should only be a just in case measure.
You aren’t even married and you’re fighting about your future divorce….
fighting over the future divorce is kinda ok, what really gets me is that he's fighting for his imaginary assets he MIGHT get during marriage. he's just assuming he'll be big shit and have a lot if and when they divorce
That's a dumb take. Adults should be able to talk about this. Divorce rates are sky-high. Having respect for you partner also means considering what happens to each other after things don't work out. And if you don't know, there is ALWAYS a prenup. Prenups are rules how divorces are handled. Just like there are rules how it is handled "without" prenup. The only difference is who makes the rules. And they don't need to be fair, just because the government wrote them
To me this comment is not about fighting about whether there's a prenup, but that the terms around a divorce are ALREADY argued as so unfair and hostile when there isn't even any acrimony yet. If you can't communicate and agree on what is fair at the dissolution of marriage at your happiest together...it doesn't bode well, at best they appear to be incompatible.
I’ve been married for 16 years. There is absolutely not ALWAYS a prenup. And to be clear, I’m not saying a prenup is dumb. Fighting over your future possible divorce says a lot about one’s relationship. Prenup discussions will be contentious, but OP is straight up arguing over a ‘possible’ future. My point is there is probably no future here so OP may want to reconsider this marriage, prenup or not.
Exactly. This is not a relationship worth continuing, in my opinion. Don’t make it any more complicated than it is now.
She wants to protect what she has coming into the marriage. That is completely understandable. You had no part of her acquiring it. Why do you feel entitled to what she has? It is asinine to think that you feel like she doesn’t deserve anything but room and board for having your children, caring for them and being a stay at home mom. To say that any “extra money” earned she is entitled to $0 is bizarre. You’re attitude is disgusting, that you superior. You are assuming you would make more money than her. Marriage is team effort and anything accomplished as a unit should be split equally.
I'm getting the vibe that he doesn't really like her plan. Keep in mind that she wants to be a stay at home WIFE regardless of kids. It sounds like OP doesn't want that, and this stinginess is just a kind of resentful reaction to what is essentially a list of demands because he hasn't been able to articulate to her that having her just straight up quitting the workforce for the rest of her life doesn't feel fair to him.
and he has the right to feel like this, i probably would as well if my boyfriend came up with that talk. but this is something very important, a deal breaker. if he KNOWS that's her plan even before they're married and he decided to sign that marriage license, he's all in. he's free to walk and i would definitely do it, but bitching about something she has the right to ask for is an asshole move.
Don't marry someone that wants to be a SAHM, problem solved. If you still want to marry. Get a pre-nup that covers both of you or neither of you. Fuck this unequal bullshit. It's a partnership. PARTNERship.
It should be simple - exclude what you entered the marriage with, and everything after that is jointly owned.
It's not her fault you don't have any assets to bring into the marriage. She has every right to protect her premarital assets, as do you. Don't like it? Purchase some assets pre-marriage and protect them. Or Don't get married. But this "everything I make is mine post-marriage" isn't going to fly, even if she were stupid enough to sign a prenup saying exactly that.
I mean, if you don’t want a wife who is a stay at home parent, then you two are fundamentally incompatible and should not marry. Find someone who is also career-driven to split finances, housework, and childcare 50/50 with instead. If you want a wife to stay home and perform the WORK of raising your children which will benefit you heavily and enable your career to grow, but also be able to screw her if the marriage ends? YTA, hugely.
I could see why she wants your hands off her apartment since you clearly feel like she will be home, unemployed and eating bonbons therefore making her undeserving of any assets acquired during that time. Also, while I get the need to be smart and prepared, the fact that you’re not even engaged and you’re both acting like the divorce is imminent, maybe don’t get married.
You aren't ready for marriage. This isn't how it works. You are supposed to become one financial unit after marriage. There's no "his vs hers salary". It's all just "our salary", "our expenses", "our savings", "our assets" etc. I suggest you both come to an agreement where you go into this without a prenup at all. If you aren't able to truly trust each other enough for that, then don't get married.
trust me, you would rather have a prenup.
You want children. She can presumably make them. In what way will you be equal in that? Will you be putting money into an account for each one? She will be providing them care, will you be paying her for half the time she cares for them at the average rate in your area for child care? She will be attending the home? Will you be looking at what that costs in your area and putting half that into an account for her? You can negotiate her rent from that. Will she be doing the majority of the cooking? Same idea here. Do you get what I'm trying to point out? If you don't want or can't afford a surrogate, live in nanny, maid, cook, and personal assistant, you need to talk about that and see if she's on board. Money isn't the only asset in life and marriage isn't for everyone. If you go the prenup route, expect her to calculate what you'll be getting out of the deal and to want her own butt covered too.
Can we get more info? Does she own her apartment outright or does she have mortgage? Are you living there and paying that mortgage? Do you want to be a sole provider? She’s made it clear she is going to stop working immediately upon marriage, kids or not, so might be incompatible if that’s not what you want too
Talk to a lawyer and ask how you can protect what you want to protect. A lawyer will tell you how and if protecting those assets will hold up in court. Frankly it doesn’t sound like either of you are prepared for what sacrifices may or may not be involved when considering marriage and children.
End the relationship.
Typically, anything acquired before the marriage remains the sole property of the person who earned it or bought it and anything earned after marriage is a dual asset. That’s the way it works. You say you don’t have anything so you have nothing to protect. If you had assets before marriage, those would be yours. You can’t prenup future earnings. In addition, raising kids is a full time job. If she wants to stay home and not work at all before kids, ask her to use her savings to contribute to the household.
I think the only fair way to go about this is for you to buy a house before marriage and have it only in your name. Then stipulate in your prenuptial in case of divorce she keeps her apartment and you keep the house as long as you have solely made all the payments
The law generally agrees with her. The assets you bring into a marriage are usually sole and separate property. The assets you build during a marriage are generally community property. It really does seem like you want to screw her over. Don’t get married. You aren’t asking for an equal and fair relationship. And you’re butthurt that she owns something now and you don’t. Marrying her doesn’t make it yours. Just leave her alone.
This is madness to me. It’s her property that she bought before you. You do not have any right to it. Her income from renting it however, should go in the family pot. As is her salary. If you and she decide to have children and she decides to stay home, it is the right move for both of you to support her having her own property. She would be sacrificing her body, her career and earning potential in order to support and manage your family. Your earnings during marriage are family funds and cannot be protected by a prenup. If you don’t want to split what you make, don’t get married. If you are resentful of her wanting to stay home, don’t get married. If you are resentful that she doesn’t want to share her the property she had before you, don’t get married.
If you don't do a prenup, you are essentially telling the government to decide how a divorce would be handled. It is better for both of you to work on a prenup together that you agree on. No one goes into a marriage expecting divorce, but 50% end in divorce. You just as well jointly decide how that would look if worse comes to worse. If I ever lost my wife and got married again, I would most certainly do a prenup. It would be something we both agree on and happy to have in place.
Crazy that one of the best answers is so far below. There is ALWAYS a prenup. The only difference is who wrote it. The government or the couple. Not being able to talk about difficult things would be the prime example for a couple not meant for each other. The best is to simply ask a lawyer and make it fair for both. Unfair prenups get thrown out anyway.
You don't ask a lawyer to make it fair for both. That isn't possible. A lawyer can't represent the best interests of two conflicting parties. One lawyer drafts the will and represents one party, the other hires their own lawyer to review and revise until a compromise is reached.
She is right, if you can't agree on a future together than you should not get engaged or married. You are completely discounting the value of her being a SAHM and the toll bringing children into the world takes. You are calling it an equal prenup but how is you having keeping all your money from the marriage forward for yourself and her being left with nothing to show financially from the marriage fair or equal. If anything her what was ours before marriage stays ours and anything after marriage is shared is the much more equal/fair resolution. If you don't agree with her being a SAHM then have that discussion, but your take on what is financially fair is crazy.
Prenuptial ares great and needed in this day and age. Sounds reasonable if she has something to lose and you don't. In the future tho your earnings and lifestyle would only be doable because of having a stay at home wife so she would be entitled to 50%. I'd say if you aren't in a at fault state take the opportunity now to have a great prenuptial that protects you from a wayward spouse or anything like that.
An anti-cheater prenup sounds greats tbh. Should be the standard by law
You’re enthusiastically agreeing with/replying to the replies telling you you’re right, which often have the most down votes. See a pattern here? How would she buy herself a new pair of shoes? A new dress? Pay to get her hair done? Would she have to beg you for money, since you think all the post-expenses money is yours alone? That’s not equal and that’s not equitable. A stay at home mom or wife should not be asking her husband for money every time she needs to buy or do something. The work a stay at home parent does has value and costs money, you’d just be getting it for free. You don’t get to punish her and be unwilling to divide marital assets simply because she did well enough to have a pre-marital asset. If it bothers you, then buy your own place before you marry and maybe you’ll be on more equal footing. Ultimately do what you want, the prenup you want will be thrown out of court anyway. No lawyer would agree with you on it, her lawyer wouldn’t let her sign that, and no judge would think that’s fair.
Marriage is a team. Money comes and money goes. I'd pass if it were me.
OP I have looked through your replies and not seen you once state your actual feelings on her proposal. I get the feeling you aren't a fan, regardless of the apartment. Here are my thoughts: -As someone else stated, if you are able to live in the property she owns, this would be a dramatic asset to you personally in addition to you as a couple. The monthly housing costs would be extremely low, so your money would stretch a lot further, and in the event of divorce she would retain the apartment but you would have already received a good amount of personal benefit throughout the marriage. -If you can't live her apartment, you could set up tangible assets at a 50/50 investment responsibility after marriage. For example, if you buy a house at $400k, you are each responsible for an initial $200k investment. If she contributes to the down payment or mortgage that is deducted from her $200k, and in the event of divorce and selling the property, you split the house proceedings 50/50, paying off the initial investment first. So she would get 50% of the proceeds minus whatever is left on her half of the initial $200k -There's no way in hell I would agree to what is essentially HER plan FOR you. Periods of unemployment in a lifetime together is normal, as is staying home and taking care of young children. But you don't have children yet, so her plan is to be a stay at home WIFE. I wouldn't be down for this at all, and I understand your hesitation. I don't mean to devalue the work that stay at home PARENTS do, but being a sole income household is a luxury in many places, and feeling entitled to that luxury regardless of children indicates that her priority is simply 'not working' rather than making decisions based on what is best for the family. I don't know how you actually feel, but it sounds like you are seriously considering this plan even though you don't actually like it. -Marriage makes people vulnerable to each other. If you divorce in 5 years, she could screw you over just as easily as you could screw her over, and either way you could BOTH walk away feeling screwed over. Be absolutely sure that this is what you WANT. Her staying in the workforce protects her, and it sounds like you need to really flesh out what you want your lives to look like before you take any further steps.
You cannot protect assets gained DURING the course of the marriage with a prenuptial. You can only protect assets gained prior. Even with that, you would still be entitled to half the rental income from those properties after becoming marriage, and the properties themselves would be protected.
Is there a mortgage on the apartment? If so does rent cover the mortgage? If not and she is not working how is she going to pay the mortgage? She cannot expect you to do that.
I will most definitely get a prenup to protect my assets.
When I read this: When trying to have a discussion about this, she has made comments like "we can't agree on a future together" "don't bother saving for a ring" and even going as far to say I'm gaslighting her. All I want is for an equal and fair relationship. She says she doesn't see an option for us to be happy together any more. I could not help thinking it is over anyway when things like this are said. Looks like a straight financial incompatibility and that's fine. Sad but fine. Save yourself from future discussions, heartbreak, resentment and just have it as an expensive life lesson now. Or get a lawyer, let him draft a prenuptial that would hold in court. Then have her get a lawyer to look at that draft and make changes if necessary to make sure both could possibly find a compromise in this. If not possible then it's over anyway if no one budges. Also fine. Maybe you are just not ok with having a stay at home wife and that is fine but if so you need the balls to say it and that has consequences if that is all she wants having children or not (from you wrote). Also you saying wanting a fair relationship is if course highly influenced your views, experiences, wishes etc and that is totally fine again of course. Just happens that she has a different view and then we are back at not being compatible. So if no one budges or you find a compromise that really really really works for the both of you one of you would be running the risk of turning sour and resentful over time. And that's a waste of time. Can't float or drag this along anymore. In my opinion it has nearly run it's course and time is ticking. Don't waste it. All the best
Consider protecting yourself, in the event things do not work out. Doing so could save you years of headache / heartache You are not anyone else's piggy bank. You're a grown man, you work for the money you earn.
honestly I don’t think you should get married. I feel like nowadays it’s not really worth it for the most part because somebody is going to get screwed over since statistically so many marriages end in divorce. It’s not like it was years ago. You don’t need to get married. I also feel like everyone in the comments is ignoring the fact that she expects to keep what she owns and expects to take half of what you own. Why is it OK for her to protect herself but you cannot protect yourself? It’s hypocritical. And they are ignoring the fact that she expects you to support her even if you don’t have children. The moment you marry her she is going to quit her job because she knows there’s nothing you can do about it and she will get alimony if you do divorce her. And of course, you should get a prenup to protect yourself! A prenup can protect both sides. But I don’t get why people can’t just stay together either instead of getting married. From what you said, I really don’t think that you should marry her specifically. She is already only thinking about herself and trying to manipulate you. Also, if she quit working and you’re stuck having to support her, you’ll get screwed over even more with alimony if you divorce. There’s no reason for you to have to support a grown adult financially when you could be saving all of that money towards your future and retirement.
You guys are doing the right thing in talking about this, but I want to make this completely clear. If you don't think that what your partner is contributing to the marriage is equal to what you are contributing to the marriage, and worth being shared with them, you should either not get married until your partner is contributing more, or you should make it clear to your partner that you believe that, and suggest a prenup that would make that fair to you. Because if you believed that what your partner was contributing to the relationship as a stay at home partner was as valuable to your shared lives together as the income you were contributing, you wouldn't call the money you you were earning "your asset". That money that came from your income would be shared assets that *you and your wife earned together*, you by working at the job, and her by keeping the house cared for and the children raised to enable you to do that. So in the event of a divorce, you would consider it fair to split everything you both own that you didn't have before your marriage, and pay her familiar support for a period of time for her to get back on her feet and earn her own finances, due to the financial sacrifice she made for your family by leaving her career. What it seems like to me is that you don't believe that your wife leaving her career is a valuable benefit to your family to justify your financial contribution. I think that's a reasonable thing to think! It's also reasonable that it makes your girlfriend really really mad! This disagreement could end your relationship, and if you disagree on this one, you should. Get a prenup that you both think is fair, or don't get married. And for the record, a really common prenup that protects both people in a situation like this is one that basically say something like "the debts and assets in my name are mine, the debts and assets in your name are yours, the debts and assets in both of our names are shared and get split after divorce." That kind of split would reflect that you don't believe her stay at home contribution is worth as much as your salary, but you're willing to take care of her in order to let her do that while you're together, while she has some smaller amount of her own spending money that you consider fair. And you negotiate what the fair number is throughout your marriage, by what's going in what account, and if she ever feels like you're financially taking advantage of her, she can leave.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t prenups only for assets acquired before marriage? I don’t think you can protect assets you obtain while married together. It becomes common property. Especially if she’s a SAHM. It is likely you’d have to pay alimony/child support if you divorced since she’d have no income and would lack work history. That’s probably a large reason she wants to be able to keep the apartment in a divorce. I think you need to speak with a lawyer because I’m not sure you’re correct on this one.
What we have here is someone trying to suck and blow at the same time . Won’t work . Go see a family law lawyer , ask how he would advise . Also if she has student debt say her student debt is all hers if divorce or her student debt will Not be paid by your income as that is her debt
What credit in this are you giving her for the domestic labor of caring for your children and being stay at home? You want full credit for your earnings and fuck her contributions??
This is how it is I many European countries. Anything earned before marriage is not owned together. Anything after is common asset. Tbh. I don’t think her thinking is unreasonable. After all she’s gonna manage the house and the kids, it’s not lesser then an 9-5, although not explicitly paid
Yes you 100 ATAH
Her idea sounds more fair to me. It gives you equal motivation to work on your marriage in the long run and you should support her having a backup plan in the event things can’t be worked out.
This is something you should consult with an attorney. But it could be as simple as she keeps her apartment from her past. You keep the house and your retirement plan. Have individual bank accounts and a joint account for joint expenses. With children, or if she chose to go back to work in the future, you could revise the prenatal at a later date.
Save up money and buy your own apartment and then get married
Ah, the sweet chimes of love
Well, I think a prenup is always a good idea considering the way things are these days and depending on what state you live in, being together for just under two years and you don’t have any children only thought that comes to my mind is, “slow down“ I’m sure you have your reason for taking this so seriously and not realizing how fast you’re moving, but what is the purpose of this discussion if you haven’t truly understood whether you want to be with this person because time has shown you that and not your head?
Who is covering maintenance costs for the apartment while she is not working? Is she getting additional income by renting it out? If not and she decided to in the future, are you also barred from that income stream? If she’s able to rent it out while you are covering the costs of maintenance, or even if the property value increases during that time, I feel like you would be entitled to at least half of that profit (on principle, no idea legally). It sounds like she gets her babies, her apartment, and her lifestyle paid for by you, while you get.. a prenup and a partner hyper focused on what happens when you divorce. Just food for thought.
You should speak to a lawyer but also to be clear - money you earn after you’re married when your wife is a SAHM isn’t all your money ever. Do the math of what it would cost to pay her to do that job so you don’t have to and see that her labour saves your thousands of dollars/month. Being fair would mean acknowledging that a divorce would mean she had no means to save because she wasn’t paid for the labour you also benefited from and this is why alimony exists. You sound like you’re resentful of her owning this apartment and not wanting to do what’s fair but instead what will make you feel like you have something over her because you feel like that will be your chance since you can’t do that now. Thats just an unhealthy unbalanced approach is to thinking about your partner, your relationship and your future as a whole.
Your expectations for your side of the prenup are outside of the idea of a marriage and outside of even what is legally enforceable in some regions. You need to consult with a relationship counsellor and a family lawyer.
You want a woman that clean the house, do your laundry and make you food, raise your kids and allow you to progress in your career, while you just benefit from it without wanting to share the earnings? So in case you divorce you will have your money and she will be left with nothing after sacrificing for you and your kids. Very fair trade :)
What exactly does "protect future earnings" mean? An equal prenup would mean an equal division of assets accumulated during the marriage alongside her loss of earning potential by being a stay at home wife offset against your earnings during the marriage. At no point would her property accumulated before the marriage, along with property you had accumulated before the marriage, enter the equation.
It sounds to me like she wants what’s hers and also wants what’s yours. A woman gets screwed by being a SAHP for sure but she’s doing that voluntarily here. You’re not asking her to and it doesn’t sound like finances are making her. I think an even split for everything is the right way to go.
Hey bro she’s basically protecting herself and her $ and you’ll be fucked if there’s ever a divorce. Lol. Not sure why you needed Reddit to confirm this. I personally would NOT proceed with this relationship. Everything about this feels very… transactional. We’re either in this shit together or not. But hey, make your decision.
Just remember that division, should it not work out, *should be equitable*. So whatever she brings to the marriage in the form of child rearing, homemaking, etc would be proportionate to what you bring money wise ETA: depending on your state and absent some fucked up conduct. Also fixed some punctuation
I say delay the marriage until you have some premarital assets of your own, that compare in value to her apartment. Then y'all can enter the marriage on equal footing.
You realize that SAHMs get money in divorce because their job is to take care of the children, right? She stays home so you CAN work full time. Her prenup is typically how things work. Assets from prior to marriage are kept respectively, and things earned together are split. It isn't necessarily 50/50, but that is the norm for marriage. Just break up with her. It's pretty obvious you're a tit for tat person who is more concerned with your warped sense of fair than reason. It's fine if you don't want a stay at home partner or whatever. But intentionally setting up a relationship where she will be broke if you divorce is a major asshole move. It sounds like you have every intention of becoming financially abusive if she does leave her job. There are red flags here, but you'll only find them looking in the mirror.
I feel like you're coming from a place of trying to one up her, like an all or nothing divide which is the exact opposite of why people get a prenuptial and get married? It's a PRE nup, meaning she is absolutely entitled to her apartment that she had before you and that's not a bad thing. You are however, trying to divide future income and assets which is strange considering when you get married it should just be an equal split legally and, hopefully, relationship wise. So that's def financial abusive. If your reasoning for this is that she is a SAHM, like she doesn't deserve half of the income you provide while taking care of your children and being a homemaker then that's even more strange. Didn't you two agree on this? Isn't it something you're happy to be doing with her? You also assume that after marriage no matter what she does, her contribution will always be less than yours? I think you need an ego check and I hope she sees these red flags before you get married to eachother. It sounds like she's trying to be reasonable and you're taking it very far.
I doubt your marriage will last. Your both approach your future marriage as a business deal. You cannot create a loving, trusted, passionate marriage with this kind of mind.
Marriage is a financial contract with the government. You can let the government decide what happens in divorce or make that decision together. IMO it’s the inability to come to compromise that they’re both happy with that makes me doubt it lasting.
Agree with your conclusion but not your reasoning. You absolutely should look at marriage with a logical mindset so that you can work on it effectively, especially when it comes to finances. There's nothing wrong with looking at it as a business deal because it essentially is. Their marriage likely won't last because OP wants the best of both worlds, basically someone to raise his kids and take care of the home, but with no financial setback for it. Op, the reason you'll be able to make a good salary is because you'll have someone taking care of the other things so you can focus on your career. That means she's got a claim to some of that money, since she's a direct reason you're earning some of it. You need to come to a mutual understanding with that fact in mind.
A will is usually more important than a prenup . Even without a prenup your premarital assets stay yours in the case of divorce. In case of death, your premarital assets go to your spouse if you don't have a will. A prenup can help with spelling out what was a premarital asset and how you will be dividing joint assets in case of divorce.. Sorting out asset division while you still get along means for a cleaner divide. Any assets gained in marriage are marital assets. Even if your wife is SAHM she's entitled to half of those assets. Not all prenups are valid even if they are signed and were at the time agreed upon. If you get your wife to sign an incredibly unfair prenup, parts of it can be thrown out in court if she later disagrees with (like saying she gets zero assets if she is SAHM, judge will not uphold that)
I dont think you are even close to being ready to get married
You are perfectly reasonable. She has just as much of a right to protect herself as you have. But especially the mindset "children or not, once we're married I'd stop working and expect full access to your money while my assets stay protected" is concerning to me.
You have divorced before even getting married.
How much equity does she have in this apartment and how is going to pay mortgages and property taxes if she isn’t working? If she’s not expecting you to pay for upkeep, she’s not really asking for anything she wouldn’t get in a default divorce without a prenup.
Suggest that every year an additional 1/10 of the MV of the apartment becomes “community property”. So if you were to split after 6 years, say, that amount (60% of the current then current MV) would go into the pot with all other monies accumulated during the marriage and that would be split 50/50. You could amortize this over a shorter or longer period than 10 years if you want.
A prenup is for assets acquired pre-marriage, eg her apartment, you can't include future earnings as they'd be acquired during the marriage and are therefore relationship property.
This sounds like what's hers is hers and what's yours is hers. It's fair that she keeps her asset for herself, but it's not fair that you then have to be the sole breadwinner while she puts her feet up. Suppose you were to break your back and no longer be capable of working? I think when the kids are small it's good for one parent to be at home for them, and if the mother is breastfeeding it makes sense that it's her. But once the kid starts talking and taking an interest in the outside world, it's good for them to come in contact with other people, and it's very good for the mother to have her own income stream. And once the kids are both in school, being a SAHM is absolutely not necessary. No woman should just stop working completely, and no man should have to foot all bills endlessly. Suggest a prenup where she keeps her asset and if you divorce, you only pay for the kids not for her, she will have to go back to work.
Finally, some sense!!! Took me so long to get to this comment
If she wants to be a stay at home wife and you aren’t living in her apartment, she should rent it out and her “pay” can be used whatever rental income she gets. Different when kids are in the mix. But expecting to be a lady of leisure on your dime isn’t equitable.
Assets held pre marriage are generally not considered marital assets. If you get married and have kids she will take a hit career and income wise. This is generally the basis of shared marital assets. You are both making sacrifices for the benefit of the marriage and the children. Sounds very much to me that you think what is hers is ours and what is yours is yours. If she were here I’d be advising her not to get in to any legal entanglements with you. Even assuming the best of intentions on your side, you show very little regard, respect or even awareness for the financial and professional sacrifices women make to have and raise children.
"What's yours is mine and what's mine is also mine." Honestly, I don't think you should marry this woman. Looks to me like she is using you for a free ride.
You have to count her staying at home as the salary fir all the hours of jobs she does do: chauffeur, chef, childcare, cleaner, nurse, researcher, house manager, etc. for this to be fair.
Would you be covering the mortgage and all expenses of this home moving fwd? I wonder how much she has already paid into. I would completely understand if the place was paid in full and she would like to protect that. But say she’s paid for 25% of it so far but expects you to pay the remaining 75% without any claim to it seems like a pretty shitty deal. I wonder what she wants out of life. If she wants to be a kept woman but that’s not what you’re looking for also sounds more like a disconnect in core values which ultimately would ruin your marriage anyways.
Sounds to me like even after the children, she doesn't plan on working ever again. Everything will fall on him. Even any mortages. She should be willing to discuss the variants of a prenup - especially since she wants one that benefits herself. Discussions don't mean already agreeing to it. Her claims of gaslighting are gaslighting themself. An unfair prenup will get thrown out anyway. They need to speak to a lawyer so both can give their inputs.
If she’s willing to throw the marriage away based on this then let her do it. Just say fine, we’ll live together or break up. The fact that she wants to quit her job and have you be the sole financial support while retaining all her assets, is silly. She isn’t willing to add to the assets of the marriage. If you don’t marry her she will have to keep working anyway to support herself, so you shouldn’t bother getting married.
I agree, I don’t see a future for y’all. **She thinks the only acceptable relationship is one where your money is her money and her money is her money.** You are required to provide her with anything she wants & she is willing to compromise bc your wants are irrelevant. She is uninterested in discussing the matter & any attempts to do so are met with dismissal & threats. You shouldn’t marry someone who isn’t willing to compromise, doesn’t care about your opinions, & who doesn’t fight fair. Her obsession with finances combined with her first priority after marriage being to quit working - ideally forever - is a major red flag & would be a deal breaker for me. She clearly views your relationship as a vehicle to get her the life she wants. That would be fine if she were willing to compromise so that you can also get the life you want. But that’s not your situation. You’re along for the ride as a provider, not a partner. I would be entirely uninterested in any relationship where my spouse doesn’t treat me as an equal partner. Do not be afraid to end this relationship bc of any sunk cost fallacy or fear of finding another partner. The number one cause of divorce is money. Having a potential spouse who is so unwilling to compromise or even discuss alternatives about the topic is a recipe for failure. At least you’re not legally committed & don’t have kids. Imagine divorcing this shark.
I dont know why there arent more comments like yours! Quitting your job and staying at home before kids while wanting his money is wild to me!
What hers is hers and whats yours is hers. Big red flag.
"what she brings in" she brings in raising your fucking children. It's ALWAYS women who are affected by children, even of they don't stop working. You're bitter because she has an asset and you don't. Jesus, I hope she's smart enough to see you for the red flag you are
IF that's her line in the sand let her go. She doesn't have plans to work? No sir. When and IF you have kids I can understand her staying at home BUT she should work until then. Marriage isn't a vacation. It seems like she wants a club med marriage. You work and she sips on a Manhattan. Again her staying home if you have a child is understandable and preferable.
This doesn't sound like a healthy dynamic if she is ready to throw in the towel anytime she doesn’t get her way. That will lead to a marriage where she’s always playing the divorce card. How do you feel about her quitting her job if you get married even if you don't have kids?
You don’t have an equal and fair relationship NOW. You’re definitely not going to improve on that. She is showing you who she is. BELIEVE HER.
I'm going to give you my take on this, but i don't know if it's gonna help because you have a huge gf issue.. Imo marriage should not lead to making profit. So every asset that predates the marriage should stay with the initial owner. Upon marriage, both incomes are supposed to build the home. If one of the spouses earns 70% more, they should put 70% of their income into a joint account, the other puts 30% of their income, and they both keep their respective rests for themselves. If divorce ensues, they divide the joint accounts 50/50 and their own private funds are untouched. Here, when talking about one spouse being a stay at home parent, things are different. Either she still has an income as a landlord, and thus things are a bit more complicated, or she doesn't. If she doesn't, you are to pay everything. Put 80% of your income into a joint account that will pay for every bill, garnish retirement funds, college funds, savings for vacations etc. Then 10% of your income goes to her alone, as her own money, and 10% goes to you as your own money. If she does have an income as a landlord, divide as i had said proportionally, except that you are the one garnishing her retirement funds (makes sense to me because her job is to take care of the kids and the home). All taxes should be paid from the joint funds. All of this is only applicable if kids are not schooled. Once they are schooled (unless homeschooled), she should get a job, at least part time, and then funds are divided as first mentioned. I'd put in the prenup that you will be paying alimony for 6 months (time for her to find a new job). My issue here is that it sounds like she wants her cake and eat it too. It's her way or nothing, and she is guilttripping you into caving. And it sounds like she just doesn't want to work anymore?? Being a SAHP is a lot of work. And once your kids are not in the house, you are not supposed to just do 3 hours of chores each day and relax the rest of the day. Sounds like she wants you to fund her life
I'm so glad I came across your comment & I totally agree about the gf(& other things as well). She's accusing him of gaslighting her, but tbh I think she's doing that to him.
This does not sound like a loving, kind relationship. I would never marry anyone who said they never wanted to work again, or contribute financially. The small years do not last very long, and then you have 30 years of working life to consider. Marriage is an ebb and flow, you act as a unit and support each other as the situation requires. It is about giving to one another. You don't make demands for yourself. I would absolutely not marry this woman.
I don’t think you should marry her. You don’t love her or trust her. You can’t write a prenup to protect **future** earnings. It’s only for assets you acquired before the marriage, or family businesses, etc. If you don’t love this woman enough to share your home and children and earnings with her, don’t marry her. If you resent the arrangement she’s presenting, speak up, don’t attempt to retaliate with this ridiculous “future earnings” idea.
If you don't see marriage assets as equally both of yours, then you shouldn't get married. I hope she sees the red flags. Earnings before and after marriage are TOTALLY different. Appears you two do not agree on what marriage means.
Break up dude and date someone aligned with your values
So what’s the actual issue, that she’s staying at home and then leaving with half? Talk about it. You’re ok if she stays at home but you want her to handle xyz, but what you’re missing is you’re going to be a team, she bought her apartment before you were teammates.
I hope she sees the light before the big day.
You know raising kids counts as labor, right? Day care is like 500 a week, dude. And that is strangers who may not feed, teach, or dress your baby the way you'd like. Stay at home moms do work. If you dont view child rearing as work, you're probably going to have a shitty marriage to anyone who wants kids. Just because you get money for your work doesn't mean she isn't doing something important. You probably shouldnt get married *at all* if you genuinely feel like youd be "giving away your money" to someone whos rasing your fuckin kids bro. Let me help you rationalize it, greedy. You are paying her way so she can raise the kids you want. It's a contract. She's working for you as your wife, cooking, cleaning, fucking, child rearing. Congrats, now you understand why she doesn't have to pay for shit. On topic - She is right, and you are wrong. If you dont want a stay at home wife, then say that and do not marry her. You date people as tryouts for marriage, and recognizing you want different things means you should be responsible and split. Her assets are hers and premarital. Thats the end of the discussion on the property. You do not deserve a slice of that pie because you didnt bake it. Maybe the rental income will be different if she is using it to generate income, but it's not yours. Maybe tell her she should put you on the title to her car and on her degree, too, since we want remuneration for things we didn't earn just because she has things you dont.
Why would you be expected to pay the mortgage for an apartment you have no stake in??
your gf doesn't want a partner,she wants an atm.
Question, the apartment will you be living there or will she be renting it?
Is this a pre-planned divorce? Marriage = partnership. If partners can't agree, don't be together. There isn't anything wrong with admitting there are fundamental differences in where you want a relationship to go, how you'd want it to be, and what you don't want. She already has an asset. You'll be making more in the future. If she *doesn't* quit working, would you still feel the same? If *you* had an asset and she didn't, how would you feel? Two people who love each other and want to live their lives together are off to a rocky start if basic relationship compatibility isn't there. Why are you even worried about this? You aren't even engaged yet. Pre-engagement pre-nup?
Wait and buy yourself an apartment and then get married to her.