Fiancé asking for a prenup

@Aquea i would definitely consider a pre marriage course to discuss such topics as finances. I am also of the "no kids without marriage " type but have nothing against people setting out ther positions and protecting accrued assets before they marry .....but as everyone knows, children complicate things financially and relationship wise .If he is a typical self employed company owner,there are certain traits that can go along with this and wife and kids aren't always the priority. You both need to be on the same page and have the same values and ideas around what a successful marriage and raising kids looks like.

I agree with this. Marriage is about protection and commitments, and this sounds like, although it has obviously rubbed both of you up the wrong way, an opportunity to sit down and have the kinds of discussions that people SHOULD have before they get married, if they were not so blinded by the hearts and roses.

marriage is a contract, perhaps the most important one that anyone can make, and you wouldnt go into any other contract without discussing and tying down the finer details in writing. this at least gives you the opportunity to get what both of you understand and expect from the situation - how your partnership will look in the future - will money be pooled and you both have access, will you be working after kids, will he build your pension if you take time out (if he is willing to sign that, which financially in business is a way to offset some tax breaks - then it does show a commitment to the long haul)

its not romantic, but it is sensible. it is ultimately supposed to be a contract for life.

So hubby and I had a prenup- which is no longer valid as we have had a child- the clauses within our prenup said it had to be updated after 5 years. We were also told by the solicitor when we had a child it wouldn't be valid anyway.... We have been married for 7 years

No, totally incorrect on both counts. There is a presumption the prenup will be upheld unless it’s manifestly unfair, which is quite hard to establish and usually involves going to court.

And no, we don’t have community of property so the second you marry, assets are not all shared. Courts will now separate assets into matrimonial and non-matrimonial, meaning inheritance or assets brought into the marriage. While non-matrimonial assets can be used to meet needs, there is no principle that they are to be shared equally at all.

No, I’m saying that if a prenup doesn’t make adequate provision for children, then the child-related provisions won’t be enforced by the courts, which would then fall back onto the normal provisions applicable on divorce. Welfare and needs of the children being paramount. As a result, prenups are predominantly there to determine the division of assets as between the adults. But even then, the terms have to be fair, and the other criteria I referred to below also have to be followed.

You want to get married for "legal protection" by that you mean if you have children and it doesn't work out you want to take his money. You say in the same breath you want to work full-time, so apart from mat leave which you only get up to a year for anyway why would you need to take this man's assets because you took a year out to have a baby? He built his business before he even met you, so I'm with him wanting to protect that. He could pay into your pension for a year and cover more bills while you are off, you could even take less time off/do shared maternity/paternity if your career is important.

You are saying he is unromantic for wanting legal protection, yet you want to get married for legal protection, why is it not ok to want to protect his existing assets? If I was in his position with a business and assets and got married after a very short relationship you'd bet I would be protecting what I had worked for.

I'm with him on this, only I wouldn't get married in the first place in his position.

I don't even think pre nups are valid in the UK. The second you are married, all the assets are shared.

He didn’t want to get married but you have forced the issue by refusing to have children otherwise - maybe he didn’t want to get married because he wanted to protect his business. Which is fine. I would never recommend to a higher earning woman or man for that matter to get married unless you put in place measures to protect yourself financially. He’s being sensible. You’ve just had your nose put out of joint because he has reacted to your baby negotiation with a negotiation of his own

Hi OP, if any discussion with your fiance makes you feel sick to your stomach I think you know your true feelings about the future of this. Imagine something coming up in the future you don't agree on after you've had children. I would politely retreat from this man, there's someone out there that is more deserving of your love.

You're saying yourself that the needs of children negate the prenup.

Obviously the OP should negotiate the best terms she can for herself.

It's his business. 35 people have jobs with him. I can understand his concerns. However, to me marriage is a commitment, you go into it because you want to be together forever and you want to make it work. Pre nups for second marriages yes, not so much for first.

But the actual concept is extremely cynical and unromantic. It’s really made me feel shit. Like I can’t be trusted. I’m kind of sick of indirectly having to convince fiancé that I am good person to marry.

I almost feel like I've had to push him to marry me.

Prenup aside (which is actually very sensible on his part), I honestly, for the life of me, cannot see why you are marrying this man. Because neither of you sound like you want to marry each other.

You have coerced him into marrying you. He is worried it won't last. Given the situation you have outlined he is probably right.

Unless you actively want to end up as a separated parent you would be crazy to have children with this man.

That’s not the case. Prenups will be upheld unless doing so would be unfair. They are as close to enforceable as you can get in England and Wales. Particularly if they have been drawn up following legal advice to both parties. So do not think they won’t be followed because in most cases they will.

You could ask for a review clause in the prenup meaning that the arrangements are reviewed once a child is born. But the birth of a child doesn’t invalidate a prenup at all, particularly where this is contemplated at the outset.

You both bring your own assets to the marriage, and those are protected in the event of a split.

What is built up during the marriage is a marital asset, and will be split equally in the event of a split.

Sounds fair to me.

That’s fair enough.

However each life stage needs adjustment to the agreement.

Kids, time served, infidelity etc etc.

You need to protect both of you. Very sensible.

This 👆

A pre-nup is to protect you as well as him. You will be taking a hit to your career and earning potential by having children, so you need to make sure this will be accounted for. The pre-nup is the best way to do this.

@Aquea You know what, this is pretty good advice. If you can navigate this together, respectfully, find compromise and make an agreement you will have shown that you both have all of the tools and behaviours needed for a successful marriage.

Or not, in which case you can call it a day

Tbf if the OP had her own business she’d worked hard for, she’d be told to absolutely protect it. He isn’t being unreasonable by asking for a prenup and it’s not unromantic.
But also if you force someone’s hand to propose to you and they’re not really that keen on the idea, the prospects of this marriage lasting are fairly slim. This guy isn’t that into the OP. She’s chasing some fairy tale dream where a guy thinks he’s the luckiest man in the world to get to marry her. Her fiancé is thinking uh oh better make sure I’m okay when the divorce happens. Recipe for disaster.

Well you can just say no, but if you feel like he is overall the right person it's probably daft to do that, so just get advice.

I think once you have kids, prenups aren't taken into account (they aren't legal here but can be considered) - what I would do is get a solicitor and make sure the terms of the prenup are fair so if the UK legal position changes, you are still well protected.

I don't think he's being insulting to you, by definition in a divorce people are focused on themselves, so in that event he wants to try and protect his business.

It's perfectly sensible to want to marry if you want to have kids, but in making that point you have opened the doors to that conversation.

Two years isn't a short relationship BTW.

OP is right that it shouldn't feel so much like hard work.

Wanting marriage before children and protecting your existing assets before marriage are both sensible. They're not entirely gendered either - we'd give the same advice to a woman who owned her own business, or a lower-earning man who was either going to take a step back from his career or become a SAHD.

But I think in most healthy relationships, people would move past the twinge of feeling "this is a bit unromantic/transactional" and realise why their partner needs to protect themselves financially - and ultimately they'd have no issue going along with those legal measures.

The way OP writes about her fiance, though, reminds me more of couples who are actually divorcing - mutual suspicion, tit-for-tat moves, rancour and resentment. OP, why do you want to marry this man? Do you even like him any more? It doesn't sound like you do.

Separately there's a lot of alarmist rhetoric in this thread about how having children will wreck your body and career. I can't quite square this with the majority of mothers I know thriving physically and picking up their careers where they left off. I know there are risks but it's a bit of a worst case scenario that doesn't apply to most.

Surely you see why you're not making any sense? You're protecting yourself... but object to your partner protecting himself. You're both doing exactly the same thing. The fact that you object so much makes me think he is very wise to put this in place.

That you live outside the UK negates my comment so your need for the added insurance of claiming to be a solicitor is puzzling.

I don’t think he’s doing anything wrong, he’s only doing exactly what you did by saying you want some legal protection in case it doesn’t work. Just like you. That said, if your gut is saying this isn’t right, listen to it and don’t marry him.