FSU women and marriage regulations

[Donna_Pedro]

 
I believe I have suggested in my prior posts what a comprehensive prenup would address.  It seems that the two of you are operating under the assumption that a prenup is trickery.  Eliminate that thought and replace it with the concept that a RW could negotiate what she wants for her protection and quality of life including the car she is given to drive, education of her children from a former marriage, etc.  Anything and everything is negotiable.

In order to negotiate what I want, I need to have a very good understanding of my options and this not possible if I have no idea about the style of life, economics and what is customary, reasonable and important in the place where I am  going to live. Now I do have a pretty good understanding of what I would possibly want. 10 years ago? No. For example  - you said "a car a woman is given to drive". Back 10 years ago I would have agreed with you. Now, that I have bought several cars and I know how fast they lose their value - no. Hell, the way I drive? No car is worth anything at all in my book. But back 10 years ago, I would not know about it. 10 years ago I would have based my wants on what was valuable in Russia at that time. Now I can make educated choices based on what I know is valuable in this country. No attorney in the world could educate a woman about all these things in one sitting. (A even less so if this is an attorney who is paid to by someone else.) You need to live here to understand these things. I still don’t know alot of details, but at least I know all the right questions to ask. I know what is customary and reasonable. And this is, mind you, with me speaking rather good English, needing no translation and not being under pressure.

[Donna_Pedro]

It means what it means.
I could pose the same question from the other side.....what is in it for the man?

A man wants to protect his assets. According to most state laws assets acquired before marriage are not taken into consideration in case of divorce, so what a man really wants is to protect potential equity on these assets, gained during marriage. Without a pre-nup there is a big chance that this equity would be divided 50-50. So what a man really really wants is to reduce the amount of pay off. So why would a woman cooperate?
 
Gator, see - 10 years ago I would not know about such thing as "equity on assets" because I grew up in a different set of economic conditions. And I am ready to bet 99% of rw coming to this country dont know about it either. Just an example.

[Donna_Pedro]

 
Pre-nup isn't gender specific, not in this day and age at least. It also isn't constructed for the sole purpose of keeping a woman from having a stake at a man's assets/property he had amass prior to a marriage.

If we are talking about am-aw marriage - no, its not gender specific. AW, who lived all her life here, has relatives and friends to advise her (aside from a lawyer) and english is her native languge, would know what to do not to lose anything signing a pre-nup. RW - is a different story.

[ML]

According to most state laws assets acquired before marriage are not taken into consideration in case of divorce, . . .

Donna, as I wrote earlier, this is simply not true in actual practice, and is strictly up to the whim of the judge.

As I gave in my real life example, the Judge noted the assets acquired before marriage and then gave the wife about 90% of the assets acquired during marriage.  The effect was nearly the same as putting all before marriage acquired and after marriage acquired assets in one pot and dividing 50/50.

[Donna_Pedro]

Donna, as I wrote earlier, this is simply not true in actual practice, and is strictly up to the whim of the judge.

As I gave in my real life example, the Judge noted the assets acquired before marriage and then gave the wife about 90% of the assets acquired during marriage.  The effect was nearly the same as putting all before marriage acquired and after marriage acquired assets in one pot and dividing 50/50.

I can not base an opinion on this matter on one example you provided. Its like if I win $1mil in LasVegas and start advising people to use betting as a primary source of income. Put yourself into these shoes. Say you have never been to China and you are marrying a wealthy chinese woman and her family asks for a pre-nup. Would you agree to sign it if she says she would provide a good (chinese and american) lawyer and a translator? 

[ML]

Yes, Donna, I understand your point.

In my example I was showing that it really doesn't matter what the law is supposed to be, the judge has great discretion and can  even seem to follow the letter of the law while really throwing the intent of the law out the window.

The same applies to pre-nups.  The judge can do whatever he/she chooses regardless of the words and intent of the prenup.

Does this mean that careful planning, thinking, choosing (about who to marry), and documents such as prenups are not worthwhile?  No it does not.

It just means that you should try to change the odds as best you can (for both a successful marriage and a less painful divorce if it comes to that), but in the end . . . it is all a crapshoot, so don't be shocked or naive about the possible outcome.

Yes, try to know who you marry as best possible . . . but don't kid yourself that you actually accomplished this with respect to who they are X years down the road.

[Doll]

In order to negotiate what I want, I need to have a very good understanding of my options and this not possible if I have no idea about the style of life, economics and what is customary, reasonable and important in the place where I am  going to live. Now I do have a pretty good understanding of what I would possibly want. 10 years ago? No. For example  - you said "a car a woman is given to drive". Back 10 years ago I would have agreed with you. Now, that I have bought several cars and I know how fast they lose their value - no. Hell, the way I drive? No car is worth anything at all in my book. But back 10 years ago, I would not know about it. 10 years ago I would have based my wants on what was valuable in Russia at that time. Now I can make educated choices based on what I know is valuable in this country. No attorney in the world could educate a woman about all these things in one sitting. (A even less so if this is an attorney who is paid to by someone else.) You need to live here to understand these things. I still don’t know alot of details, but at least I know all the right questions to ask. I know what is customary and reasonable. And this is, mind you, with me speaking rather good English, needing no translation and not being under pressure.

I am totally with you. Same situation here- I've been here for 10 years and sure know more than I did then.
BTW I was offered the "fair prenup".  I am glad I said no.

[JohnDearGreen]

Sorry for being persistent on this, but is it true that in case of divorce the assets that have been accumulated by every spouse prior to the marriage are also subject to splitting? My take on it is that it only concerns the things that have been acquired during the marriage, but not prior to it.

The last statement is correct (almost) for community property states.   Be aware it also applies to debt as well as assets.  One man with a big spender wife put everything purchased on credit for a year or two before divorce.  She was left with $40,000 debt as her share of the divorce settlement.  The husband can also buy things during the marriage with his previous non-community-property savings and they will be his non-community-property at divorce.

[Gylden]

A man wants to protect his assets. According to most state laws assets acquired before marriage are not taken into consideration in case of divorce, so what a man really wants is to protect potential equity on these assets, gained during marriage. Without a pre-nup there is a big chance that this equity would be divided 50-50. So what a man really really wants is to reduce the amount of pay off. So why would a woman cooperate?
 
Gator, see - 10 years ago I would not know about such thing as "equity on assets" because I grew up in a different set of economic conditions. And I am ready to bet 99% of rw coming to this country dont know about it either. Just an example.

Donna_Pedro
Your posts sound a little "gold diggerish". It sounds like you are more concerned about what one can get rather than protecting oneself.
As Gator has mentioned a prenup has the potential to clarify many things and is meant to be an agreement not necessarily a mandate.
 

[Patagonie]

In order to negotiate what I want, I need to have a very good understanding of my options and this not possible if I have no idea about the style of life, economics and what is customary, reasonable and important in the place where I am  going to live. Now I do have a pretty good understanding of what I would possibly want. 10 years ago? No. For example  - you said "a car a woman is given to drive". Back 10 years ago I would have agreed with you. Now, that I have bought several cars and I know how fast they lose their value - no. Hell, the way I drive? No car is worth anything at all in my book. But back 10 years ago, I would not know about it. 10 years ago I would have based my wants on what was valuable in Russia at that time. Now I can make educated choices based on what I know is valuable in this country. No attorney in the world could educate a woman about all these things in one sitting. (A even less so if this is an attorney who is paid to by someone else.) You need to live here to understand these things. I still don’t know alot of details, but at least I know all the right questions to ask. I know what is customary and reasonable. And this is, mind you, with me speaking rather good English, needing no translation and not being under pressure.

Interesting post. I have been surprised to know in FSU that cars don't lose their value (or really slowly).

[Patagonie]

In order to negotiate what I want, I need to have a very good understanding of my options and this not possible if I have no idea about the style of life, economics and what is customary, reasonable and important in the place where I am  going to live. Now I do have a pretty good understanding of what I would possibly want. 10 years ago? No. For example  - you said "a car a woman is given to drive". Back 10 years ago I would have agreed with you. Now, that I have bought several cars and I know how fast they lose their value - no. Hell, the way I drive? No car is worth anything at all in my book. But back 10 years ago, I would not know about it. 10 years ago I would have based my wants on what was valuable in Russia at that time. Now I can make educated choices based on what I know is valuable in this country. No attorney in the world could educate a woman about all these things in one sitting. (A even less so if this is an attorney who is paid to by someone else.) You need to live here to understand these things. I still don’t know alot of details, but at least I know all the right questions to ask. I know what is customary and reasonable. And this is, mind you, with me speaking rather good English, needing no translation and not being under pressure.

Dear Donna_Pedro, i have simples questions to you . May you tell us what you had had previous your marriage and what you can get, in the case of divorce, now.  Tell us, in $. And (based on the assumption that your husband has no separated assets) tell us how many $ you would get in case of a prenup (separated assets previously gained before his marriage) would have been signed.
We would have more information to understand how your life has improved or not, based on a divorce with or without prenup in your case, in relation to your FSU situation. Doll  may you tell us the same ?


Situation 1 : your assets in FSY and your income.
Situation 2 : your total asset now if your divorce now (if no separated assets)
Situation 3 : what it would be in case of a prenup.

[Doll]

In $? Probably not.
 
Contrasted to "having the prenup", it is much more. This "more" is not earned by my husband solely.

[Patagonie]

Doll hiding is exactly what we cannot do, after the court, in case of divorce there is a total amount on the document and men cannot avoid it. This is the topic : how this amount impacts man's life and woman's life not on a blabla basis but on a real basis. And how it improves oneself and despoiled anyone.
 
 You seem to be in the case that you earn as much as your husband , you had had equal asset as him from the scratch or he was having no asset at all ?
 
 And about your situation in FSU before mariage ?

[Donna_Pedro]

Donna_Pedro
Your posts sound a little "gold diggerish". It sounds like you are more concerned about what one can get rather than protecting oneself.
As Gator has mentioned a prenup has the potential to clarify many things and is meant to be an agreement not necessarily a mandate.

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.

[Donna_Pedro]

 

We would have more information to understand how your life has improved or not, based on a divorce with or without prenup in your case, in relation to your FSU situation.

and why would you need to understand MY situation? But let me assure you, I have been here for 10 years, I am a successfull professional and being paid accordingly and all my business affairs are in perfect order.

[Patagonie]

 
and why would you need to understand MY situation? But let me assure you, I have been here for 10 years, I am a successfull professional and being paid accordingly and all my business affairs are in perfect order. Moreover, I am from Moscow, so do not even try to put me in the the same row with all these village girls you are bringing.

 
You are right the economical situation is really better in Russia, and especially in big cities (Moscow - St Pet), so average waves too. It would be very interesting to know what are the average earning in Russia
 About the village girls you are wrong, any of whom i have knonw come from the countryside, all from biggest cities in Ukraine, and with a first degree in average.

[Patagonie]

For the moment, at least, none women explain us what had been theirs situations previous mariage and what they can get now in case of divorce. They are very silent about these major issues. 

[Donna_Pedro]

For the moment, at least, none women explain us what had been theirs situations previous mariage and what they can get now in case of divorce. They are very silent about these major issues.

 

and nobody would. I have heard its considered a mauvais ton to ask about personal finances in this culture.
 

[Gylden]

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.
 
 

[Doll]

For the moment, at least, none women explain us what had been theirs situations previous mariage and what they can get now in case of divorce. They are very silent about these major issues. 

We don't have to. I don't think these questions are appropriate. We let you know by not answering.

[Doll]

You sound pretty bitter.
 

You're right- the whole prenup between AM and RW is a very bitter thing. You guys can post your endless comments (about love or knowing the person), but what Donna says about the person who is new in the country yet facing the prenup (what did you say- it is about love? ) IS true.

[Patagonie]

We don't have to. I don't think these questions are appropriate. We let you know by not answering.

 Unfortunately they are the core of the topic : before or after the mariage everyone want to improve his life, but in an ideal world this mustn't happen at the expense of neither of them (man and woman).
 On the contrary the attitude of Donna_Pedro lets me guess that we are exactly on the right track.
 
 
 When i want to understand people and a country i try to know how they live, what are the basis of the economical life, you don't know how many people are really dreaming about what is the real world. Know in which court you play in society is important to bring some justice and give you some humility and more respect for others people, and also to avoid to be abused.

[Kuna]

For the moment, at least, none women explain us what had been theirs situations previous mariage and what they can get now in case of divorce. They are very silent about these major issues. 

and nobody would. I have heard its considered a mauvais ton to ask about personal finances in this culture.

The culture in France must be very different if Pat thinks a woman should disclose her personal and private financial affairs on the Internet to satisfy an anonymous "wife-seeker".



It's an infantile argument anyway to equate a woman's losses only in financial terms.  It totally misses the personal and emotional cost to someone leaving everything behind, not only friends and families but her customs everything she knows.  This is the aspect of marriage (I believe) most misunderstood and under-rated, and probably a big contributor to marriages that fail in the first few years.

Pat seems to generously think that a woman should be bought an apartment back in her home country and "exported" there at the end of a marriage - which is a very nice idea except I wonder if he has thought how long it would take her to settle back in (including finding another stable job) on her return.

What about if she has children - is she still exported out of the country???  I bet not with the children!   



I think in reality there are very few men that NEED a pre-nup to protect assets but those that may include those involved in family businesses or those retired with lots of assets but low income.

Pat said earlier that someone on less than $4000 (or $7000) income per month shouldn't pursue marriage with a FSU because they can't afford it. Maybe the cost of a potential property settlement should be equated into his figure so no one on less than a $250,000 annual income should marry a FSUW because they would struggle with the loss of assets after a marriage breakdown.  That might sort out the men from the boys?

[Kuna]

 Unfortunately they are the core of the topic : before or after the mariage everyone want to improve his life, but in an ideal world this mustn't happen at the expense of neither of them (man and woman).
 On the contrary the attitude of Donna_Pedro lets me guess that we are exactly on the right track.
 
 
 When i want to understand people and a country i try to know how they live, what are the basis of the economical life, you don't know how many people are really dreaming about what is the real world. Know in which court you play in society is important to bring some justice and give you some humility and more respect for others people, and also to avoid to be abused.

Pat, 

Here's another thought....

If men benefit from having a RW in their life after marriage and if their progress "in society and financially" faster because they either have their sh!t together, or they are perceived differently than if they would have married another fat lazy westerner, or if she was more educated than him - and therefore played an excellent support-role... then should she get a greater percentage of the post-marriage asset accumulation because she was the major contributor to his increased success?


We have to remember that not all men entering this caper have their sh!t together... Not all men are honourable or reasonable...  Just like some women,  men are in this to exploit their spouse.

[mies]

If a woman must say what's in it for me, then she is not the right one for him and he is not the right one for her.

so it's OK for a man to think this way, and not OK for a woman to do this?