[astura]

I thought prenups were for couples where one or both parties are bringing assets into the divorce? Like, I'd consider one if I had any real assets or savings beyond my retirement accounts, but at the time I got married I didn't.

[CSMastermind]

Marriage is first and foremost a legal and financial arrangement.

When you get married you have the option of writing the agreement between yourself and your partner (a prenup) or just accepting the one-size-fits-all government boiler plate.

Maybe you think there's nothing special about your situation. Maybe you think the government rules will work fine enough. Wouldn't you at least like someone to review them with both of your first so you know what the contract you're signing says? That still involves getting a prenup.

The prenup process also has a few additional advantages.

First, it forces transparency with finances. A stunning number of couples never fully disclose their financial state to each other. They don't know about that credit card debt their partner is holding or the student loans, or the jewelry they inherited from their grandmother worth $30k or whatever. Having those discussions about money with a neutral third party can actually help your relationship succeed and it provides insurance against not only surprises but also having to have those discussion while your relationship is failing which will be a much more stressful time.

Second, it forces conversations around expectations for the relationship, big life decisions, etc. I know many religions enforce pre-martial consoling that's similar but in today's secular world there's a good chance you might get married without having those discussions or without having a neutral third-party present to oversee the process.

In short, prenups are not about divorce, they're about the terms of the legal agreement you're signing.

[benreesman]

So I’ll annotate your insightful comment.

In many cases and jurisdictions, things like unvested RSUs have never been litigated.

So it’s like, do we want to choose, or roll some dice if it doesn’t go well?

[saiya-jin]

In place I currently live even retirements savings are part of divorce split, and I don't think any prenup can affect that. They basically add them together and split 50:50, which is often more fair to women who skipped years of work and career building and stayed with kids. Earned before/during marriage doesn't matter in this case.

[giantg2]

"which is often more fair to women who skipped years of work and career building and stayed with kids."

Or unfair to those who simply choose not to save (without staying home with kids).

"Earned before/during marriage doesn't matter in this case."

That sounds like a terrible and unfair place. Where is that?

[saiya-jin]

Switzerland, hardly a terrible place, in contrary. And as fair as one can possibly hope on this planet.

Retirement saving is mandatory just like elsewhere in Europe and taken automatically, so you can't avoid that part if you actually work. There is additional voluntary pillar but that's a minor sum compared to mandatory ones.

[giantg2]

In general Switzerland seems like a nice place. I don't really agree that premarital assets should be split in a divorce. That doesn't seem like a fair thing if one party comes into it with significantly more.

[benreesman]

Any contract is useful only so far as one or both parties have the means and inclination to either litigate it or credibly threaten to.

Absent a disparity in the pre-marriage estates, I doubt anyone would have the inclination to push the issue.

[benreesman]

GSElevator is notoriously vulgar and offensive, but if you view it as stand up comedy, it’s (darkly) funny for a reason.

https://mobile.twitter.com/gselevator/status/698952591963598...