However, four months into the relationship, before much of this had happened, I proposed to her. I was always big on commitments. I felt that if you were dating someone, it was to eventually get married, assuming they were right for you.
I think a pretty good heuristic would be to never marry someone you have known less than a year. The only exceptions are if you’ve been married before or have been dating a rather long time and thus have a clear sense of what you’re looking for. Of course, plenty of people don’t know this.
The only exceptions are if you’ve been married before or have been dating a rather long time and thus have a clear sense of what you’re looking for. Of course, plenty of people don’t know this.
Those aren’t the only exceptions. There is the obvious “They are extremely rich and do either do not want a prenup or offer a desirable prenup package.”. In that case you either get a great marriage in the long term or you get a truckload of money in the somewhat shorter term.
“They are extremely rich and do either do not want a prenup or offer a desirable prenup package.”. In that case you either get a great marriage in the long term or you get a truckload of money in the somewhat shorter term.
This is not actually how it works if you get married without a prenup. You only get income made after the marriage; if they have lots of investments and don’t work, you probably get nothing. If they have a high salary, you may get a lot. If, that is, you’re in a community property state. If you’re not, you may not get a dime.
My phrasing was admittedly imprecise because my interest was “Will we have a stable marriage?” not “Will this marriage materially benefit me?” Obviously, “Someone credibly threatens to murder tens of thousands of people if you do not get married,” might also be a great reason, but I think from the context it’s obvious I wasn’t discounting such creative issues. Still, your “obvious” is, as a legal matter, not correct, and therefore hopefully not obvious.
I think a pretty good heuristic would be to never marry someone you have known less than a year. The only exceptions are if you’ve been married before or have been dating a rather long time and thus have a clear sense of what you’re looking for. Of course, plenty of people don’t know this.
Those aren’t the only exceptions. There is the obvious “They are extremely rich and do either do not want a prenup or offer a desirable prenup package.”. In that case you either get a great marriage in the long term or you get a truckload of money in the somewhat shorter term.
This is not actually how it works if you get married without a prenup. You only get income made after the marriage; if they have lots of investments and don’t work, you probably get nothing. If they have a high salary, you may get a lot. If, that is, you’re in a community property state. If you’re not, you may not get a dime.
My phrasing was admittedly imprecise because my interest was “Will we have a stable marriage?” not “Will this marriage materially benefit me?” Obviously, “Someone credibly threatens to murder tens of thousands of people if you do not get married,” might also be a great reason, but I think from the context it’s obvious I wasn’t discounting such creative issues. Still, your “obvious” is, as a legal matter, not correct, and therefore hopefully not obvious.