Sunday, December 22, 2024
Brock's Only Independent Student Newspaper
One of the only worker-managed newspapers in Canada

The normalisation of prenups is an admission that marriage vows are outdated 

|
|

The normalisation of prenuptial agreements in modern society is smart and responsible, yet a direct contradiction to the very idea of marriage. 

Prenuptial agreements, often referred to as “prenups,” are written contracts signed by both members of a couple before they enter a marriage or civil union. These agreements allow couples to plan the division of their assets, property and right to seek alimony in the case of divorce before they officially become married. They supersede the regular marital laws that divide the total assets of the two parties into as fair a division as possible and which normally come into effect should a non-prenup married couple eventually divorce. 

Signing a prenup before entering a marriage is often a smart decision as it can protect your finances and ensure your future security should the marriage go awry. Having a personal lawyer review the prenup before signing it is also a wise decision, as it ensures that you aren’t signing an agreement that unfairly favours your partner-to-be. 

However, as responsible as prenups are, it’s time we stop pretending that they’re anything but an admission that marital vows don’t mean very much in the modern age. 

It is estimated that around 40 per cent of Canadian marriages end in divorce, which seems quite high given the continued prevalence of traditional views around everlasting love in culture today. This fact is a grave reminder that even couples who are hopelessly in love upon getting married aren’t safe from a potential downfall in the relationship years later. 

As such, even couples who are deeply in love with each other are signing prenups before they tie the knot as a purely economic (and potentially forward-thinking) decision.  

What most people don’t want to talk about, however, is that prenups directly contradict the idea of an everlasting union. 

A phrase commonly used in wedding vows since its coinage in early modern Europe by religious leaders, “‘till death do us part,” is perhaps the best example of how one should ideally approach marriage, even monetarily. The phrase is meant to indicate that death is the sole thing that could separate a couple: a vow that they will stay together until death itself separates them.  

Except, wait — isn’t signing a prenup a legal admission that there are factors other than death that might come between you? Haven’t you already accepted the idea that trouble might arise in the future, and have in fact already planned for the potential divorce that you’ve legally acknowledged is possible? 

The concept of a prenup, therefore, cannot truly co-exist with this popular vow. If the vow were entirely true — that death is the only thing that could possibly separate a couple — then there would be no need to sign a prenup. After all, if it could hypothetically be proven that a couple would never divorce, then signing a prenup would be pointless. 

But by signing the prenup, you’ve accepted the possibility that, no matter how much you might be in love right now, things might fall apart in the future. To subsequently vow that you’ll stay together “‘till death do us part” is then nothing more than a verbal tradition with no actual meaning behind it. 

This isn’t to suggest that couples who sign prenups aren’t actually in love, nor is it claiming that couples who sign prenups are more likely to get divorced in the future. It’s simply calling a prenup what it is: a legal declaration agreed to by both members of the union that factors other than death might eventually come between them. 

Many people naturally take issue with the idea that prenups are unromantic, but in my opinion, there’s nothing less romantic than a prenup. It’s fair to say that sitting down with my future spouse to start planning for the potential plan for a divorce isn’t exactly my idea of a romantic evening. 

But again, that’s not to suggest that there’s anything fundamentally wrong with signing a prenup; it’s just important to be aware of the implication behind what you’re signing. Signing a prenup is certainly a responsible decision, especially for those with considerable assets, so from an economic stance there’s nothing to be ashamed of.  

There are, of course, many valid reasons to seek a divorce. Abuse or adultery within the relationship are on the harsher side of the spectrum, or perhaps you’ve simply fallen out of love as time went on. People change over the course of their lifetimes, and it’s fair to suggest that two young lovers might eventually grow apart as the years or decades pass by. 

So there’s no shame in signing a prenup. Divorce has become so normalised within our culture that it’s often simply practical to ensure your future financial safety before marriage and prepare for whatever is to come. Signing a prenup is wise and shows a practical perspective that love doesn’t always last forever as well as demonstrating a level of self-respect by aiming for lifelong security. 

It just means you might have to think twice before vowing you’ll stay together “‘till death do us part.” 

Of course, this leaves us with the ultimate question as to whether couples should seek a prenup before marriage. Is it better to think practically and seek security through a prenup yet violate the core idea of marriage, or should you attempt to honour the idea of everlasting love yet put yourself at potential financial risk in the future? 

The truth is that this a question without a clear answer. A century ago, this wouldn’t have been a problem when it was an expectation often forced by familial pressures that marriage would last forever, but that also led to a slew of issues in which marriage became inescapable when issues arose.  

The normalization of divorce, then, is a double-edged sword: on one hand, it provides a safety net for those in marriages that have gone awry. On the other hand, it means we must fundamentally question what “marriage” even means in modern society. 

The question of whether to get a prenup is a decision that can only be made by the couple. Together, they will need to decide where their priorities lie, deciding between financial security or a genuine commitment to everlasting love. Again, this isn’t to suggest that couples who seek prenups are somehow destined to divorce; rather, it simply throws into question the part of marriage which is an absolute commitment to staying together no matter what. 

Prenups are not inherently bad, and those who seek them shouldn’t feel shame. It must be recognized, however, that they are essentially a formal declaration that the core idea of everlasting love isn’t something the couple is sure of. 

More by this author

RELATED ARTICLES

Taylor Swift doesn’t owe Toronto anything 

Going home between concerts in Toronto doesn’t make Taylor Swift a bad person.  

Goodbye glasses, hello LASIK MD! 

My experience with LASIK MD corrective eye surgery has truly been eye-opening, and I cannot recommend it enough. 

Why “Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree” shouldn’t have been nominated for Game of the Year 

Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree should not have been nominated for Game of the Year (GotY) at The Game Awards. 

Public displays of affection: keep it to yourself 

When you’re in public with your significant other, please don’t reach a level of intimacy that makes others uncomfortable. 

Something needs to be done about downtown St. Catharines 

St. Catharines is becoming more violent, and the recent downtown shooting proves that something needs to be done about it. 

Let’s leave “Do They Know It’s Christmas?” in 2024 

On the heels of its 40th anniversary, it’s time to ditch “Do They Know It’s Christmas?”  

Coca-Cola’s new A.I. Christmas ad is an attack on artists 

Coca-Cola has found themselves in a controversy over their recently released A.I.-generated Christmas advertisement, and they deserve every bit of backlash they’ve received. 

Should we forgive Marques Brownlee? 

The prominent tech YouTuber Marques Brownlee is in a controversy after it was discovered that he drove much higher than the speed limit in a recent video showing off his Lamborghini. After his long, respectable career as a reputably ethical tech journalist, it’s probably best that we forgive Brownlee — but that doesn’t mean we should forget what he’s done.