|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060 |
I, Cymanca, and maybe others here have stated our view that post nup agreements between FBSs and FWSs make a lot of sense.
But we're BSs.
The notion of a post nup would be to create a legally binding agreement that states, in effect, that in the event of future infidelity by either spouse, the betrayed spouse has first right of refusal to all jointly owned assets and primary custody of children if he/she seeks a divorce from the WS.
The details might end up different, but you get the point.
The purpose of such an agreement would be two fold as I see it: provide both a disincentive for future infidelity by either spouse AND in the event it happens anyway, provide some level of civil justice in light of existing "no fault" laws. (I admit, I'm really, really pissed I had to fork over a large % of my retirement funds to a WS who ended up marrying the [censored] who makes over twice my salary.)
Cy has stated and I agree that a truly repentent FWS ought to RUSH to agree to such an agreement.
Your reaction?
Please, let's not get distracted with the legal ins and outs, specific wording, etc. - we'll address that later once we air out the concept.
Thanks, WAT
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977 |
I love the concept.
I would have rushed to sign it (if he'd cared to actually save the marriage after I cheated)...
... and I wish I'd had it when he'd cheated years before... I think that might have sped the healing process for me... considerably. It would have, at least, given me some peace of mind, that's for darned sure!
PS: I don't blame you, WAT, for being a irked (to say the least) that you had/have to pay your ex-wife for choosing her affair over your marriage. Someone very near and dear to my heart was in that same boat with you and has had to do the same thing. It stinks.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,197
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,197 |
As a FWW, I would have gladly signed a post nup agreement clearly spelling out the penalties for future infidelity.
My H and I had a verbal agreement prior to the marriage that "he who walks away, walks away with nothing".
I stood by that agreement when I left (except we did share custody of the kids) and WH has pretty much stuck to it. But since he was the primary breadwinner, that throws a monkey wrench into it.
Me-41 BS (FWS) DH-41 WS (FBS) 2DD's- 10 and 12 Married 15 years Separated for 2 years after my A Reconciled for 1 year before his A D-day for his A 8/23/05 WH moved out 9/16/05 Divorce final 1/23/07 Affair ended or month or so later My Story
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
WAT,
I fear that you have inadvertently misstated my position. The infidelity penalty is for my WS to sign, not me. I would consider it an insult to have to sign a postnuptual agreement given the circumstances of her A. That is one of my boundaries.
My agreement on this matter was clearly delineated by a ceremony 9 years ago where I vowed to love her and I pledged her my fidelity.
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060 |
My apologies, Cy. I did not intend to misrepresent you. If you like, I will edit out your incorrect, implied agreement. But I suggest we leave it as is, clarified by this exchange, and consider it adds to the discussion.
Respectfully, WAT
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
Wat,
No problem at all.Leave everything as is. I am sure my position will provoke some discussion. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 486
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 486 |
If a FWS is truly committed, he/she should have no problem with this. I struggled (and still struggle) with expressing how truly sorry I was/am, and I think signing a legal document like that would have helped me feel like I was taking a real, physical step towards repairing the marriage.
H and I cancelled my email accounts and changed my cell phone number together. Like the NC letter, I think a post nup would be a thoughful, truly repentant gesture made by the FWS.
During my A, I always felt that if I left H, I would not want or take anything. I figured it was my choice to leave, so I would get nothing. A friend of mine's WH, on the other hand, left the M and wanted EVERYTHING. I don't get it.
I'm sorry about your situation, WAT. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> You've helped so many on this board, including me.
All blessings,
KM
Me: FWW (34) H: BS (35) Together 12 years, no children (yet) LTA: 3 years D-Day: Sept. 13, 2005 (I confessed)
So blessed, thankful and happy for my wonderful H...
"God lives in the gathering of saints."
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
Katie,
I applaud you for your stance and for the acceptance that you show for your actions. If every "repentant" spouse behaved the same, a lot more M's would be PERMANENTLY saved.
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060 |
Thanks Cy - yes, your position is worthy of discussion.
I'll start by saying you're right. You shouldn't need to make such a gesture - you already made it. But so did your wife, right? Mine did too. Nonetheless, I was emotionally AND financially raped.
Do you think a FWS - regardless of their level of commitment - might be less inclined to sign such an agreement if the FBS won't?
KM - thanks for your input and I'm glad to have helped. I wish you well.
WAT
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
WAT,
I too am getting raped, but that is of little consequence to me. My WW on the other hand has always been concerned with the accoutrements of financial success.
Do I think that the FWS might be more hesitant to sign? I am sure there are some.
We call them serial adulterers.
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668 |
I would enthusiastically sign a PN Agreement stating that if I engaged in an A again, I would release first refusal rights to jointly property/persons to the BS.
I have a caveat, however. I would not sign an agreement that simply gave the BS absolute power to ruin me. I am not sure if that stance is totally understood, but my point is I agree it is repentant to sign a document that provides protection to the BS. I do not agree to sign a document that makes the BS lord over the WS.
Probably still not explained well. If not, let me know. I am totally willing to hash it out.
overall, I completely agree to the provision of protection to the BS.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060 |
CY - We call them serial adulterers. Good point. Maybe some FWSs will weigh in on this point? Does it matter that the FBS also agree? I stated it as a two way agreement primarily to establish the goose and gander thingy, thinking that shared, equal risk was also a statement by the FBS of sincerity and, frankly, to sweeten the pot for the FWS to enter the agreement. WAT
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977 |
Well, I skew it all because the BS (my then-H when I cheated) had ALREADY CHEATED - SEVERAL TIMES, HIMSELF... which would mean that YES, I would have expected him to sign as well.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668 |
CY - We call them serial adulterers. Good point. ... Is this in reference to what I stated?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
patriot92,
With all due respect, and I truly mean that, when you were the WS, did you not lord it over your BS and also were in the position of absolute power to ruin her life both emotionally and financially?
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,060 |
Pat - Is this in reference to what I stated? Absolutely NOT AT ALL. I hadn't seen your reply when that was posted. And thanks for your input. WAT
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,892 |
New Beginning,
My point would not include you since BOTH spouses are WS. In your situation I would agree with you.
Divorced: "Never shelter anyone from the realities of their decisions": Noodle
You believe easily what you hope for ernestly
Infidelity does not kill marriages, the lying does
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069 |
The first time my husband cheated, he volunteered without any solicitation from me, that: "I will even sign a contract that I'll never cheat on you again, Resilient".
This, of course, was after the affair died its natural death that Harley talks about (approx 13 months from D-day), and my then-husband wanted to reconcile.
At the time, I thought the idea ridiculous. But looking in my rear view mirror now, I think if I would have had him do so perhaps his repeat performance 7 years later might have been less likely. <shrugs>
Jo (a Former BW, never a WS)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 668 |
I think the term lord over, in my case, would be up for debate. However, in a position to financially and emotionally ruin her? Yes, I was. It was simply wrong. In my estimation though, the emotional destruction power was mine directly and the financial destruction power could or could not have been an indirect by-product.
I speak only from how my situation occured. My A, and much of my existance for that matter, thrived on secrecy and self-serving protection, so I find it difficult to say I lorded over her with anything. My A was timidly hidden and I never wanted anyone to know. Lording, it seems to me, would be the kind of thing a WS does as a manipulative overt tactic against the BS. Blatant affairs, attempting to control the BS or the recovery process to the benefit of self during recovery... so on.
I obviously wielded emotional destruction. Financially, there is more to it than to simply say yes or no, is what I suppose I am getting at.
Which brings me to my question from this. If it is something that deems repenting, the absolute power the WS takes, are you saying it is ok given the circumstances to hand this kind of power over to the BS?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,575
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,575 |
just for giggles.....as a bs didnt i have the power on d-day to totally destroy my then wh??? financially i would have cleaned his clock.....work wise if i exposed i would have ruined him socially.....i allready had the power to destroy the ws......didn't I????
what we do in life......echoes in eternity!
|
|
|
0 members (),
623
guests, and
50
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|