Prenuptial Agreement. Is it a bad word?

[banjoruth 8]

In my specific case, I think it is a good idea. I have my parents finances in my name due their age and inability to make decisions independently.

It would be a disservice to put their livelihood at risk, regardless how I feel about, or how much I trust my fiance.

My question is... Should I get a lawyer for this. Has anyone out there dealt with this?

I explained the situation to my fiance and she has no problem with a prenup. I simply want to protect my mother and fathers well being.

[N-o-l-a 7,168]

You should get a lawyer and if you really want it to hold up well, have her have a separate lawyer that will represent her and read over the document.

Edit: We have a post-nup. An excellent idea for us.

Edited April 16, 2014 by N-o-l-a

[KayDeeCee 4,895]

~ Moved from K-1 Process to Off Topic - subject not K-1 process or immigration-related really ~

[banjoruth 8]

I think it will also be a good Idea to have the document translated into her primary language as well.

[Pooky 3,825]

No. It's two words.

It also indicates a lack of trust between the two parties signing such a document.

[Merrytooth 5,748]

To each of its own.

[Novembro 1,763]

To each of its own.

This is what I was thinking.

[novedsac 355]

While all fifty States recognize and will enforce a prenuptial agreement, there is wide latitude by most courts in how these agreements are enforced. And there are limitations as to what is enforceable in a prenuptial agreement (alimony, perhaps; child custody, most likely not). People often put too much blind faith in these agreements without really understanding them.

As noted by a poster above, if you choose to go down this path then hire independent legal representation for each party. It would be way too easy for an attorney to nullify a prenuptial agreement if one party was an immigrant spouse who wasn't in a position to understand the legal implications and limitations of the agreement.

For the OPs finances related to his parents, estate planning would be a better option. A trust could protect their assets and ensure they are available for their care throughout their lifetime.

[novedsac 355]

It also indicates a lack of trust between the two parties signing such a document.

Alternatively, it indicates tremendous foresight and responsibility when two parties bring substantial pre-existing assets and liabilities into a marriage. Trust really has nothing to do with it.

Edited April 17, 2014 by novedsac

[Pooky 3,825]

Alternatively, it indicates tremendous foresight and responsibility when two parties bring substantial pre-existing assets and liabilities into a marriage. Trust really has nothing to do with it.

It has everything to do with it. A prenuptial agreement is an anticipation that things will go bad.

[Avery Cates 1,141]

It's never a bad idea.

[Avery Cates 1,141]

It has everything to do with it. A prenuptial agreement is an anticipation that things will go bad.

No, it's working things out civilly when things are good, so that you don't have to slug it out in the event of a messy divorce and both parties can move on with their lives.

[novedsac 355]

It has everything to do with it. A prenuptial agreement is an anticipation that things will go bad.

Kinda like property insurance is an anticipation that your property will suffer an insurable loss someday?

Nope.

It's risk management, that's all it is.

A prenuptial agreement can, for instance, define pre-marital assets without the expense of identifying and resolving them in the event of a divorce proceeding. They are also useful for equitable division of marital property, conditions of separation and temporary support while the proceedings are underway. They're not very useful for defining spousal support - perhaps for a short term marriage, but it gets murkier for a longer term marriage.

Edited April 17, 2014 by novedsac

[JohnR! 5,495]

In my specific case, I think it is a good idea. I have my parents finances in my name due their age and inability to make decisions independently.

It would be a disservice to put their livelihood at risk, regardless how I feel about, or how much I trust my fiance.

My question is... Should I get a lawyer for this. Has anyone out there dealt with this?

I explained the situation to my fiance and she has no problem with a prenup. I simply want to protect my mother and fathers well being.

A prenup is always a good idea, especially in your case, where money that belong to others is involved. Get a good lawyer, so the document can be drawn up in synch with the laws of your state and to make sure specific assets are protected.

While you're at it, get your will done, if you haven't yet, so that your parents are taken care of in case of your death. You would be surprised how many people get married these days without a prenup and a will.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Gegel

[jan22 3,056]

You definitely need legal assistance with this. I assume that you are the US citizen. Are your parents' assets in the US? If so, instead of a pre-nup, you might consider establishing a trust and putting all of their assets into that trust, with you as the trustee. (It also might solve some probate problems when the worst happens, hopefully a long time from now). A lawyer with trust and pre-nup experience should be able to help determine which route is best for you. Good luck.