Posted on 02/15/2006 5:51:53 PM PST by qam1
By the time Donna Peterson's three children are grown, her estate will be worth $5 million.
The kids -- now 5, 8 and 16 -- can cash in on the family assets when they turn 30. But there is a catch -- each must sign a prenuptial agreement before saying "I do."
No prenup means no money until their 55th birthdays, says the Chelmsford resident.
"I'm not saying they're going to make a bad choice, but it happens," explains the 45-year-old, who has been happily married for 17 years without a prenup. "At 21, with puppy love, who knows how you're going to feel about the person 10 years down the road? We have to protect what we've earned."
Demands like Peterson's are climbing in the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, where Middlesex County Register John Buonomo estimates 5 percent of all newlyweds in the Bay State are signing prenups before exchanging vows.
Figures from the register's office show the number of divorces declining by more than 2,600 since 2001, and prenuptial agreements steadily increasing by nearly 13 percent.
Reasons for prenups vary, but Buonomo believes two trends are driving the demand: age and women's professions.
"In the five years I've been register, I've noticed a considerable increase in prenuptial agreements," Buonomo says. "People are living longer, and they want to protect their assets. And more women are bringing up the discussion.
"Women have moved up the socio-economic ladder. They're partners in law firms, doctors and professors, and they want to secure their investments."
Boston lawyer Marty Kane, who represents residents in Greater Lowell, says 25 percent of all his clients' prenups stem from Generation X -- those ages 30 to 40 -- compared to less than 5 percent for older generations.
Generation X, adds Kane, is a guiding force in the rising tide of financial pacts.
"There are a lot of people in this age group that made a ton of money during the peak of the dot-com era," Kane says. "It's this generation that's putting prenups together."
Another push is coming from Generation Xers' baby-boomer parents.
"There's more acceptance of prenups today in general," Kane says. "Parents work very hard to leave a cushion for kids to fall back on. Sometimes you find the push for the prenup isn't necessarily the party getting married, but from the parents who forked over the dough."
That's where the Donna Peterson comes in.
Her oldest son, who is 16, is destined to become the first beneficiary of the family fortune.
There is a Catch-22. Peterson's son has no idea that a prenuptial agreement is in his future if he wants to collect his inheritance.
"He can use his parents as a scapegoat if he has to," says Peterson. "If he's really in love, it shouldn't matter. If it sours the relationship, he can move onward and upward."
Kane says mentioning the word prenup can lead to "one of the most difficult conversations two people can have."
He recalled a personal friend who waited to "drop the bomb" the day before his wedding.
"He was nervous, thinking his bride-to-be might call the wedding off," Kane says. "I wouldn't recommend leaving the discussion for the last minute like he did. But she still agreed to marry him."
Buonomo suspects prenups are increasing because younger people marrying are staying together for shorter periods of time. If a person has valuable assets going into a marriage -- a house, a car, jewelry or cash savings -- he wants to be sure to keep them in case married life is no longer blissful.
"Last week, I saw a woman in her late 30s who was going through her third divorce," says Buonomo. "People fall in love, love is bliss, then all of a sudden, it's not working out, and it's let's get out fast."
His theory?
"Short engagements lead to short marriages," Buonomo says. "There is an important part of marriage and it's called engagement. If people put more time into that, we'd see less divorces, and maybe less prenups."
Considering this is the Age of Oprah and Dr. Phil, yes I do.
Those same kids are the ones who are tempted to "pull the feeding tubes" and over medicate dear old mommy and daddy. My aunt cites an instance where that happened. She was the floor nurse, and when she wouldn't up mother's morphine, the greedy bitch of a daughter reported my aunt to the doctor.
Nothing happened to my aunt, discipline wise, but she did walk in to the room to hear some ugly talk from the daughter directed at her mother. Mother declined rapidly, and was dead within the week. That was a very long time ago, and my aunt will never forget.
My mother passed away in September 2003. I got a real good look at a couple of my children. My mom and aunt wanted to protect me from my then husband, so I did not inherit according to mom's will. I had to lay down after the funeral, and my oldest was hitting up my aunt for "her share" of the estate.
There is more, but that's all I'm going to say on that topic.
If you have decent relatives, why not provide for them if possible? What are you going to do with family heirlooms, if not pass them down to children and grandchildren?
The kids can always make their own money, if they don't like the terms under which they'd get their hands on hers. :)
having drafted a few of these little wonders, it is very interesting to observe the difference between the men and women.
Women have prenups for different reasons than men. Generally, if it is a "professional" woman the prenup is a indication that the woman is a feminist and has no intention of being a wife. She just wants to be married for some unknown reason. Women are looking for an escape route.
Men are strictly asset protection. Men are looking to preserve themselves.
In either case, if not drafted correctly and REASONABLY they can be challenged successfully.
so by the MSM opinion:
When a professional man wants a prenup he is being a selfish pig who is cheating the woman by getting ready for divorce. How dare he weasel out of paying support to the woman.
When a professional womyn wans a prenup she is being a liberated independed woman who is protecting the fruits of her labors from a money grubbing man. (heaven forbid SHE have to pay support...)
Actually in all seriousness, prenups can be very valuable to help OLDER people who have adult children and assets they want to go to their children.
When people are concerned with a decimal place on some egg-heads spread sheet more than the important issues in life they've already lost the battle and should be "cashing in their chip" so to speak.....
That's how the "Life Extension Industry" intends it to be. They'll keep your sorry a$$ on this mortal coil until the cash runs out or your entire family is in debt up to their ears....
a very sad state of affairs (i.m.h.o.)
This would make a heck of a movie of the week. Son meets girl. Falls in love. Hard. Wants to get married. Mother demands a prenup, or he loses out on millions. Girl won't do it. Son has to choose.
Hey, wasn't this an episode of "The Love Boat"?
Does anyone else see something wrong here?
He doesn't lose out, if you read the article - he just has to wait a lot longer for the money. If he thinks love comes first, he won't mind the wait. Right?
Whenever these man/woman, divorce, or pre-nup threads come up, there is so much bitterness thrown around I think I'm on DU. Am I the only person on FR that's happily (and FULLY) married, and has been for MANY years (19) ?
Seems like it sometimes.
Yeah, but in MY movie-of-the-week, the mother would be an old shrew (think Hillary) who demanded the pre-nup, or NO money.
And of course, the boy would choose the girl and accidentally discover the "next big thing" and become richer than the mother ever dreamed.
Dramatic license, y'know ?
I guess I don't see why pre-nups are seen as the evil counterfoil to True Love. If there are large family assets to be protected, they can be a smart move. My husband and I have always had very even assets, so we did not see the need. I am my parents' sole heir and executor, but they did not see the need to regulate the inheritance (I'm 50 and still waiting!). They liked my husband and I was 31 when I married, so this was not a sudden, youthful decision that they felt they had to shelter me, and my potential assets, from.
I think there was a movie of the week that was close to that. "The Two Mrs. Grenvilles" comes to mind. I may be wrong.
I am all for it!
I'd be satisfied with one fewer John Kerry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.