Suppose your spouse proposes that you take out a life insurance naming them as beneficiary. Is this responsible behavior? Or is it "thinking negatively"? Or could it mean that your spouse is planning your demise?
I'm hoping that most of us would think it was about financial responsibility, but after this morning I can't be so sure. Chilli Amar, the traffic babe on a morning show, told of her friend's relationship which had progressed through an engagement. Then just before they set a wedding date, the man matter-of-factly proposed a prenuptial agreement, not suspecting that it would be an issue. It was - the friend was outraged and things haven't been quite the same.
If any specifics were discussed, Chilli didn't mention them. Certainly there's some potential for abuse there, especially if it pops up the morning of the wedding. But apparently her friend was mortally offended by the idea alone - there was nothing specific to complain about and no wedding date had been set yet anyway.
I don't see the problem here. We were told that both had some significant assets such as houses and savings - why be at the mercy of judges' whims?
We didn't hear from the friend, but a number of callers weighed in. Most were for the prenup, and insisted that there were benefits that weren't obvious. At least one was against it, talking about "negativity" et al, as if someone were betting that their marriage would fail going in, and he felt that the uncertainty provided an incentive to work on saving the marriage.
IMO if you can't think of a better reason for making a marriage work besides what might happen to your personal assets, maybe you shouldn't get married at all. But in a world full of willful judges, vicious family law attorneys and jealous family members, putting things down in writing sounds like plain common sense to me.
Anyway, I thought it was interesting. Trust is good, but not having to trust is better.
No comments:
Post a Comment