Dd s boyfriend wants a pre nup .

he said that - what people don't see is he does treat her - and he is generous- but again thats in his control

"Generous" huh? This is troubling - he sounds like a power-tripping misogynist to me.

My husband earns a lot more than I do and has done throughout most of our marriage, especially since kids, unsurprisingly. I get to spend as much of the money in our joint account as he does. If there is a question it is always a matter of "can we afford?" not "please may I? - thank you darling". Because it's our money.

This guy's attitude stinks.

Good for him, why should he have worked hard on his own for his savings, only to risk them in the future if the marriage doesnt work out.

Same. My DH is from an EU country where this is the norm. We had to go to his consulate afterwards to opt for the regime where each person’s pre-marriage assets are protected. We also have separate finances (joint accounts not a thing in his country).

How does that work if eg a man brings in a business worth £100k and a woman nothing. But during marriage the business goes bust and the women makes £100k? Does he walk off with all the money?

Op I have similar with my dd. Her partner comes from a family more wealthy than us and they have said all their kids will have to have pre-nups. Dd is not engaged yet. As far as I’m concerned till they have kids she can leave with what she put in. But once they have kids that will not be the case. I will pay for the best lawyer to thrash out a fair deal.

What stands out to me is that whilst he seems to be doing well now, his work seems precarious. What is his plan B if he loses his niche role? What would be wrote into the pre nup with regard to children and financing your DD as a SAHM?

If he thought about it seriously and genuinely wanted this surely he just ring fences his deposit and doesn't get married?

I'm in the middle of my second divorce where my xh is lying and will leave me in a very difficult position. So I'm all for it. I wish I'd done something to protect myself, but xh waited for my df to die and that's what he's going after, my parent's money.

I also put in the larger deposit on the house and paid off all his debts earlier on in our relationship. I also paid for my own engagement ring! I know, I know.....

So I think it's important that they're both protected, your dd may end up being the higher earner, and you hope that they never actually need that protection. It's a lot like life insurance in my eyes.

If in UK, look into how pre nups can be used as they are not legally binding. Also though I would be saying to her to get legal advice about the property purchase and ownership, as a minimum I would want to ensure she equally is on the deeds and her contribution is reflected.

She can continue to work then

That isn't true at all actually .

My DH and I married in an EU country that basically has built-in prenups. Anything you bring to the marriage remains yours even if you divorce, but anything gained during the marriage is shared.

That strikes me as the fairest option really.

Please stay off the relationships board then. In the real world, it is predominantly women who take career breaks to be with children and their husbands reap the rewards. Even if the woman isn't consciously prioritising his career, it is the net result.

Unless it has changed since my divorce 20 years ago, a prenup has no force in the UK. I had one from another country, it meant absolutely nothing (although my XH tried to say that it did as he would have benefitted, he was gunning for my NHS pension).

You're being unreasonable as it really has fuck all to do with you.

Personally I think any assets somebody has already acquired before the relationship is established should be ring fenced, but as that isn't the case then a legal order makes perfect sense.

No issue with prenups if drafted sensibly and fairly (eg making provision for children and the lower earner’s contribution to the home which enables the higher earner’s working patterns etc), but it isn’t a case of “just sign and it’s done” in the UK. Couples are generally advised to have them refreshed/updated as post-nups/provide a declaration every few years to demonstrate continued intent to abide by them and to reflect the changing reality of their position. The longer it’s in place without review and update, the more likely a court will be to take other factors into account too during divorce, at least that’s what we were advised.

The house purchase is separate and would be governed by a deed of trust pre-marriage and then his portion under the DoT would be accounted for in the prenup.

Precisely.

Money and infidelity?

I think your DD is unwise to marry or buy a house with financial pre-conditions. Like you I believe marriage is about sharing everything. And what happens once children are involved? I would also be put off by the boyfriend's view that men end up worse off after divorce - just look at the threads from separated and divorced women on MN. Not sure what you can do though, since DD is an adult making her own decisions.

It wouldn't bother me asking as her 30% is protected.

However, they need to change this upon having children as she should not and will not be able to give up her career or have extended time at home not working. Then she will be vulnerable.

Also pensions are something to consider. She needs to know to never give up work or sacrifice her earning potential for him/children.

Then they should be sensible and take legal advice

This could easily turn into an abusive and controlling relationship. She would rely on him for gifts and to be able to go on holidays/activities etc. My cousin married someone like this. He is wealthy and convinced her to become a sahm. At first it was fine, then he resented her and asked her to get a job. She managed to find a part time job that fitted around school hours. He started making her pay for all her clothes and the childrens too. He would go on expensive holidays and activities without them. It was very painful to see. I would not want my children to ever be in a weaker financial position than their partners, because having children does make every woman vulnerable.

Absolutely. And prenups aren’t bad (per se).

but would you sign a rental agreement that protected your landlord (or even afforded him financial rights) but didn’t give you any kind of protection (or other benefits)?
Would you you commit yourself to pay the purchase price if you wouldn’t receive the item you’re actually paying for?

I certainly wouldn’t. Contracts are meant to benefit both parties. That ought to apply to pre-nups as well. But too often isn’t the case (unfortunately)…

One person wants to protect their assets. The other person is sooo in love, simply wants to get married and “understands his point of view”. And ends up signing a legal agreement that is primarily (or exclusively) intended to benefit one party.

Postnup?