Pre nup- long term partner

[Newpjamas]

How would you feel if your partner of 18 years & 2 kids said they will marry you as long as they can sort a pre nup?
he is the bigger earner 70k and owns the house where i am on a lower wage 12k

Another woman who failed to use her own mind to protect herself.

There is only so much we can blame men for some woman's poor planning.

@Andromachehadabadday

Just to add to that - perhaps he does see all that, pensions and family money as theirs shared - while they are together. Like I said it’s self protection in case she decides to screw him. Really he’s just successfully doing what she’s trying to do and protecting himself. It’s a pity the two can’t be protected at once but the law is what it is and talking about that won’t help OP.

He has been able to get rich because she has provided childcare AND contributed financially. She is out of pocket and with hindered earning potential. If they split she should be compensated for that.

If it’s just a house or pension that he’s trying to protect he is wasting his time and money because a judge will change it.
A prenup is much more applicable in a big money situation, business assets,
property, an inheritance, it could and frequently does apply to a woman with an inheritance or other assets as well as a man.
The principle is that a spouse and family has to be provided for

Just agree to sign if he backs off don’t waste any more time with him.

@Regularsizedrudy

But likewise he has enabled her to stay home which was her choice. He is likely leaving the house and situation he’s worked toward if they split.
If she wants to leave him for any reason no matter how selfish he’s screwed by it. Why wouldn’t he protect himself.

Everyone always says “if they split” like it’s both doing it but it’s really not, she could marry him and divorce him the same year, then he’s be a fool for it.

I like pre nups and suggested one to my now DH, but he couldn't be bothered.

The issue here is he has unrealistic expectations of what they do. They won't give you less than you're entitled to via marriage.

All the do is clarify what you bring to the wedding and how some things will be divided should you divorce. He can't use it to basically say you get nothing.

Both parties must have taken independent legal advice prior to signing for them to be legal.

@Newpjamas

OP if you’ve gone all this time without marriage why is it important to you now? Are you thinking you might want to leave him and want more if that happens?

If your not planning on leaving him and you trust him, what difference does it make at this point - after all you’ve trusted him unmarried to this point?

It seems like your trying to get your financial ducks in order if you split and can see marriage might be more beneficial to you. If I were him I’d be wary of this after all this time. Frankly pushing marriage and this point given the circumstance seems a little bit toward being financially abusive which makes me uneasy.

What an utterly awful position you've found yourself in.

Another thread with the same issue.

We need a new feminist movement which tells women to get married before they have children.

Men are milking this new liberal 'marriage is just a piece of paper' crap for everything they can get.
Women are being played for fools whilst told they are liberated.

This is frankly naive at best.

Relying on his goodwill, when he's shown himself to be utterly untrustworthy as far as the OPs security is concerned.

What difference does it make? All the bloody difference, unless you're fine with leaving an 18 year relationship that bore 2 children with nothing but the clothes on your back.

My first response would be to ask to see a copy of the proposed pre-nup so that you can see exactly what is being proposed.

It's really important for your best interests, to treat this as the business transaction it is, separate from any emotion around loving and supporting each other.

You have been together for a long time, unmarried and have children together and your earning power has been impacted by childcare.

You are very sadly not in a strong position.

It is very sadly fact that any prenup which would stand up in court will not put you in any weaker position than you are now, when you have absolutely no provisions in the case of death or divorce.

Any legal advisor will have set out what you would be likely to be granted by the court in the case of divorce and strongly recommended that the pre-nup provides for that plus s little more to encourage you to sign it and save legal fees in the event of any divorce.

If it is not drafted in this way, then it would be much less likely to stand up in court

Sadly, the power you might have had to agree a more advantageous agreement before the marriage and children had evaporated. You might as well see the draft to know what you are facing.

In general, in your position, being married will still have advantages. No tax in any transfers between you, including any inheritance. Good luck.

Tbh I don’t blame men for not marrying and doing this today. Obviously they don’t feel protected by it so instead of blaming them maybe we should ask why and what concessions can be made so both can be satisfied with the marriage contract?

Well he could have done his fair share of child care and housework for a start. Said that he is sited on taking equal responsibility for all that AND the kids.

That’s the problem. Many men simply don’t. They want their partner do most of the housework and child care but also not want to share anything they have. Which is why they are upfront.

I do agree that, women should think carefully before getting in these situations, but the men could always choose not to help make them financially vulnerable.

To be clear I’m not in the uk and wasn’t talking about the recent changes to divorce law there. I meant the idea of fault having no bearing whatsoever in a general sense - it’s pretty scary for a lot of people to enter something like that. Especially if they’re the one who will leave the family home and see the kids less. Actually it’s scary just to think you may see your kids 50% less and they may have a new parent figure who is beyond your control - all against your wishes for them and what you worked for.

In reference to your these comments, financial splits being based on whose fault it is, isn’t helpful for anyone. It drags out the divorce and makes it more painful for everyone. Including the children. All for what? To shame and punish someone. Besides which, most ‘fault’ in a divorce is very difficult to prove.
also confused as to why you referred no fault divorce law, if you didn’t actual mean no fault divorce law.

I do imagine that’s scary. Just as I imagine it’s scary from the woman’s point of view when she has damaged her earning potential with the full support of a man, who then decides to kick her out.

it appears you are suggesting women are made to stay in a marriage they don’t want, if their husbands earn less.

Surely those men made a decision to tie their finances to someone else? just as op decided to take a risk without marriage.

You can’t say ‘op made her own choice, she wasn’t forced’ then ‘oh poor men, choose to get married and then divorce have to split family assets….and they had no choice. Poor victims’

But also, these men wouldn’t see it as losing loads of money or assets. Because if they view it as family money and assets it’s just being split, surely. He would only see it as losing his money, if he viewed it as his money.

it’s extremely rare for the man to be booted out from his home leaving the mother and children living there while the man pays for it. Especially on 70k per year.

"As previous posters have said they don't count for anything in the UK so the joke will be on him."

They are not legally binding, but I don't think it's true that they don't count for anything. They are being taken into consideration more and more as time goes by, it seems.
I'm not sure how valid they are when the couple have already been together for 20 years and have children together because OP would be singing from a place of weakness.

@AhNowTed

Yes she’s relying on his goodwill - but if they were to marry he would be relying on her goodwill. And he obviously feels that way which explains his reluctance to do it - after all if he felt protected by marriage he wouldn’t be doing this.

Why is it wrong that she should rely on his goodwill but it’s so right that his life be reliant on her goodwill?

I don’t think it’s helpful to paint OP as a victim here, when she’s a grown woman who made choices. Bad choices, yes, but choices made nonetheless. Presumably freely.

He’s likely not looking at it in terms of fucking OP over, but in terms of protecting himself. As it’s seen as her enabling his career, in his eyes he’s taken on the role of financial provider so she could stay at home with the children. Of course he’s going to want to protect his pension and the house, those are physical representations of what he’s spent years working hard for. He’s seeing his own sacrifices made, the stresses and time spent to advance his career. Unsurprisingly, he’s not going to want to lose what he’s worked for, especially when there’s the societal trope of ‘when she leaves she’ll take everything’.

Funnily enough people just usually see things through their own perspective.

OP didn’t have to be in this position. She could have insisted upon marriage before children, and walked away if that wasn’t what he was offering. She could have refused to give up work. She could have continued education to put herself in a better position to have her own career and financial security. She didn’t, and unfortunately this is the end result.

How old are the children? I think in the event of a divorce a judge would consider provision of housing for children so you may get access to savings or greater child maintenance from his salary.

I'm so sorry you are in this situation however it really is a wake up to others who might have children without marriage and forsake a career.

I would marry, if you love him as marriage would give other benefits. However seek legal advice as your contribution should also be recognised. He may also not go through with a pre nup - if you agree.

Pre nup is usually to protect assets accrued before relationship.
In your case he is viewing assets accrued whilst together as his, you are viewing as shared.
You need legal advice. Although if you are at stage of legal advice and him denying you’ve contributed has the relationship got a future?
Why are you marrying now?
If you split tomorrow as things stand he pays child maintenance. You probably have no claim on his house (proving beneficial interest is not easy) No claim on his pension. No recognition of your contribution to family life.

Yes she could have done lots of things differently but she's been sold the lie, like millions of women, that marriage is outdated, just a piece of paper or even patriarchal. And she didn't need it. And certainly couldn't insist on it before kids.

This liberal lie has allowed men to reap the benefits of women's reproductive labour, and domestic roles, without any cost.
Men get to have a family, progress their careers, and keep all the assets to themselves.

It's disastrous for women as seen by examples on these boards daily.

Young women need urgent help to see the reality and vulnerability of having children, and burst the nonsense bubble that marriage is outdated at worst or a nice romantic gesture at best.

Do not have children until you are married.
(Unless you are independently wealthy then do what you want)

Can we please start saying this to young women & stop the farce of pretending that scenarios like this are liberated women.

@Dixiechickonhols

"Pre nup is usually to protect assets accrued before relationship.
In your case he is viewing assets accrued whilst together as his"

This is a very good point.

Let’s get this straight, in case of a divorce ideally you want 50/50, all assets including PENSION.
you say he doesn’t want you to access what’s IN the house or savings.
someone here has brain disease.
who does he want this to go to upon death? I’m suspicious at this point he’s got another woman, is planning on divorce and is planning to shaft you.

@fallfallfall

Death and divorce quite different. My DP is named beneficiary on all death service type payouts. If we split I would have that in trust for the DC so they get it directly and so any new partner of DPs doesn’t get it.

@Allthe4s , I’m thinking of in the OP’s situation based on her limited comments. The timing and based on what she has said, something more than a pre nup is off.

I agree the timing sounds dodgy.

What have I just read?

So you worked and supported him through Uni (contributing to his earning potential). You then gave up work / reduced your hours to look after your JOINT children? So he now earns £70k and you earn £12k. But you contribute 50% of costs, so he gets a LOT more 'spending money' / savings than you (and a lovely pension too I assume). But he wants to protect those savings if you divorce?

He is diddling you at every turn.
It's so wrong. Not logical. Not morally right. Shows him to be greedy and selfish.

I'd still marry him, because a UK court would be able to see that his prenuptial is outrageously unfair, and change it in your favour anyway, and he would get vilified for it.
I'm surprised such a financially abusive man is willing to marry at all, he might be calling your bluff by giving such shit terms that he expects you not to agree so no wedding happens. Call his bluff and sign it - I suspect he will come up with another excuse not to marry then.
He's been financially abusive for years by the sounds of it, so if you do get to marry him, stop paying half food and bills because he's been a twat making you do that with such a wage disparity.
Overall though, it's a tough situation, I'm not sure how you have managed to have any respect for him left. Don't think I'd be able to stand the sight of him anymore tbh.

@Opentooffers

Hes not financially abusive - he hasn’t misrepresented anything. He didn’t want to marry and neither has OP. If anything OP is financially abusive to insist upon marriage at this late stage and try to guilt him into it. I’d be concerned if I were him that she’s planning to leave and trying to get as much as she possibly can.