20 of 58

No

Write now Article Tools

A prenuptial agreement can only serve to undermine a marriage. Such an agreement amounts to a concrete and legal acknowledgment that neither party is fully committed to the relationship - ensuring a fallback position. It can therefore only be seen as a sign of mistrust.

With such mistrust, or even the acknowledgment that a marriage might not be forever, couples should be asking whether or not they should be getting married in the first place. Would co-habitation not be more suitable or appropriate? Many disagree with co-habitation but think of this: surely it is better to be honest about a relationship and its potential longevity, than to merely nod to the accepted norms of society by entering into a legal and moral bond that is not being taken as seriously as it should.

A marriage is about wholeheartedly committing to one another. By ensuring that you have legal and financial protection before entering into the marriage, you are seen to be willing only to commit part of yourself and your life to your partner and your shared future. If this protection is because you don't know everything about each other - then you're just not ready.
Where has the acceptance gone that marriage is a life-long commitment by two people to one another? A prenuptial agreement is surely a pre-marital preparation for divorce. This can only be unhealthy for the marriage from day one, and in many cases may even be the cause of future antagonism in the relationship.

So, no, it should not be compulsory for couples to sign prenuptial agreements before marriage. It should be by choice - nobody is saying they should be outlawed, but an acceptance of their effect and what they could be seen to signify should be borne in mind.

Learn more about this author, Peejaydee.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should it be compulsory for couples to sign a prenuptial agreement before marriage??
We want to hear your view. Write now!