FSU women and marriage regulations

[mies]

-
Which brings us to my second (after a pre-nup) unpopular opinion - a woman MUST have a full access to all family finances - joint access to all accounts, assets etc and share all financial decisions. (And of course woman's assets in Russia, if any, should be disclosed to the husband as well). Decisions on how to spend money should be mutual. So as responsibility. If you feel that your husband's decisions put you at risk (financially), you can always file your taxes separately.  You can see a CPA and an attorney  to explain the situation and teach you how to reduce your risks. But this will be YOUR decisions. YOURs, not someone else's.  If you prefer to pretend not to see, or too lazy to get involved, then you probably deserve the consequences. But I consider it my first responsibility - to share my husbands' financial decisions. If asked for advise, I always say to girls to put their feet down on shared financial decision making BEFORE coming here, because later it might be too late.

Donna, thank you for your reply. I think I need to elaborate where my question comes from. First of all, they have nothing to do with my family situation. I've read some environmental regulations which describe how an individual can get fined for what he does on or with his property/land. The fines can be big. But those aren't financial decisions. Let's say the land was purchased before he got married to his current wife. Then he does some "remodeling", gets fined. How deeply should the wife get into every decisions? Will she be able to sort through multiple regulations in her 1st-2nd-3rd year of marriage? Will she even think that it may be an issue? In Russia the laws are different, her husband tells her that (a) this is his property so by law he can do anything he wants with it and (b) this is his property which was acquired prior to marriage and the wife has nothing to do with it. If the man is so convinced that he is right that he isn't eager to consult with the laws of his country, how eager will he be to consult with his foreign wife?
I am sure there are many situations in which decisions which aren't reckless, and aren't directly related to finances, can lead to fine or debt. Would it not be too much weight on wive's shoulders to keep everything under her control? Especially when a man will most likely be resisting to it?

[mies]

Why? All women in Russia and Ukraine live somewhere, dont they? Unless they are 20yo they probably own properties - houses, apartments. The amounts are different, but still.

very true.

[Ade]

Absolutely true, from the beginning some particular cases are ignoring the average wealthiness in FSU and the average wealthiness of the guys who are capable to support the endeavor to get married with an FSY lady. 

Entirely irrelevant when it comes to the issue of fairness of asking a woman to sign an agreement without the background information to make good, informed choices.

[Donna_Pedro]

How deeply should the wife get into every decisions?

Interesting question. When a woman comes here its HER life now. Everything that goes on in the family (financially or otherwise) has direct impact on her (and - often - her children, which is twice more important). So you tell me how deeply you want to be involved in all decisions.

Will she be able to sort through multiple regulations in her 1st-2nd-3rd year of marriage?

Its not going to be easy. But again, we are talking about YOUR life, not someone else's.

. If the man is so convinced that he is right that he isn't eager to consult with the laws of his country, how eager will he be to consult with his foreign wife?

These are core value differences we are talking about! Things like this should be talked through LONG BEFORE marriage itself is discussed. In my book, family should be based on parity and all decisions, big or small, should be made by BOTH husband and wife. If a man does not share this opinion, he is not my man.

[TheTraveler]

When people talk of relationships using business language, then it's not any kind of loving relationship that fits into my idea of marriage. Sure, I'm sure these people can be happy, perhaps in their experience the relationship is even a good one. That's fine, but I'm giving my opinion of what I consider to be a loving marriage and in my reality, you both give up everything, and you trust 100%. Any less and why bother except to import a hot bod that shares your house that you can divorce when the whim takes you? Something much more easily done it you have an iron-clad pre-nup limiting your losses, right?

Well said, I agree completely.  Thanks.

[TheTraveler]

My impression has always been (and still is) that prenups are for wealthy men (or women): People worth tens or hundreds of $millions...
 
Not for men who are deluding themselves into thinking they are wealthy just because their wife-to-be is from a poorer country and only earns a few hundred dollars a month.

[Gator]

Entirely irrelevant when it comes to the issue of fairness of asking a woman to sign an agreement without the background information to make good, informed choices.

For the 100th time, if the woman was not properly informed, the prenup is worth nothing more than TP (toilet paper). 
 
There is also the issue of a woman signing under duress, and no one has mentioned that. 
 
It seems to me that 90% of the posts in this thread are by people who have no direct experience with American prenups.  The arguments are far more emotional rather than factual, and examples presented are incomplete hearsay.
 
If a man is considering that he may need a prenup, he should seek legal advice and his attorney will explain the process and requirements. 
 
For a man with money, his accountant will probably remind him of the three F's of financial management:  If it  Floats, Flies, or Flucks, rent it!
 
And that was my final word.

[Muzh]

 
And your post, Glyden,  sound plain manipulative. Prenup is about business, not about love. And business is all about profits, or at least its about how not to lose. A prenup has a potential to clarify things indeed, if you are from this culture and understand 100% of what is going on. Agreement, not mandate.. hmmm. OK, as long as you leave a woman the right to refuse this agreement without calling the whole marriage thing off.

You sound pretty bitter.
Let me put it another way, if I was single and met a woman whom I loved and upon discussing marriage she would ask me to sign a prenup. I would not think anything wrong with it. In fact I would expect it. I would think she would be pretty foolish to not bring it up. I myself would bring it up if she didn't, as I would be interested in bringing out into the open any possible concerns over such matters, as to not interfere with the relationship.
Any reasonable person would admit that there is a potential for these issues to be at the least on ones mind.

Gylden, I think you have missed a few factors.


Again you said "Let me put it another way, if I was single and met a woman whom I loved and upon discussing marriage she would ask me to sign a prenup. I would not think anything wrong with it."

However, you forgot to add that you are leaving everything behind, not know the language very well, very poor market qualities, and in case it doesn't work out you will have to go through hell to get back on your feet and your only lifesaver is the divorce laws that exist in her country that will make sure you will NOT end up in the gutter may be exercised because your public defendant was able to do a good job?

Now, would you not think anything of it? The prenup?

[Donna_Pedro]

For the 100th time, if the woman was not properly informed, the prenup is worth nothing more than TP (toilet paper).   

For the 100th time both me and Doll are saying that in our  practical experience a woman can not be properly informed before she even set a foot into this country. 

[Misha]

My impression has always been (and still is) that prenups are for wealthy men (or women): People worth tens or hundreds of $millions...
 
Not for men who are deluding themselves into thinking they are wealthy just because their wife-to-be is from a poorer country and only earns a few hundred dollars a month.

Well said. A man with enough money to warrant one would already have a lawyer and an accountant. He won't need to seek out advice on a forum.

[Gylden]

Muzh,
Absolutely I still wouldn't think anything wrong with it. Would I sign it? Of course, if it seemed reasonable to me.
I absolutely feel that these issues, especially what a poor woman would do if she found herself in a foreign country without local knowledge etc. need to be considered before the marriage occurs.
 
The point I think people miss here is that it is somewhat foolish to think that you could possibly know someone good enough after a few visits in order to be 100% sure that nothing could go wrong with a relationship. Especially when these many of these AM FSUW marriages are second or third marriages (not the best track record IMO).

[Ade]

Well said. A man with enough money to warrant one would already have a lawyer and an accountant. He won't need to seek out advice on a forum.

My opinion is that someone with millions can afford to lose half and not really suffer a substantial drop in lifestyle. A man like this that goes out of his way to "protect" himself from his wife sounds like a cheap man to me.

[Muzh]

Donna, thank you for your reply. I think I need to elaborate where my question comes from. First of all, they have nothing to do with my family situation. I've read some environmental regulations which describe how an individual can get fined for what he does on or with his property/land. The fines can be big. But those aren't financial decisions. Let's say the land was purchased before he got married to his current wife. Then he does some "remodeling", gets fined. How deeply should the wife get into every decisions? Will she be able to sort through multiple regulations in her 1st-2nd-3rd year of marriage? Will she even think that it may be an issue? In Russia the laws are different, her husband tells her that (a) this is his property so by law he can do anything he wants with it and (b) this is his property which was acquired prior to marriage and the wife has nothing to do with it. If the man is so convinced that he is right that he isn't eager to consult with the laws of his country, how eager will he be to consult with his foreign wife?

Mies, mostly everywhere in the US, when you are doing extensive renovations to your house, you have to discuss your building plans with your town board and obtain a permit. The reason for this is to avoid any of the problems you mentioned above. FYI, you can probably do whatever you well please with your property, as long as you let the town know what you are doing. They will let you know IF you would be in violation with any laws that were enacted to protect the value of your property.
 

I am sure there are many situations in which decisions which aren't reckless, and aren't directly related to finances, can lead to fine or debt. Would it not be too much weight on wive's shoulders to keep everything under her control? Especially when a man will most likely be resisting to it?

LOL


I have tried to give my wife absolute control of the finances and no luck; yet. And the reason is exactly related to your first sentence; she thinks she might do something that will result in unnecessary debt.

[Muzh]

My impression has always been (and still is) that prenups are for wealthy men (or women): People worth tens or hundreds of $millions...
 
Not for men who are deluding themselves into thinking they are wealthy just because their wife-to-be is from a poorer country and only earns a few hundred dollars a month.

+10   

[Ade]

For the 100th time, if the woman was not properly informed, the prenup is worth nothing more than TP (toilet paper). 

As has been said, how on earth is she supposed to be properly informed?  By a lawyer no doubt?

So, by that logic, all these men that have never stepped off a plane in the FSU should know all there is about the place just by reading here for a few days?  Yeah, right. They might have a slightly better idea but are they fully informed? Of course not. Now just turn that around and you're expecting a FSUW to make choices that could quite possibly affect her future without even having lived in her soon to be adopted country?

So, going by that, there are few to none FSUW/WM pre-nups that are worth more than toilet paper.

[Ade]

Muzh,
Absolutely I still wouldn't think anything wrong with it. Would I sign it? Of course, if it seemed reasonable to me.
I absolutely feel that these issues, especially what a poor woman would do if she found herself in a foreign country without local knowledge etc. need to be considered before the marriage occurs.
 
The point I think people miss here is that it is somewhat foolish to think that you could possibly know someone good enough after a few visits in order to be 100% sure that nothing could go wrong with a relationship. Especially when these many of these AM FSUW marriages are second or third marriages (not the best track record IMO).

The answer is pretty damn simple; they shouldn't be getting married. 

[Muzh]

Muzh,
Absolutely I still wouldn't think anything wrong with it. Would I sign it? Of course, if it seemed reasonable to me.
I absolutely feel that these issues, especially what a poor woman would do if she found herself in a foreign country without local knowledge etc. need to be considered before the marriage occurs.
 

THAT was the point, how do you know it is reasonable to you?

[Donna_Pedro]

Muzh,
Absolutely I still wouldn't think anything wrong with it. Would I sign it? Of course, if it seemed reasonable to me.
I absolutely feel that these issues, especially what a poor woman would do if she found herself in a foreign country without local knowledge etc. need to be considered before the marriage occurs.

Good word choice - "seemed reasonable" . If a lawyer is worth  at least 10% of the money you paid to him  any document he drafts will "SEEM" reasonable. But I do agree with the second part of your post - these things need to be addressed at the beginning of the relationship. Basically if pre-nup is important for a man, he needs to state it as early in a relationship as possible, so both sides wont waste time. I wouldnt want to spend a year talking to a man only to realize that now I need to start all over again.

[Gylden]

THAT was the point, how do you know it is reasonable to you?

Well Muzh, I guess it's just up to the individuals concerned. What might be reasonable to one might not be to another. There is no right or wrong answer.

[Doll]

For the 100th time, if the woman was not properly informed, the prenup is worth nothing more than TP (toilet paper). 
 
 

You're funny!
Properly informed for the judge is "translated or understood in English and having the attorney"
We are talking about the educated  decision which means knowing all the economic and legal aspects (also all the consequences ).

[mies]

Interesting question. When a woman comes here its HER life now. Everything that goes on in the family (financially or otherwise) has direct impact on her (and - often - her children, which is twice more important). So you tell me how deeply you want to be involved in all decisions.

Its not going to be easy. But again, we are talking about YOUR life, not someone else's.

That's an interesting twist indeed. For my personality type in order to be the most successful i need to focus on some tasks, and "delegate" other tasks to other people. For me the ideal partner is the person who has the same values and whose decisions I can trust, and with whom we are mutually complementary. So back to your question: I do not want to get deeply involved in everything and in all decisions. There are things which I know well and can do well/better than others, and I do them. Often it is better, easier and faster to do them myself, my way rather than explain to other people how to do it, or why it should be done this way. I can learn how to do other things well, but it will take time and effort, and there are people who are good in doing it. I learn about other people strengths, and I believe in their ability and willingness to make good choices and do their best. I try to do my best in whatever I do, and I trust my partner. I do not need nor want to control every step my partner is making. Of course for that I need to know the person well enough. So my strategy is to do the best job in whatever I am doing and what can affect other people, and limit/minimize the potential negative effect others' actions have on me.

I guess you and I have different personalities, and we need to do what works best for each of us.

[Donna_Pedro]

I do not want to get deeply involved in everything and in all decisions. There are things which I know well and can do well/better than others, and I do them.
I guess you and I have different personalities, and we need to do what works best for each of us.

I think we are simply talking about different things. I am technically illiterate in general and when it comes to buying cars I can only say what color I like. My husband is an ultimate technical guru in the family. He negotiates with  car dealers, he takes decisions what to buy and when. I trust him and do not get involved.  But if my husband  starts talking about buying, say,  a new  "Bently" tomorrow,  I would want to ask some questions and get involved into decision-making process and if he buys it without my knowledge or consent, I will make sure this is the last time he did it.  I also dont like to get involved into his investment activities. But if my husband starts talking about taking equity on the house to buy some investment assets - I will ask questions and demand explanations and put "veto" on it if they are not satisfactory. The same goes for me. I can spend money on our household needs and my own too, but if I bring a $10K mink coat home tomorrow.. well..why do I need it living in TX anyway..

[mies]

I think we are simply talking about different things.

oh, ok. then we aren't that different after all and we were talking about same things using different words.   Although I really like to get into technical details, especially into the technical details. 

[jeff9556]

The strange thing about the OP is that pre-nups are virtually unheard of here in Sweden, its a very egalitarian society, a value that is held dear in all aspects of life. Basically pre-nups are not needed - I have never heard of anyone getting one.

The law is like this, more or less:

Alimony - pretty much unheard of. The poorer spouse would have to prove that he/she is basically destitute. A case might be where a husband had prevented his wife from working and she could not find a job in good time after the divorce. The main feature here is that the marriage prevented the spouse from earning a living. Its the "done thing" that partners simply walk away and take care of their own affairs thereafter. When I say the done thing, I mean it, think 99.99% of the time, it would be extremely rare for alimony to be paid under normal circumstances. Think that there are tremendous resources here to help assimilate immigrants - free language classes and many many other things at her disposal to help her get on her feet.

Child Support - enforced and set by the courts or by agreement.

Division of Marital Assets - self explanatory really. The division is most often settled outside the court system. In the rare case it might end up in court its generally a 50/50 split.

There are two types of assets - Marital Assets and Premarital Assets. The latter are off the table, period, there is no middle ground here. She would have no rights to his premarital savings/investments.

The only thing I would say to look out for is if Sweden is forced to capitulate to the EU and introduce Rome III, which will allow a foreign spouse to select their country of origin divorce laws. I am not really up with this so keep an eye on it - last I heard (a few years ago now), is that Sweden has pretty much rejected this and it will likely never come into effect here. Never say never.

[Patagonie]

Why? All women in Russia and Ukraine live somewhere, dont they? Unless they are 20yo they probably own properties - houses, apartments. The amounts are different, but still.

I speak for Ukraine.They probably own nothing in 80%-90% of cases. They had had  been too young or if it happened in this case generally  family has been highly involved (or  some have made or makes good business (rare).
 
 
For those who have tasted the capitalist dream the dream is like a bankrupcy. I mean those who have borrowed from banks.  Loans are based on $. Difference between the end of 2008 and now  +50%.
 Difference of value between 2008 and now for real estate : -40/-50%
 With the crisis the surrounding of Kiev have increased of 1 million of people. A lot of people don't have job or are less paid or they take theirs wages with delay. Fortunately families in Ukraine are strong, people share what they have and cumulates wages for a household.