Re: She wants me to guarantee her security in the US before she comes...

[calmissile]

Ok, you're out 
Women like Tulip basically tell you (or men)what you (men) want to hear. She probably does believe in it somehow but wait till she faces the reality.
You guys go and read RW forum.

Please be reminded that promoting other forums is against the rules.  Several of us have already been hammared for this is the past.     

[Doll]

Please be reminded that promoting other forums is against the rules.  Several of us have already been hammared for this is the past.     

Oh, please! No threats.  Many members do read it AND refer.
I didn't give any links. Even if I did. This forum was refered to by AM members more than once.
 
 

[Boethius]

Boe, I am not very knowledgeable about this, so could you please comment on the part Cal wrote:

"Futhermore, estate planning for the security of the wife can also be included in a pre-nup."

Isn't this something of value for the woman?

This would depend on the jurisdiction, but presumably, the prenup would spell out what types of assets the spouse is entitled to if they are married at the time of death.  Of course, a Will or spousal trust has to have similar types of provisions, or you are into litigation, with issues of which document prevails, though I'd argue the prenup does, as it is a contractual obligation.  Still, that would depend on the law of the jurisdiction.  Where I live, the courts generally would find that the prenup prevails.


Where I live, prenups do have restrictions, and have less "enforceability" the longer a couple is married.  Matrimonial lawyers here build in "escalation clauses" - you're entitled to X after five years together, Y after 8 years together, etc. 

[Boethius]

I think you missed the point.  A prenup in a California divorce will prevent the husband from claiming premarital assets of the wife regardless of where they are located.

No, I didn't miss the point.  Even without a prenup, a California husband's ability to enforce a matrimonial property order in the FSU is fairly remote.

Your comment about a FSU women would  not marry a AM if she had equal or greater assets is false.  We have members on the forum that have already done so.  In fact, in one case I don't think they even have a prenup.  They may not want to share their financial info with you , but there are cases refuting your comment right on the forum

I did not post they would not marry a Western man.   Read more carefully.  Most such women are not seeking WM.  It is unusual.  There are no cases of FSUW who post on this forum who have more assets than the men they marry.  There are a few who have significant assets by FSU standards, but not anywhere near what her partner has accumulated.  In fact, if I were an FSUW looking for a man, I would not be interested in a 40 something man who had not accumulated assets.  It would indicate to me he is not a responsible individual.

I am not sure I understand your comment about prenups primarily protecting AM.  If fact, for young people with no large assets to protect, a pre-nup is not necessary.   In all of the community property states,  whatever wealth is accumulated during a marriage is split 50/50.  Unless one of the parties wants to waive those rights, there is no reason for a pre-nup.  As others have posted, such a waiver is likely to be overturned anyway.

Were that true, men would not be asking for them.  Prenups generally protect assets acquired before the marriage, and any source of income before the marriage as well, even if that source continues after marriage, with no 50/50 split.    Barry Bonds, for example, was able to protect all of his post matrimonial baseball income because his spouse signed a contract in 1988, when he was earning a little over $100,000 annually. 

Furthermore, unless the law has changed recently; premarital property is still off limits to the opposite spouse unless you have co-mingled the assets.  This is perhaps more important than a prenup for someone with substantial premarital assets.

True in practice in most jurisdictions with communal property, including where I live.  However, the issue becomes, what has been commingled.  Couples generally do not keep records of every dollar they spend.  So, a decade, or even half a decade down the road, she claims she improved his properties by cleaning/painting them, she bought supplies, etc., or she bought all the groceries and gas while he invested in his portfolio, while he claims they split the costs 50/50, and, you are in litigation. 

The impression I get from some of you ladies is that most/many AM are going to throw their wives out into the street and penniless.  I don't buy it!   You can take some isolated cases and try to imply that it is the norm, but I have not seen it.  In fact, my Russian neighbor can tell you all kinds of stories where Russian women have taken advantage of AM.  In one case, a Russian doctor immigrated to the US and her husband put her through several years of medical college and she filed for divorce the day she received her US diplomas.   I don't believe that her behavior is the norm of FSU women any more than I believe the norm of AM is to throw out their wives and leave them penniless.

Legally, an AM has an obligation to support her as her immigration sponsor, does he not?


We know of cases on this very forum where an FSUW was left scrambling, working two jobs to make ends meet.  There are many other examples on the FSUW women forums of women holding down two jobs, usually as a sales clerk, to make it on her own.  That is why I, and the FSUW here, applaud GQBlues.  He ensured that if something happens to him, or in the unlikely event they were to split, she would have the same lifestyle she had when she was with him.

[Boethius]

There are also probate laws yet people like to have wills.

In most jurisdictions, dying intestate is much more of a hassle than dying with a Will.  Furthermore, people often wish their property to go to someone other than the individuals who would inherit under intestacy legislation.


Finally, anyone with significant assets should have a Will because tax can be minimized with good estate planning.  Intestacy legislation doesn't cover tax planning, and it generally can't be done after the fact.

[Boethius]

Tulip gave her perspective as a UW, and that should be respected. 

[jone]

I had this discussion with two different attorneys that work for me.  I don't consider myself any different from any other WM.  But unlike most other WM, I have a business to protect that involves investors and stock.  In a confrontational divorce, it is very possible that I would loose control of my own company. 

The recommendation, should I get married, is that I have an agreement with my wife that allows me to maintain control of the company that I have built, while at the same time rewarding her for her agreement to this.  I won't go into all of the specifics, but there are many times where dotting your i's and crossing your t's ahead of time is important, not only for my continuity, but for the consideration of those other investors who need to know, with confidence, that I will still be at the helm.

I also don't need to divulge trust information, but suffice it to say part of my eventual estate is held in trust for unnamed beneficiaries.  That, too would be excluded from any marriage.

I don't think much about money type issues.  But I have good people that do for me on my behalf.  Much of the discussion that I have heard is from people that have not accumulated assets, and, therefore, cannot picture the way the law disseminates those assets. 

I do agree with Bothius in that dying intestate is a foolish thing.  It is very easy to declare a will, even by using an online application and those who have not done so are playing with fire.

[Boethius]

Much of the discussion that I have heard is from people that have not accumulated assets, and, therefore, cannot picture the way the law disseminates those assets. 

I am fully aware of how the law disseminates assets on marital breakdowns.  That isn't my point.  My point is about trust, and, as I posted, I have never experienced a case where a client with a prenup did not, eventually, divorce. 

As a lawyer, of course I would advise all clients marrying to get prenups, just as I advise them to have shareholder agreements with business partners, partnership agreements, joint venture agreements, etc.  However, that is a separate issue from the "why".  I wouldn't marry someone who I did not trust 100% in all circumstances, good or bad.

[newjason]

This whole thing reeks of evil to the very core.

If modern marriage has been reduced to this petty thought process of " what do I get out of it ? "
and Divorce has the effect of resolving the agreement of " I did not get what I thought I would , or what I wanted "
Then a pre nump is the equal of admitting you don't know the person well enough to become married to them, and more over , you don't trust them with your "stuff", and that "stuff " is more important to protect than anything else.
This whole mindset of the mass acquisition of money or material things is just a face painted another color over greed and envy.
It's just stuff.
It's only money.

Modern Marriages that need these long agreements and disclaimers seem to not be about happiness and love, but about something very far from those ideals.

IMO

[Paulie]

Thank you everyone.  I have my answers.  You have all been great.  I will be back here in a few days to describe how I arrived at my resolution.  All the best.

[Fashionista]

Seriously, normal healthy relationships aren't that complicated. They don't require opinions of the crowd either. If you need advice, you don't go to people you don't know, you ask the person you are in a relationship with.

[TheTraveler]

Seriously, normal healthy relationships aren't that complicated. They don't require opinions of the crowd either. If you need advice, you don't go to people you don't know, you ask the person you are in a relationship with.

so true.

well put, fashionista!

[TheTraveler]

...You have a good head on your shoulders...

seriously?

...or is this like little league soccer (everyone gets a trophy!!)?

[ML]

Seriously, normal healthy relationships aren't that complicated. They don't require opinions of the crowd either. If you need advice, you don't go to people you don't know, you ask the person you are in a relationship with.

I disagree with parts of this.

Some of best advice comes from independent third parties who have no emotional stake in the situation.

This is why specialists in relationship counseling exist.

Even untrained persons, such as we here, can give insights that might not have been thought of by the two parties.

[TheTraveler]

We know of cases on this very forum where an FSUW was left scrambling, working two jobs to make ends meet.  There are many other examples on the FSUW women forums of women holding down two jobs, usually as a sales clerk, to make it on her own.  That is why I, and the FSUW here, applaud GQBlues.  He ensured that if something happens to him, or in the unlikely event they were to split, she would have the same lifestyle she had when she was with him.

whenever a husband/wife don't have kids, the doomsday scenarios are always a lot less painful and complicated.

or is that also part of your point?

[Tulip]

I am not surpised AM (and Ed) applaud you because this is  exactly what they want- cheap or free wife.

Cheep and free wife? No foreign wife is cheap and free. I just believe that every man ( male ) wants to be beloved how he is and what person he is, not depending on his wallet's size.

[TheTraveler]

i'll let her speak for herself, but my take on fashionista's thought was that if a guy has to ask if she's the girlfriend... or just the girlfriend experience, then the guy deep down probably already knows the answer.

[Tulip]

Tulip, of course the AM members loved what you wrote. Love, pure love, purified love and nothing else.
It works in 1% of A-R marriages when people go for the second or third marriage with kids from their previous relationship.
There is NO way a woman in her 40's drops everything, goes to the US to marry a guy with a prenup and she will want nothing.
 I am not surpised AM (and Ed) applaud you because this is  exactly what they want- cheap or free wife.
 AM protect themselves and their kids with prenups and a RW only can "love" and be thankful (for whatever you want to be thankful))).
 Флаг тебе в руки и барабан на шею

I can't understand why there is so much poison and spite in your words. The only one reason, I believe, is that you are not happy. Your lot ( destiny ) - to be dumb ( wordless ) in your family as you seem to be "nothing" there, like "zero" for your husband and you are off your husband's mind and his attention. You seem not to have got what had been expected by you. And you have neither love from your "best-half", nor even simple things, I believe. The only thing you can be pleased with and can allow yourself is to spread all your poison and negative emotions on other persons here, believing that no feelings exist and there is only a will of benefits. I am sure if some day your husband loses his money ( his job etc ) you will disappear out of his life and go for looking for "someone next", who is able to give you more. I have never been saying what others want to hear. I got used to saying what I think about. As for a drum and a flag.. I could advise you to put it into a place, that had been advised by Melanie Griffith in "Working Girl" but I won't do it. Just take that flag and that drum and lead the column of such unhappy and willing-a-lot-but-getting-nothing persons like you 

[Tulip]

Doll, count me out.

I don't love reading fairy tales written by someone with the mind of a  teenage princess wannabe.

In your opinion to be able to love and to place love before other material things means to be someone with the mind of a  teenage princess. Maybe you simply need no love. As for fairy-tales, I could also tell another one. It is about some King, who believed him to be very smart and perfect, and his too young wife. At the end of that fairy-tale the king is spending all his time being left ( thrown ) alone and thinking what a donkey he had been. This tale may even be named "The Donkey King". I have to think about offering this scenario to Walt Disney. And when it is filmed, the sign "It is based on true story" may be placed there )

[Tulip]

...You guys go and read RW forum...

As for Russian women's forums, I have read a lot of topics there, on all kinds of forums. Yes, there is many interesting and useful topics, but the main idea of lots of those topics is how to get more money from their foreign fiances.

[Boethius]

Still believing in that "pleasant personality" fantasy, calmissile? 

[Tulip]

Tulip, welcome to the forum.  You are refreshing voice here.  If you have not already done so, you might want to go to the Get Acquaianted thread and tell us a little about yourself.  If you are single, I am sure you will have many suitors from here.     


The wisdom in  your posts and your pleasant personality are very welcome.

Calmissile, thank you for welcoming me here and your good words No, I am not single. I have a beloved man and he is the best one for me

[TheTraveler]

Cheep and free wife? No foreign wife is cheap and free. I just believe that every man ( male ) wants to be beloved how he is and what person he is, not depending on his wallet's size.

i agree 100%.  keep 'em coming, syestra!

but unfortunately there are some (foolish) men who don't realize that a marriage with a rw will generally incur a lot more expenses than marriage to an aw.

[Boethius]

This whole thing reeks of evil to the very core.

If modern marriage has been reduced to this petty thought process of " what do I get out of it ? "
and Divorce has the effect of resolving the agreement of " I did not get what I thought I would , or what I wanted "
Then a pre nump is the equal of admitting you don't know the person well enough to become married to them, and more over , you don't trust them with your "stuff", and that "stuff " is more important to protect than anything else.
This whole mindset of the mass acquisition of money or material things is just a face painted another color over greed and envy.
It's just stuff.
It's only money.

Modern Marriages that need these long agreements and disclaimers seem to not be about happiness and love, but about something very far from those ideals.

IMO

Best post on the subject, IMHO.




Traveler, no, that was not part of my point.  My point was about protecting "what's mine". 

[Paulie]

I disagree with parts of this.

Some of best advice comes from independent third parties who have no emotional stake in the situation.

This is why specialists in relationship counseling exist.

Even untrained persons, such as we here, can give insights that might not have been thought of by the two parties.

Thank you ML for your thoughts.  I needed a "reality check."  I can't talk with friends and family because their opinion is biased.  So, I found it here. 

I am not saying I found my entire solution here, but everyone's thoughts and comments have played a role in my getting a better understanding.