Is it unfair of me to ask my gf for a prenup in this case?

Post Reply New Topic

Okay well I will tell her I think that before we are to get married, I would like to go to pre-marital counseling based on new events as to how she has been acting lately. She will be crushed as we were planning on getting married in August, but I feel I need more time or at least tell her how I feel about it.

I have cooled down since, and have thought much more positively about us, but I feel there needs to be something to establish about the situation before getting married, if that's fair.

As I have mentioned in another thread, getting the approval to get married in her (Catholic) church required going to a weekend retreat and meeting with the Priest or Deacon on a number of occasions. There's little religious about this: it is ultimately a reality check for a number of the younger couples of what marriage ACTUALLY means, not what Disney movies say it is. Things like children, family obligations, conflict resolution and of course money.

I went to counselling with my ex-GF before I considered engagement. In some ways it was a waste of money but it another way it was worth its weight in gold because I saw beneath it all she was a child who was incapable of being a marriage partner. Once the counsellor starting zooming in on her she made excuses (cancelled three times in a row due to 'snowstorms') and kept stonewalling until I broke it off. She then send a email to the counsellor about how *I* broke it off and was refusing to go. So glad I got away from that one!

I get it. I've been there. Ex did have a few good qualities (good cook, loved sports, didn't drink much) but that's a moot point when you have to walk around landmines. This relationship sounds like it's full of landmines and marriage will only make them MUCH worse. I'm not trying to tell you what you are feeling but I can say in my case, I greatly confused sympathy and infatuation with love. I get it: you can't just walk away from a relationship like this. All I am saying is pay attention to how counselling goes and if she can take the heat. If she refuses to go, sad to say you have your answer on what to do next.

Pope John Paul II, if I'm not mistaken, used to preside at these sorts of retreats you mentioned.

He was a real "priest" in the pastoral sense before he was Pope.

He was also had a doctorate and was a professor at a secular university in Poland.

Okay thanks. Well we both saw a counselor for one session and the counselor said I was being selfish in the sense that I used the word "I", when describing my assets in the prenup, when I should have used the word "our", when discussing the prenup, and our relationship assets.

Is that true though? I didn't mean to be selfish, I just used the word I, since I thought they were my assets, but are they ours and I was being selfish, without realizing it?

Well, it's not about what we think now, but if the counsellor didn't ask you why you said 'I' before making assumptions, you really need to look for someone else.

That is weird, but we might be missing some context. Was the counselor just noticing that you use "I" a lot, and never used "Our"? Either way, having parts of your life that are distinct from your partner is perfectly healthy -- it's all a matter of degree.

For me 'I' used a lot in couple therapy would just mean the person saying that is hoping to finally be heard and understood.

Do you feel as tho they are your assets alone, because you're the one that banked it and earned it? Probably, yes, you do... Because you did!
However, I can see where the word "selfish" came in...

To me personally, your case is an interesting one. I'm still mulling over whether it raises NT v ASD thought processes, upbringing (including cultural), or both.
Let me give you an example...

My father was the successful career person, and my mother stay at home. He made the money. That was his only job. She took care of the rest. The home. The kids. The finances. And so on... What it meant for my dad is essentially this...

From the moment he woke to go to work, his freshly laundered clothes would be laid out ready for him after his morning shower. His breakfast would be ready. His lunch would be packed. There would even be change put into his pockets for parking.
When he came home his dinner would be waiting. He would have his feet washed by her (and me, as I got older) so that he could relax after a stressful day. If he was working shifts/late (he was a surgeon)... She would stay up.

Basically, she woke before him, and slept after him. Every single day of their married life, till her recent death.
He didn't have to think of anything. She did his thinking, and anticipated his needs for him.
From the moment he woke, till the moment he slept. She was there behind the scenes. Making his life comfortable and stress free. On the occasions she went to visit family abroad, the freezer would be packed with food for him to heat n eat.
Yet she made no money of her own.

So, was her contribution valueless? During their marriage he used to make the occasional joke at her expense regards her not working. In the main tho, and to his credit, he valued her highly. She was a superlative cook, help mate and home maker. He didn't actually realise just how much she did, till after her illness and death.
Yet she made no money of her own.

Despite not making any money of her own, she treated his money as hers. And he let her. Indeed, it was a point of pride for him. Why, you ask?
Because they shared everything. Because her job was 24/7, unrecognised and unpaid, whilst his was respected. Her role was silent. His wasn't. Because they loved each other greatly and each had respect for what the other brought to the partnership. Because they recognised their partnership.

This type of conjoining is unusual, I'll accept, and possibly something unique to certain cultures only (my parents are from india) but they set an example that proves what sharing can achieve. There was no "i" for them... It was "we". It didn't come overnight but, they were generous with each other.

This leads me onto me. I'm NT, my other half has AS. I only have my own parents as a template to work from, for good or ill. He thinks similarly to you.
I stand to inherit a reasonable sized asset. To me it's "ours" to him, it's "mine".
But right now, until I graduate, I'm a liability and he pays for everything. Will I always be a pauper? No, I won't. But for us, money is sometimes an issue. Yet like my mother before me, I've tried to make his life as comfortable as possible even tho I'm asset-less just now. We carry on tho, because we work together, love each other, and I can understand why he sometimes feels as he does. In the main, he values me. He knows when I'm not there. I do my best to look after him.

I don't know what will happen going forward but I'm leaning towards thinking some of his thought processes are culturally based (he's Caucasian and I'm indian) whilst the rest is AS.
Regardless tho, we've talked it out. And because we value each other, we will probably be ok.

This leads me to my question for you. Do you value her? Just as she is? Warts n all? The way she appears to value you, your warts n all?
Once you establish that answer, your innumerable questions to strangers who don't know you or her and can't really advise with any authority, will cease.

Make a decision. You appear to struggle in this area, so work on that, and work on asking yourself whether you value her just as she is, or not.

Hope that helped.

I would use the word I/my to describe all assets acquired prior to the beginning of a serious relationship (ie a milestone like living together) and then the word our/ours to describe assets jointly acquired once you two became "you two." That's how I'd explain it to the counsellor, as well. If they can't see the logic in that then they may have some sort of prejudiced bias towards people splitting non-jointly obtained assets. IMO

I tend to mix-up I and we frequently, so I don't think a counselor would be able to make any reasonable conclusion about that.

I don't get this so when you get married everything you own and made before now is automatically hers? But her stuff isn't yours. Seems unfair. Why doesn't she have money ?

She lost a lot of money to her ex before me a few years ago, when she left him, moved out and left his business which she was a part of.

I discussed the issue also with a close female friend of mine, cause I felt like getting a woman's perspective from a woman I know. When my gf found out, she got really mad about me discussing with her, and said that it's completely inappropriate to discuss these matters with a woman friend, and that I should have went to a guy friend to talk about it instead. She said it's inappropriate cause my female friend has feelings for me. I never thought she did at all, but okay...

My gf then went and told a guy friend of mine about what happened. Later that guy friend met me to hang out, but gave me a lecture about how I my gf has been telling her that I am not being providing and supporting enough to her, and how it's a d$%k move tell a female friend about it, who I apparently didn't know may have feelings for me, compared to telling a guy friend. He said it with a tough love attitude, and it felt like a weird intervention coming from him.

Is he right though, and my gf's points she made to him are valid?

That girl you told shouldn't have told your girlfriend that you discussed the issue with her. That was a "dick" move.

I still don't believe in prenups....but it's your choice.

Your girlfriend seems somewhat materialistic to me, and somewhat bitter that she lost all that money in her previous marriage.

The girl I told did not tell my gf. I told my gf that I did cause I was upset and wanted a friend to talk to about it.

I only used I once, cause right after I responded with I to the one question, the counselor then brought up how I should have said we. He brought it up immediately after I only said it once.

Well she is open to doing counseling now and wants to go more.

As for telling my friend about the problem, I guess it was a dick move on my part and I was just upset and wanted someone to talk to about it.

Now my gf wants me to tell my friend the truth about how I went to see the lawyer behind her back, and it's my fault that it caused a lot of issues to come out of it. But my friends told me that I should have told her I was going to see one and that was bad of me.

Do you think it was bad of me to go behind her back on that, and that I should tell my friend that it was my fault cause I was dishonest?

Some people have romanticized views of marriage, where they envision that the other person is their eternal soul mate and divorce does not, and will never exist between them. These people tend to be very offended by prenups because they imply lack of trust and suggest the possibility of divorce.

HOWEVER these people also don't understand that in most cultures throughout history, marriage has always involved a contract which stipulated what each party receives in a divorce, and it used to be that the signing of the contract was what officiated the marriage. In the United States (and maybe in Canada also?), states have enacted default prenuptial agreements that are built into the marriage. In the state of California, for example, a spouse gets 50% of what was brought into the marriage, and possibly alimony, depending. Because this is a built in contract, and it only comes into play at the filing of a divorce, the couples only sign a marriage certificate. Some people, however, wish to expand upon the terms of the marriage, or negate some default terms when afforded by law, with a prenup.

Personally, I like the idea of a prenup because I like legal agreements understood by both parties all the way through, and I think it's important for couples to discuss beforehand what they think is fair in the event of a divorce. It's hope for the best, plan for the worst type thing. Generally though, I do agree with the California default that each party gets 50% of what was brought into the marriage. However a prenup might be used to determine who get what in their 50%. For example instead of both getting half of everything, maybe one person gets the house that was bought during the marriage, and the other person gets the business that was started during the marriage, and those things comprise the respective individuals' 50%.

Maybe approach this from a different angle and put the prenup aside and get some premarital counseling, and then discuss the prenup with the counselor present at some point. She might be more receptive to the logic of it if explained by an impartial party.

While it would've been good for you to have informed your girlfriend that you were going to see a lawyer about a prenup before having done so... it's water under the bridge. That ship has sailed.

This whole debacle suggests that you and your girl have communications issues that really need to be worked out before you get married.