"I don't completely trust you to do the right thing."

And you completely trust your FWH to do that?

What kind of a basis for a marriage is that?

A very practical one, free from the fear of financial ruin at least in the event of another affair.

I am a believer in what Dr Harley says: "marriage isn't supposed to make you happy, its supposed to make you married".

One where there are boundaries and automatic consequences for doing devastating things to the marriage?

I'm not strongly opinionated here. In my rich fantasy world where WW chose the M, it was something I wanted. But I wasn't willing to make it a condition of reconciliation.

Naturally should be two-sided. And IMHO, it shouldn't be all or nothing (too harsh). (Also, there is the case where *both* of you have As.)

Would anybody put custody issues in a post-nup?

And, any agreement has to be POJA'd. Can you imagine POJA a post-nup with a WS?

WG - is there a way I could contact you via e-mail on East Coast to potentially acquire a piece of info in the Baltimore/Annapolis MD area?

Swade88 -

My thread - Plan A and dealing with broken NC.

Yes, I do. Otherwise, what's the point in staying married? I personally could not marry, stay married to, or live with someone that I did not trust.


Really? He says this? I guess I don't understand. Could you please explain what he means by this? Wow.

custody issues in the post nup??? yep, I would...it would save that messy battle. IMO, a repeat adulterer would have no right to be a custodial parent.
I also think that the agreement should be a pretty much all or nothing thing.
I also do not think it should be two sided unless there has been infidelity on both sides. Not because the BS is owed a romp...but because the BS has done nothing to warrant THEIR signature.

Actually.....that statement about marriage was written by Frank Pittman....and I think it's a peach!!

princess meggy.....I think blind trust is naive and as a mother I have a responsibility....not just to myself...but my children. Foggy waywards don't just walk away from their wives, sometimes creating financial ruin, but they sometimes leave their children in poverty too....all for "love".

I trust myself....that's the person I need to trust to have a good relationship. It's foolhardy to give complete trust to anyone else. As long as a prenup or postnup is fair and equitable....I think they can have real value. The other potential they have is to create enough SAFETY for the BS to be able to forgive and recover. Infidelity destroys safety as well as self esteem.

Just something to think about.

oops ! yes it was Frank Pittman. I do believe that though.

harley back this up though.

Marrige doesn't make you happy - depositing in each others love banks makes us happy. Marriage is teh framework within which we do that.

Medc,


Just curious.

How would you handle divorce in the case of non-adultery in this contract? (ie. the WS decides they want out but hasn't misbehaved)

Mys

I think the scope of the post nup should or could be limited to infidelity. It might benefit the couple, since they are already going to the expense of having the post nup drawn up to have the contract specify the non infidelity clauses as well. Those should be negotiated between the parties.

Perhaps the rate of reported infidelities would rise but I'm not convinced there isn't infidelity out there in that part of the world that doesn't get reported.

Let me put it this way:

Most of us know how you feel about the behavior of your son's mother - and you have good reasons. Even with all of that, would you report her knowing that this would be the result? If nothing else, wouldn't you be tempted to remain quiet just for the sake of your son and what might happen to him psychologically if such a sentence would be carried out?

Mys

Most likely I wouldn't report her...but that is me being level headed saying that...I can't say for sure what I would do in the heat of a d-day.
I think the rate would drop dramtically since it wouldn't be my spouse that would concern me... it would be the H of the woman I was screwing around with.
I think there is infidelity over there...unreported...but I would bet my house that it is most likely at very small fraction of the problem here.

MEDC, my argument against it is that there is no mercy for human frailty. I don't think that I'd want to be bound by terms myself that are so severe. Steep financial penalty so there is a 'bite' or consequence to the action. Fine. But are you really okay with impoverishing someone? Where does it stop, adultery as a capital crime?

I believe that under the right (i.e., wrong) circumstances I could cheat. I haven't. I don't plan on it. I protect myself from it. And I hope I never do.

On this, I think it creates a power imbalance in the marriage, that will undermine the relationship. Your WS then doesn't have as much of an expectation of sexual exclusivity from you subsequently in the M.

Just my $0.02

- WG

I thought so, too, but I remember a post by piojitos (who lives in Saudi) that said it was rampant over there. Hard to say.

Back to the original topic:


Did you mean to say shouldn't or couldn't be limited to infidelity? It seems the rest of your post is suggesting outlining other reasons for "fault" (for lack of a better word) that would affect asset distribution.

Once again, I think the complication comes down to enforceability. How are you going to prove what happened. Most of what we use here as "proof" of infidelity probably wouldn't stand up to tests in a legal court. You know?


I agree. I think it would be awfully hard to rebuild a partnership (if that's what the BS is interested in) without equity in the agreement. And, if you're not trying to rebuild a partnership, then maybe the marriage shouldn't survive.


Mys

I don't think that taking away an unfaithful partners ability to walk away with marital assets that are only in peril because of their actions is unfair. I would call it a consequence of the SECOND affair.
Death is a far cry from a financial punishment...
but you asked where do you stop... I actually think a jail sentence of up to one year would be reasonable...forfeiture of parental rights is also on the table as a repeat infidel has clearly shown themselves to be an unfit parent and partner.

The sexual exlusivity of the BS is not in question so therefore not subject to penalty, imo. You say an expectation of sexual exclusivity would be not had by the WS... I say the opposite is true and that is why the protection is needed.
A person is raped... do we punish or limit the victim...NO. We jail the rapist and when they are freed, should they commit the crime again, their punishment would be much more severe. That's the way it should be.

MEDC

No, I meant should or could. I am comforatble with the scope being limited to infidelity... BUT if the couple wishes to protect themselves against expensive (and potential) legal costs down the road, I would be okay with including other issues.

So, what happens if the BS has a revenge affair? We see those on these boards. Re-do the post nup? Or, divorce proceeds as though no affair happened (ie. the normal split/fight).

Someone all ready mentioned the case where both parties are having/have had affairs. It's pretty common.


The rapist and the victim aren't usually trying to figure out a way to live together afterwards, though. And, if the victim rapes the rapist back, then we punish both of them.

Mys

One of the reasons that I do not think a BS should be bound by the terms of the post nup as far as infidelity is that the WS has created a situation in the marriage where the BS may feel compelled to act in a way that they would not have in the past. There have been revenge affairs mentioned here that, while they are NEVER right, are understandable considering the impact an affair has on a person self esteem. I think the BS should do everything in their power to make sure that they protect themselves against this monster...but lets say they had a revenge affair three months after d-day, I think the WS is partially responsible for this result.
Another example... a man molests a child...the father hunts the man down and shoots him. The courts, while holding the father responsible, will take into account the persons state of mind as it relates to the assault on his child. The charges and the sentence would VERY likely both be dramatically reduced as a result of the first crime. So, what he did was terribly wrong...but when taken in context was partially caused by the actions of the molestor(mitigating circumstances).

Just my 2 cents.


mitigating circumstances
n. in criminal law, conditions or happenings which do not excuse or justify criminal conduct, but are considered out of mercy or fairness in deciding the degree of the offense the prosecutor charges or influencing reduction of the penalty upon conviction. Example: a young man shoots his father after years of being beaten, belittled, sworn at and treated without love. "Heat of passion" or "diminished capacity" are forms of such mitigating circumstances
MEDC

I think one question is answered in the above post.

I would say either re do the post nup or yes, proceed as though no infidelity has occured.

And the rapists would not be punished equally due to the mitigating circumstances.

I can see the "justice" in this in a purely objective way. This might be the absolute most FAIR scenario - in a Solomon "split the baby" kind of way.

What I don't see is how it would work to make the marriage any more functional. In fact, it seems more designed to set it up for failure than anything else.

Star suggested the post nup as a way to start rebuilding trust inside the marriage - primarily for the BS. If that trust is built at the expense of the WS (now I have a freebe affair (presumably equal in number to the ones the WS had) to hold over your head for an indeterminate length of time) then why bother with the exercise?

Somewhere along the way, it seem the whole point of the MB system isn't just to stop infidelity. It isn't just to put actions in place to preserve the safety and dignity of the BS. It's to rebuild something that might not ever have been very sustainable into a life long partnership of marriage.

It's not really very fair - but it's probably is worth it.

Mys

We aren't diametrically opposed here. I just don't advocate leaving an unfaithful partner with nothing. I guess the hard part is determing what is "fair", and trying to do this with less anger.

Interesting... The part of me that craves justice likes it... But it doesn't sound marriage-enhancing to me.

Would you suggest this only for repeat cheating or even a first time offense (i.e., imagine a pre-nupt agreement)?

IMNSVHO, this is overboard. Do you *honestly* believe this is in a child's best interest to have no further contact with a repeat cheater. Perhaps even a remorseful, recovered cheater? Curtailment or restriction? Maybe. Termination of rights? I don't think so.

Let me try another tack. How would it be safe for a FWS to be honest about an indiscretion or actual affair if the stakes were this high?

Shirley Glass's writing was helpful to me.

During my courtship with WW, I told her that I didn't think I would be able to forgive infidelity in our M. I came to regret making that remark.

If one can't bear the risk of a possible future affair then maybe the M shouldn't recover.

Gotta go make this day count for something other than MB-posting.

- WG