MelodyLane thank you for reposting what Pepperband said and for your own advice. THIS is what I keep forgetting. The money issue is important given the circumstances that put us where we are now but it is the issue of safety and surety that I am after. The issue of this being about money creeps me out. Thank you.

You are misunderstanding the purpose.

Post-nup is financial risk management in favor of the BS, but it will not guarantee a future faithrul spouse.

It's easier to grieve another possible future betrayal if one is not also living in their car with 3 kids.

I agree.


I don't look at the post-nup as "just compensation". I look at it as a safety net for the BS.


A number of people I know !!!

Yesterday GM went to an attorney who argued with him about a 100% Post nup. I did not know that was what he was asking about but he came home with the offer of whatever it takes for me to live well and keep the farm and house. This morning when he talked to Steve he was encouraged to do the 100%. I am uncomfortable with the entire thing except I see such a huge benefit in terms of safety and surety.

One thing that neither of us is comfortable with is the retroactive part of this. It seems odd to try to guarantee against something that has already happened. I can give him my 100% guarantee that I will not just up and take it the minute it is signed and I feel like my honesty and credibility record with GM is 100%. Still....I could use some help with this. Steve apparently told GM that this was what he should do.

One thing first...I am absolutely certain that no matter what happened GM will come through fairly and make certain I do not lose the farm and I would do the same for him. There is no question about this.

The attorney called this afternoon. She is going to look into this, come up with whatever she can but if she can't do this comfortably she will tell us who will.

Believer,

I have often thought of the instruction of God to Hosea that he should marry an unfaithful person and queried the legality.

Reading again does not hugely improve my understanding.

I focused on the words "buy back" of his adulterous wife. Someone else here has noted months earlier - this is exactly what Christ did to save Christians. Hosea paid for her and told her that she must be intimate with no one else - then he would live with her. (from Hosea 3:1-4)

So, for the Christian husband - no reasonable compensation except loyalty. I assume that her next attempt would be separation.

This is a husband passage. For a woman, still reading...

Believer, I bumped this because there is another side to post-nups that it seems people completely miss.

tst gave me financial security by signing the post-nup, yes. And as a stay-at-home-homeschooling mom for the last 19 years, who had every intention of continuing to homeschool if at all possible even if WS never defogged, THIS was important to me if I were to consider reconciliation.

BUT, that post-nup gave tst something, too. Because of that post-nup, everyday that we are married, he knows it is because I WANT to be here with him, not because I feel financially trapped. I am CHOOSING to stay married to him, even though I could walk out of this marriage with financial security.

I have financial security IF WE DIVORCE, but he has peace about my reasons for staying every single day of recovery.

His signing that post-nup told me where his heart is, my staying in this marriage even with the post-nup, tells him where my heart is.

I took a huge emotional risk choosing recovery. He took a huge financial risk choosing the post-nup. But the post-nup is key in giving us both peace to move forward together. The post-nup actually REMOVED money from the equation.

Everyone wants to make it out to be about money, and it really is not. It's about both of us taking huge risks for the sake of each other. It's about commitment to this marriage and to each other. Why do people put more emphasis on a WS's financial risk than on a BS's emotional one? Why is the money more valuable than the heart? Seems backward to me.

Perfectly stated. Thanks. I have had my own problems with this idea but you, tst and then Steve Harley have convinced me it really is not all about the money. I would be in a terrible mess now that we have built a house on my farm. I would lose it all after all these years building it up all by myself. With the post nup I would be secure and able to stay here therefor it takes my attachment to our home and land and the fear of losing it out of the equation. You said it better than I ever could. We are working on one now and are going to take tst's advice and make the attorney mine instead of GreeMile's. That should help.

{{{{{{{{{sss}}}}}}}

I'm changing my mind. I wasn't thinking about a SAHM or someone who could trust and then lose their farm and animals.

Thanks for the other points of view.

I have always worked outside of the home and have a retirement and my own savings.

And I really hadn't even considered that the WS would know that the BS wasn't just staying for security. That makes sense too.

Thanks, B, for rethinking this.

I don't think a post-nup is appropriate in every situation, but definitely in some...and especially in sss's case. The price of admission back into a BS's life should be very high after a false recovery, multiple affairs, or an LTA. But that's just my opinion.

Why did tst have to sign a post nup? Didn't you BOTH have an A?

Vladie, if you took the time to actually read SMB's entire thread you wouldn't ask such a simpletons question.

I have read it! I used to read it everyday! IMO your A was a totally different kettle of fish! I didn't blame SMB one bit for what she did!

But here on MB an affair is an affair. There are no GOOD affairs!
You both obviously feel as I do - that your A was worse than hers.

So thoughts - do you feel its ok to have an A as a BS?

Grow up Vladie

You still haven't answered the question. But your silence speaks volumes!

Yet you keep throwing it in her face in various threads. :RollieEyes: Why are you so worried about it? If tst was willing to do a post-nup for his wife, that's his choice. Get off it already.

I just don't like double standards. SMB is always quick to play the BS but never the WS

Then your problem isn't with the post-nup yet you keep screaming about it. smb has already said several times that being a SAHM is was a huge factor for her yet you conveniently over look that.

tst and smb, my apologies if I spoke out of turn.

We both signed it, because it was what we felt was best for our marriage. Our MB counselor supported that decision.




Yes.

I don't "play the BS card". I lived the BS hell. And for you to refer to it as playing a card is down right disgusting.

How does one "play the WS card"? Maybe you can enlighten me.

I'm here at this point to help people save their marriages using Dr. H's plans. There are many living the same BS hell I lived, and I will do what I can to help them survive it. When I see a BS setting themselves up for an affair, I share my personal experience with the hope that they will see the dangerous road they are walking. But that situation doesn't happen here often, so no, I don't post about it often.

On Queenie's thread you are supporting her getting involved with OM. Are you going to slam her later if she continues this path and has an affair because she "always plays the BS care but never the WS"? Regardless of what she does at this point, her experience as a BS is invaluable here and she will help many by sharing it. If she has an affair next month, it will not negate what she has to offer as a BS.

BR, no apology needed. I appreciate your comments.