Indeed, theres no such thing as an iron clad prenup. And the more one-sided it is, the less likely it will be enforceable.

The "state of marriage" today is very different from how marriages were viewed for thousands of years (a financial union of two families)... 99% of people going into get married in the US today do so for "love", not financial reasons. Now, theres nothing at all wrong with that...Hollywood popularized this movement.

But the problem is that the GOVERNMENT still imposes a set of financial obligations when becoming married, many of which couples are COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF! As far as I know, not one state provides any pamphlet/handbook/etc detailing the financial obligations one assumes when signing up to get married. Where else would you sign/agree to a financial contract without being provided its terms? Would you signup for a credit card that took half your assets if you defaulted/paid late? Well thats essentially how a marriage is treated in the event of "default".

Im not saying that every couple going to get married must pay $25 for a paperback copy of the Family Code and be quizzed/tested on it prior to getting married, But I have a huge problem with the automatic imposition of financial obligations on partues who were partly or completely unaware that doing an act they thought was based on "love" is really a financial contract/obligation they had not considered.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:But the problem is that the GOVERNMENT still imposes a set of financial obligations when becoming married, many of which couples are COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF! As far as I know, not one state provides any pamphlet/handbook/etc detailing the financial obligations one assumes when signing up to get married. Where else would you sign/agree to a financial contract without being provided its terms? Would you signup for a credit card that took half your assets if you defaulted/paid late? Well thats essentially how a marriage is treated in the event of "default".

The credit card analogy also works in other ways when you consider that the laws that applied at the time you were married are subject to change at any time just like the terms of your credit card.

Another thing about child support is that it should be reduced if the ex-wife marries a guy who has money already. The goal should be that the children's needs are taken care of, not that the ex-husband has to keep paying and living in the poorhouse just out of "principle". What's even worse is when the ex-wife decides to quit her job and stay home because she doesn't need to work anymore due to the new rich husband, the ex-husband is forced to pay even more than before.

Anytime the government gets involved in something, it screws up.
Over the years I have lost 3 Tax refunds because of the deadbeat dad laws.
AND THEY WERE NOT MY KIDS. I didn't even know the woman, I had never even been to that part of the country.
But try telling any of that to a judicial desk jockey who automatically assumes you are guilty.
And they make it so expensive to try and fight, that you just give up.
I have never gotten the money back, but I did make sure I never had money coming from the gov again.
I agree with the sentiment on men.
A man now-a-days should have their head examined before they get married, unless you have been dating for 10 years. Then it's somewhat safer.
My family consist of all boys. No girl has ever been born into the family, ever. So we all have a bit of a one sided view.
None of my sons want to get married. They have all the benefits of a marriage like kids and a partner , but without the legal garbage.

vaylon said:Anytime the government gets involved in something, it screws up.
Over the years I have lost 3 Tax refunds because of the deadbeat dad laws.
AND THEY WERE NOT MY KIDS. I didn't even know the woman, I had never even been to that part of the country.
But try telling any of that to a judicial desk jockey who automatically assumes you are guilty.
And they make it so expensive to try and fight, that you just give up.
I have never gotten the money back, but I did make sure I never had money coming from the gov again.
I agree with the sentiment on men.
A man now-a-days should have their head examined before they get married, unless you have been dating for 10 years. Then it's somewhat safer.
My family consist of all boys. No girl has ever been born into the family, ever. So we all have a bit of a one sided view.
None of my sons want to get married. They have all the benefits of a marriage like kids and a partner , but without the legal garbage.

I'm no law expert (but there is a few here that are), but you could of filed a motion to get DNA tests on these children you claim that are not yours. Once the results are in and you are indeed not the father, the gov't can't garnish your tax refund for child support. And in some cases, you can even sue the mothers for fraud if there is proof that they intentionally lied about paternity. But that's kinda cold though...

bravebiffy said:
I'm no law expert (but there is a few here that are), but you could of filed a motion to get DNA tests on these children you claim that are not yours. Once the results are in and you are indeed not the father, the gov't can't garnish your tax refund for child support. And in some cases, you can even sue the mothers for fraud if there is proof that they intentionally lied about paternity. But that's kinda cold though...

My question on this is if the non-father is stuck paying for the DNA test.

kaiotes said:Don't get married and make sure you get a prenup in case you couldn't resist!!wouldnt a condom be better than a prenup if you "couldnt resist"?

I know lots of guys who couldnt resist and ended up with a kid, but no one who culdnt resist and ended up with a wife!

I feel my Prenup is good but have a little back up plan. Whenever we are watching the news and there is some story about a guy killing his wife because she is trying to screw him over, I always start talking about how I can see how that could cause you to snap and then talk about how I was tempted to kill my ex, Helps that she knows I was charged with threating to kill her. Just a good idea to put that thought into the back of their minds

scott1961 said:codename47 said: A mere paternity test is almost assuredly deemed a male responsability
The big problem is a women can put any guys name on the Birth Certificate and then you must prove you're not the fatherI read a story once about this guy who are forced to pay for child support even after the DNA test proved he isn't the father. Talk about a double whammy. Finding out the kid ain't yours + having to pay for him/her till 18.

lostdude said: I read a story once about this guy who are forced to pay for child support even after the DNA test proved he isn't the father. Talk about a double whammy. Finding out the kid ain't yours + having to pay for him/her till 18.
Was the guy married to the mother? Cause that happens a lot