Should William and Catherine have a prenup?

[muriel]

I agree with Jacknch's comments about prenups and marriage. I also think that marriage should be for life, not just for when you feel like it and divorce should be made much harder to get, save in the cases of domestic abuse.

A few thoughts:

1) Practical as they may be, I hate pre-nups

2) Prenups had little standing in UK courts until very recently. They really are not very common here.

3) It would be very difficult to agree a suitable pre-nup in a situation like this, and to take into account a number of different factors: divorce before or after kids / how long after the marriage / access to any children / royal titles / popularity of Catherine as a working member of the royal family.

4) Royal wealth can typically tied up in trusts and other such mechanism (Duchy's etc), and I would be surprised if a major part of William's wealth is held directly in his name.

5) Taking everything into account, I would be very very surprised if they did acutally get a pre-nup.

 

[Mirabel]

I think a pre-nup should be a requirement for every marriage because rarely does anyone think rationally when it comes down to divorce. But I do feel there is a huge difference when a marriage is broken up because one partner cheated on the other. Then the guilty party, male or female, should have to PAY!

I don't know; I remember reading an interview with a famous lawyer once, and he said that every time he's done a pre-nup, it's inevitably followed by a divorce! Bottom line, it reflects a lack of trust. OTOH, Prince Charles didn't have one with Diana, and it cost him $$$$. I heard he was shocked and really had to scramble to come up with enough cash, and was rather bitter about it.

 

[Al_bina]

Given the precedent set by Prince William's parents, it would be safe to assume that royal lawyers would take steps to protect Prince William's interests. Correct me if I am wrong, but Crown Princess Mary of Denmark signed a prenuptial agreement.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I agree with Jacknch's comments about prenups and marriage. I also think that marriage should be for life, not just for when you feel like it and divorce should be made much harder to get, save in the cases of domestic abuse.

I've always thought that a marriage license should cost $10,000 and, if necessary, divorce should be $5.

 

[MRSJ]

A prenuptial agreement doesn't make divorce any harder or easier to get nor undertake, it just protects assests and when hearts are broken even the most rational people can become irrational - if you have large assests to protect IMO they make sense and don't dictate if a divorce will occur or not- things happen, it's best to be prepared.....

I don't think/want to die in early age but I buy life insurance just in case to protect my family/children....same concept in my mind

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I agree, MrsJ. But there is no "romance" attached to life insurance or pre-nups. LOL

 

[Kataryn]

After what Catherine has sacrificed for William in giving up what a bright and charming girl from a wealthy background who successfully worked for an university degree with honours normally takes for granted: a career, working in a foreign country, well, lately even parties and shopping sprees... I think he should sign over a substancial sum to her in case he doesn't make the marriage work! If she married another man from her social circle, she could have a much easier life. But she is willing to shoulder his burdens, those he inherited and for that he should be grateful. Just my opinion, of course.

 

[Al_bina]

Ms. Middleton's sacrifices are far outweighed by perquisites she and her family may have in the future. It would be impossible to determine whether or not Ms. Middleton wanted to climb a career ladder. She is in the same position as any other ordinary woman, who happens to marry into an affluent family and is requested to sign a prenuptial agreement. At the same time, I would like to note that a possibility of a divorce in the Ms.Middleton's case might be viewed as slim because of her future spouse's family position within the society.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

After what Catherine has sacrificed for William in giving up what a bright and charming girl from a wealthy background who successfully worked for an university degree with honours normally takes for granted: a career, working in a foreign country, well, lately even parties and shopping sprees... I think he should sign over a substancial sum to her in case he doesn't make the marriage work! If she married another man from her social circle, she could have a much easier life. But she is willing to shoulder his burdens, those he inherited and for that he should be grateful. Just my opinion, of course.

Kate hasn't "given up" anything. Whether she married him or not was solely up to her. No one put a gun to her head...

If there is a pre-nup, it has surely already been signed and she would have had her own counsel and, possibly, had input into the document's content.

Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, Section 25, governs the court's decision and cannot be avoided. The court cannot ignore the matters in the section or be bound by the terms of a prenuptial agreement. The section imposes on the court the duty to assess: 1) all the circumstances of the case and, among several other factors, 2) the conduct of each of the parties, if that conduct is such that in the opinion of the court it would be inequitable to disregard it. Plainly, a prenuptial contract could be relevant under either or both of these factors. But the fact that prenuptial contracts are not enforceable does not mean that they cannot be relevant and, in some cases, influential or very influential. The tide may well be turning in favour of attaching more weight to them, subject to the crucial assessment in each case of whether: 1) the agreement was procedurally fair when it was made; 2) the agreement was substantively fair when it was made; and, 3) if its terms were enforced, the agreement would now provide fairly for both parties.

In essence, it ain't, under English Matrimonial Law, worth the paper it's written on.

 

[RubyPrincess168]

Definately! You almost have to have one in this day and age, even if there isn't alot of money involved or plans to get divorced. Just as long as it's fair........

 

[Anna Catherine]

I just really don't agree. That's like expecting a divorce. It's makes both parties seem untrustworthy or like they don't trust each other. I don't think that's the point of marriage. It's really a bit selfish in thinking.

 

[Skippy]

I just really don't agree. That's like expecting a divorce. It's makes both parties seem untrustworthy or like they don't trust each other. I don't think that's the point of marriage. It's really a bit selfish in thinking.

I rather say it's more moving along with the times. We live in a day where married couples don't stay together until death do them part or live through domestic abuse "because you promised to stay together".

I do agree that it is unromantic but marriage is not solely romantic - it is also a lot of work. It takes effort on both parts and - imo most important - good communication.
I also think that married couples divorce much too quickly in these days, but the institution of marriage - or at least how it is perceived - is not what it was like 50 years ago.

 

[Little_Rain]

I just really don't agree. That's like expecting a divorce. It's makes both parties seem untrustworthy or like they don't trust each other. I don't think that's the point of marriage. It's really a bit selfish in thinking.

I kind of agree with your Ann. This was discussed on another forum I posted not regards to William and Kate but just marriage in general asking if people would get a prenup. Some said yes mostly to protect their assets that they personnel had before the marriage. Others felt it was a bad omen that it was predicting that they would divorce. Some felt it was reality that most marriages unfortunately do not last in this day in age. It seemed pretty down the line of those who were for prenups and those not for them

As far Kate and William - I think that a personnel decision. If they have one/want one great if not fine.

 

[Fay]

Prenups aren't valid in UK courts, it's an American thing.

 

[Iluvbertie]

They are however considered by the courts in a dispute - if there is one the courts will look at it but they don't have to agree to its terms.

I think a pre-nup is a good idea if it spells out things like custody of kids and settlements so that is arranged in advance before the bitterness and malice sets in that is aimed at destroying the other party - too bad about the kids and their emotional well-being.

 

[lyndaW]

They are however considered by the courts in a dispute - if there is one the courts will look at it but they don't have to agree to its terms.

I think a pre-nup is a good idea if it spells out things like custody of kids and settlements so that is arranged in advance before the bitterness and malice sets in that is aimed at destroying the other party - too bad about the kids and their emotional well-being.

I agree. Have a pre-nup and work hard that you never have to use it, and marriage is hard work

 

[jdcharlie]

They are however considered by the courts in a dispute - if there is one the courts will look at it but they don't have to agree to its terms.

I think a pre-nup is a good idea if it spells out things like custody of kids and settlements so that is arranged in advance before the bitterness and malice sets in that is aimed at destroying the other party - too bad about the kids and their emotional well-being.

The one thing a prenup can't do- at least in the US- is deal with issues relating to children. Their best interests must be decided at the time of the divorce and may forever change depending on the circumstances.

 

[Zonk]

I think prenups are a good idea, and I understand why people think they are unromantic and why are you already thinking about a divorce when you are getting married. As previously mentioned, divorces tend to turn into bitter matches and if you have everythign spelled out in the beginning (except for the kids of course) than hopefully the bitterness will be at a nil.

That being said, I don't think William will do a prenup. If they were to break up, I think that Kate would be well provided for and lets face it...in regards to children....they will (and I hate to use this term) are the proprty (or main concern) of the Crown so that custody will be shared without a doubt.

 

[Prince Harry chris]

I think its a good way for both of them there should be

 

[Prince Harry chris]

i request Prince william to make his marriage life wonderful with catherine so its better he not think of prenup

 

[sesa]

Personally I think that after what happened with his parents and his Uncle, the Firm will insist that he have a prenup. I think it will be part of the whole package of marrying William. I don't think he (they) will really have a choice in the matter. Even with out one, she will be taken care of either way, especially if there are children involved. But I'm sure the firm will feel better if they have it down on paper, so she will know what to expect before, during and after.
But that is just my opinion.

 

[Iluvbertie]

After the War of the Wales, which was designed as much as anything else to ensure that Diana got herself a hugh payout, spelling out what the settlement would be in the case of a divorce and the access rights to the children in general terms (after all the custody of royal children always rest with the monarch in the end anyway - so yes the Queen could have legally taken custody of William and Harry and denied access to either parent if she had so desired) would reduce the chance of another PR disaster in the case of a divorce.

 

[pacomartin]

I think prenups are a good idea, and I understand why people think they are unromantic and why are you already thinking about a divorce when you are getting married. As previously mentioned, divorces tend to turn into bitter matches and if you have everythign spelled out in the beginning (except for the kids of course) than hopefully the bitterness will be at a nil.

That being said, I don't think William will do a prenup. If they were to break up, I think that Kate would be well provided for and lets face it...in regards to children....they will (and I hate to use this term) are the proprty (or main concern) of the Crown so that custody will be shared without a doubt.

Pre-nups are primarily concerned with financial security and the division of assets. Catherine's financial security is not in doubt (even if she has no children).

While the division of the children's time is probably a major problem in many divorces. it is probably a difficult thing to address in a pre-nup. Regardless of what you say in a pre-nup, the reality of children is very difficult to address up front. For instance, if you specify equal visitation time in a pre-nup, and then one parent charges the other one with being abusive, the wording in the pre-nup will carry no weight.

The problems of a royal divorce are more concerned with media airing of fights, behavior and intimate details. Trying to address these things in a legal document prior to marriage would be nearly impossible.

While some may disagree with me, the four royal divorces (Pss Margaret, Prince Charles, Prince Andrew, Pss Anne) were not particularly acrimonious as far as divorces go. No children were ill-treated as both parents seemed very concerned with the well-being of the children. No one was destroyed financially. They were fairly ordinary divorces but magnified because so many details were played out in the public eye.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

Yes they should!
I think it would be silly of them not to have one...especially considering the track record of this royal family.

 

[Grandma828]

We will never know. It will not be made public unless there is a divorce.

 

[cd_1]

^ i agree!

 

[Skippy]

We will never know. It will not be made public unless there is a divorce.

^ i agree!

Indeed we will never know unless *that* happens, but that is not the purpose of this thread. The question is should they have one, not will they have one.

 

[cd_1]

i was posting underneath crown princess 5's comment, and i never realized another one had been submitted in the mean time!

 

[Skippy]

i was posting underneath crown princess 5's comment, and i never realized another one had been submitted in the mean time!

Ah, then I placed your comment in the wrong context.

 

[Island Princess]

Pre-nups are the invention of lawyers to protect the assets of wealthy families. There will never be any question of Catherine being able to strip assets from the BRF in the case of divorce so I don't think there is a need for a pre-nup.

The BRF don't strike me as unfair in terms of the settlements (what we know of them) for the previous divorces, and as someone posted previously the real issue of access and custodial arrangements for the children is impossible to define prior to their existence.

If their relationship does break down then Catherine should just follow Diana's path and hire the best divorce lawyer in Britain.