Two Day Magazine

That Is The Question

I don’t see a marriage as just an emotional or physical union, but as a financial one as well; most marriages that end are usually over money. Trust is one thing that is completely vital to a healthy relationship, while wearing blinders can be another. Some people think of prenuptial agreements as divorce insurance, while others think that the mere mention of the word “pre-nup” instantly kills a relationship.

A good friend of mine once told me that in a marriage, one partner’s career has to come first. In her marriage, her husband’s does, because he is the bigger earner. It’s an interesting philosophy, and I’ve thought about it for years. I don’t necessarily agree 100%, but I think this approach solves a lot of problems before they even happen. She left a great job and a promising career in order to raise her kids so that her husband could concentrate on his career and climb the corporate ladder worry and stress free. In her case, I don’t see why she’s not entitled to half of his earnings if he would ever decide to leave. On the other hand, if she would ever decide to leave him, it may be a different story. I think that the economic sacrifices made in good faith between partners in the relationship should definitely be considered.

Although I personally feel that prenuptial agreements are generally a good idea, they don’t allow anybody to avoid unpleasant negotiations that are made when a marriage goes sour. Divorces in and of themselves are oftentimes just as emotionally and financially messy without prior agreements.

In the case of certain celebrities (the ones that provide perfect examples on why not to get married), I can’t fathom why a prenuptial agreement isn’t required. If Britney Spears’ mother didn’t force her and Kevin Federline to get a pre-nup, he would have walked away from the marriage with much more than he already did. Sir Paul McCartney chose not to get a pre-nup and his ex walked away with much more than she deserved; and had the audacity to complain that she deserved more.

Why does Guy Ritchie deserve $70 million? They have a huge staff to take care of their children, the housework, and even Madonna’s accent. He was completely free to continue his career, which took a sharp nosedive after that god-awful Swept Away. Despite having been behind two excellent British films, they weren’t enough to revive his career or prop him up enough to get past being referred to as “Mr. Madonna.” The point is, he didn’t make the bulk of that money, so he’s not entitled to it. But, not everyone is a celebrity, and not everyone has a couple spare million at the bank.

Generally when a marriage ends, the idea is that you should support each other’s lives ends as well. You’re divorcing. You’re going separate ways. Starting separate lives. The ones owed the most support are the children, if there are any. The laws seem to finally be catching onto the reality that marriage doesn’t automatically afford you what the other person has.