My First Visit To Ukraine!

[clueless_in_usa 8]

I even used them to provide me with a certified translation of my Prenup Agreement (which is a subject that will cause a LOT of flack on this site)...

- Scott

There is nothing wrong with making her sign a pre-nup, but...

... if it has not been reviewed and amended by an attorney on her behalf, it will be like signing toilet paper because it can easily be thrown out in court during divorce proceedings in any state.

Moreover, her attorney cannot be paid by you. So, you'll have a very tough time drawing a pre-nup that will stand the test of court during a nasty divorce.

A better solution is to make sure that you will not need one ... or a post-nup, when she can find and pay for own representation.

Good luck!

[Scott and Iryna 2]

There is nothing wrong with making her sign a pre-nup, but...

... if it has not been reviewed and amended by an attorney on her behalf, it will be like signing toilet paper because it can easily be thrown out in court during divorce proceedings in any state.

Moreover, her attorney cannot be paid by you. So, you'll have a very tough time drawing a pre-nup that will stand the test of court during a nasty divorce.

A better solution is to make sure that you will not need one ... or a post-nup, when she can find and pay for own representation.

Good luck!

This is a good point. A "standard" prenup is useless. It is very important that you use an attorney who is versed in International prenups. There is a special prenup required in these cases. I had a certified translation made of the prenup, and sent to her. She then needed to find her own lawyer locally who explained it in detail to her in Russian, and then the attorney signed the actual prenup, stating that it was explained and fully understood. This must take place BEFORE she comes to the US on her visa. Then in the US, we both sign before the notary. Without these steps, the pre-nup will most likely not hold up...

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

This is a good point. A "standard" prenup is useless. It is very important that you use an attorney who is versed in International prenups. There is a special prenup required in these cases. I had a certified translation made of the prenup, and sent to her. She then needed to find her own lawyer locally who explained it in detail to her in Russian, and then the attorney signed the actual prenup, stating that it was explained and fully understood. This must take place BEFORE she comes to the US on her visa. Then in the US, we both sign before the notary. Without these steps, the pre-nup will most likely not hold up...

Personally, I would call off an engagement if I even once had a thought a pre-nup was necessary. Just sayin'.

[Scott and Iryna 2]

Personally, I would call off an engagement if I even once had a thought a pre-nup was necessary. Just sayin'.

Here comes that flack I was talking about...

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Here comes that flack I was talking about...

Please, do not mistake this for "flack". You are a free man in a free country and can marry anyone you want, even someone you don't trust, I just wouldn't do it myself, that's all.

Best of luck to you, really.

[Scott and Iryna 2]

"... can marry anyone you want, even someone you don't trust..."

Not flack, eh? Look, being naive and unrealistic is also an option for some men. I get it. Now that we've both offered our opinions, let it rest. We don't need to degrade yet another thread into useless bashing.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Not flack, eh? Look, being naive and unrealistic is also an option for some men. I get it. Now that we've both offered our opinions, let it rest. We don't need to degrade yet another thread into useless bashing.

I will agree with you that naive and unrealistic is an option for some other men.

[visaveteran 1]

We don't need to degrade yet another thread into useless bashing.

Your uninvited editorial comments? Or are you summarily passing your judgment while sitting on high?

Look pal, you pull the pin on a grenade, don't complain when it blows in your face. You brought up pre nups knowing the score. You could have sent this PM but you went whole hog. Deal with it with at least some level of ownership.

[Brad and Vika 129]

This is a good point. A "standard" prenup is useless. It is very important that you use an attorney who is versed in International prenups. There is a special prenup required in these cases. I had a certified translation made of the prenup, and sent to her. She then needed to find her own lawyer locally who explained it in detail to her in Russian, and then the attorney signed the actual prenup, stating that it was explained and fully understood. This must take place BEFORE she comes to the US on her visa. Then in the US, we both sign before the notary. Without these steps, the pre-nup will most likely not hold up...

Not sure what standard, or special international prenup means. A certified translation, and a copy signed in both languages is always a good idea, as well as translators during each meeting regardless of fluency in English. The power of a prenup and the shelf life vary widely from state to state, but so long as both parties understood and agreed to all the provisions, you are good to go. Then the provisions of the document, facts and circumstances will govern what holds up and for how long. Generally speaking, the more punitive the prenup, and the longer the marriage lasted are the factors that weigh most heavily.

To my knowledge there is no state that requires a prenup or translation for an immigrant to be signed in the country of that immigrants origin (not saying it isn't true, just that I don't know), but arguably signatures, notarization, and witnesses that presumably cannot be examined at depth would be an easy way to blow up an agreement. I imagine the leverage comes in the form of an accusation that the immigrant was surprised by the prenup, and had to sign for the marraige to proceed or go back. That, and the argument that the translation was accurate, but the concept and consequences were so foriegn that the immigrant couldn't possibly have given any informed consent will be raised in any event.

[Scott and Iryna 2]

To my knowledge there is no state that requires a prenup or translation for an immigrant to be signed in the country of that immigrants origin (not saying it isn't true, just that I don't know), but arguably signatures, notarization, and witnesses that presumably cannot be examined at depth would be an easy way to blow up an agreement.

No, it's not that it is a requirement by state law. The issue is that many, many pre-nups have been deemed invalid by divorce courts because the immigrant claimed either misunderstanding (because it wasn't made clear in their native language), or duress (because the pre-nup was presented AFTER arriving in the States, and therefor seemed to become a condition of the marriage). The first is addressed by having an attorney in their country meet with them to discuss it in detail, and document such a meeting. The second one is addressed by doing all this BEFORE they enter this country, and LONG before the actual wedding.

In my case, my pre-nup was to protect my children. If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, my grown children still deserve the bulk of my estate, just as they did prior to my wedding. So, my pre-nup simply protects my assets prior to the marriage. Anything acquired after the wedding is normal joint marital property. A pre-nup can be an attempt to protect future assets as well, but I don't think that's fair and I opted not to do so, even though my lawyer stressed that I should protect myself in the future. But again, this was not a matter of trust for me, it was a matter of protecting my children.

Edited May 16, 2010 by Scott and Iryna

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No, it's not that it is a requirement by state law. The issue is that many, many pre-nups have been deemed invalid by divorce courts because the immigrant claimed either misunderstanding (because it wasn't made clear in their native language), or duress (because the pre-nup was presented AFTER arriving in the States, and therefor seemed to become a condition of the marriage). The first is addressed by having an attorney in their country meet with them to discuss it in detail, and document such a meeting. The second one is addressed by doing all this BEFORE they enter this country, and LONG before the actual wedding.

In my case, my pre-nup was to protect my children. If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, my grown children still deserve the bulk of my estate, just as they did prior to my wedding. So, my pre-nup simply protects my assets prior to the marriage. Anything acquired after the wedding is normal joint marital property. A pre-nup can be an attempt to protect future assets as well, but I don't think that's fair and I opted not to do so, even though my lawyer stressed that I should protect myself in the future. But again, this was not a matter of trust for me, it was a matter of protecting my children.

This is my opinion and you are entitled to your own. Law, smaw. I have FOUR children. Two from my first marriage, two that came with my second, and I HATE that I had to say that and I almost never do. I also HATE that in our society people seem to think it is OK to ask about the genetics of people's cjildren. They won't ask you how much money you make as a bus driver...top secret information...but they will ask if you are the father of your children. Bizarre stuff. I committed to my wife as well as to the children. ALL my children have 100% of my committment and there is nothing I would do for one I wouldn't do for another. If I die tomorrow, and heck I could have died in December, ALLA gets everything. Simple. She is my wife, she gets it all. That is what a WILL is for. Not a pre-nup. In the case she does not survive me it gets divided four ways equally. I do not see that two of my children are someone more entiteld to more of what I earned (ME, not them) than the other two.

Were I a woman and my husband-to-be said "Um, if I die my kids get more than you or your kids" I would say "KISS MY @SS AND DIE MOTHERF*CKER!" You are asking a woman to marry you, love honor and cherish you until death, your kids can do what they want and they get most of what YOU earned, not your wife? Tres bizarre. In my opinion. Now make no mistake, it is not because I am greedy or Alla is greedy. It is because you are getting married and if there is going to be this "yours, mine, ours" BS then I want no part of it. It is ALL ours or none of it is OURS. Period. No discussion tolerated in my own case. Again I do not care what you do or what your wife allows you to do.

However you could do this in a WILL, as I did. You have a pre-nup and that has nothing to do with what happens to your money after you die, that is for divorce. In the case we get divorced, she will likely get half, I think that;s how it works here anyway, I really don't care. DO NOT CARE. I committed to this marriage and will do so with all I have in me. Consider it like Columbus buring his ships. If I had the "safety net" of a pre-nup I may just say "#### it" and bail on the marriage, I won;t do that and I want my wife to know it. I wouldn't ask a woman to marry me on the internet and I wouldn't ask a woman to marry me and tell her that I am not 1000% committed. And here is at least HALF my money to prove it.

I do not say I am better than you. I do not say I am "right" and you are "wrong", because frankly, I am a Libertarian and what you do with your money is your business because it cannot possibly affect me, but I am just making it clear how I feel on the matter. I think children are important, more important than me. All my kids will have every advantage I can provide for them, that is what I am here for, I reckon. I am so happy that all my kids have the oppotunity to do what they can do, to get an education, play sports, etc. I put 100% into it for all of them. I also think it is really, really important for my wife to know that I accept and commit to her in every way and that she also knows the children are cared for. Children are number one, or should be. I know Alla is the same way and that is why I would give her 100% if I died. She will use it wisely, maybe even more wisely than me. I wouldn't marry someone that wasn't that way.

I never mentioned this before but one of the great things that impressed me about Alla was that the night I met her she was talking a LOT about her children, very little about herself. Gorgeous Ukrainian women are a dime a dozen...a dime for 3 dozen...the Hryvnis isn't what it used to be...but find one that puts OTHER people first and you have hit the "motherload" (pardon the pun)

Your uninvited editorial comments? Or are you summarily passing your judgment while sitting on high?

Look pal, you pull the pin on a grenade, don't complain when it blows in your face. You brought up pre nups knowing the score. You could have sent this PM but you went whole hog. Deal with it with at least some level of ownership.

Yeah, what he said.

and they have nothing to do with dieath, that is what WILLS are for.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Not sure what standard, or special international prenup means. A certified translation, and a copy signed in both languages is always a good idea, as well as translators during each meeting regardless of fluency in English. The power of a prenup and the shelf life vary widely from state to state, but so long as both parties understood and agreed to all the provisions, you are good to go. Then the provisions of the document, facts and circumstances will govern what holds up and for how long. Generally speaking, the more punitive the prenup, and the longer the marriage lasted are the factors that weigh most heavily.

To my knowledge there is no state that requires a prenup or translation for an immigrant to be signed in the country of that immigrants origin (not saying it isn't true, just that I don't know), but arguably signatures, notarization, and witnesses that presumably cannot be examined at depth would be an easy way to blow up an agreement. I imagine the leverage comes in the form of an accusation that the immigrant was surprised by the prenup, and had to sign for the marraige to proceed or go back. That, and the argument that the translation was accurate, but the concept and consequences were so foriegn that the immigrant couldn't possibly have given any informed consent will be raised in any event.

So, as I suspected, the weaknesses are basically the same as they would be with an American fiance', just different underlying causes. Claiming that one party was pressured, or didn't understand are pretty standard, and raised in every property settlement as a matter of course. As long as there is a good lawyer on the back end, it shouldn't be a problem with all the translations, etc.

No, it's not that it is a requirement by state law. The issue is that many, many pre-nups have been deemed invalid by divorce courts because the immigrant claimed either misunderstanding (because it wasn't made clear in their native language), or duress (because the pre-nup was presented AFTER arriving in the States, and therefor seemed to become a condition of the marriage). The first is addressed by having an attorney in their country meet with them to discuss it in detail, and document such a meeting. The second one is addressed by doing all this BEFORE they enter this country, and LONG before the actual wedding.

In my case, my pre-nup was to protect my children. If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, my grown children still deserve the bulk of my estate, just as they did prior to my wedding. So, my pre-nup simply protects my assets prior to the marriage. Anything acquired after the wedding is normal joint marital property. A pre-nup can be an attempt to protect future assets as well, but I don't think that's fair and I opted not to do so, even though my lawyer stressed that I should protect myself in the future. But again, this was not a matter of trust for me, it was a matter of protecting my children.

Thanks for the confirmation, and for sharing some pretty personal stuff here. A quick word about the attorneys and payment. I think that any judge looking at the typical FSU immigration situation would find that to get the prenup done, the USC had to pay for both attorneys and basically everything else. So long as the attorney was found to be competent and representing only the non-USC client, I don't think that is a problem. Again, allowing that everything was translated and understood. You are right about the attorney having to be competent in that area too, just for CYA.

[Brad and Vika 129]

and they have nothing to do with dieath, that is what WILLS are for.

Technically correct, but here he is just taking an extra step. If he wants to protect and preserve his assets for his heirs, as it is his right by law to do, he cannot do that without a prenuptual. If a divorce were to happen before he passes (I know... sorry Scott), the will won't do him any good at all. A will can only convey assets that are actually in his estate, not what was parsed out in a property settlement.

[Scott and Iryna 2]

... and they have nothing to do with dieath, that is what WILLS are for.

You are joking, right?

A pre-nup has nothing to do with death? A pre-nup determines how property is divided in the event a marriage is dissolved. Death doesn't dissolve a marriage?

Dude, you can not WILL away what isn't yours...

Let's say some divorced guy has a $700,000 net worth, and has a few kids. He gets married, and dies 6 months later. Without a pre-nup, that guy CAN'T will $600,000 to his kids (divided equally) and $100,000 to his wife. It's not his to give away!

[Brad and Vika 129]

You are joking, right?

A pre-nup has nothing to do with death? A pre-nup determines how property is divided in the event a marriage is dissolved. Death doesn't dissolve a marriage?

Dude, you can not WILL away what isn't yours...

Let's say some divorced guy has a $700,000 net worth, and has a few kids. He gets married, and dies 6 months later. Without a pre-nup, that guy CAN'T will $600,000 to his kids (divided equally) and $100,000 to his wife. It's not his to give away!

Interesting. I would say that death does not dissolve a marriage, and in fact would nullify a prenup, but I will defer to any one with practical knowledge or experience. Any jurisdiction could just create a legal fiction that death came after dissolution for the purposes of a prenup, I would think that in most places the assumption is that property division after death is controlled by will or the descent and distribution statutes there.