9 of 52

No

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 3

practices of this nature is not only irrelevant but insulting.

Sure there are way too many marriages that are ending in divorce. That's a sad fact of life that cannot be denied. But there have to be so many more positive ways for our society to address this issue. What we ought to be doing is focusing on what can be done to make more marriages last the distance.

Marriage enrichment seminars, etc should be encouraged more. Society should be looking seriously into practical ways of reducing the stress in people's lives and making it easier for them to spend time together and communicate more. There should be more emphasis on the Christian principles upon which marriage has been founded throughout the generations. This will stand to benefit all involved - including the children that are the ultimate products of marriage - and society as a whole.

There are already laws in place to protect the most vulnerable individuals in marriages that break down. If the marriage has lasted a specific period of time there is a requirement that certain divisions of assets and savings be made. Whether these laws are altogether just and adequate is debatable. However, any failings in this system should be addressed in much more appropriate, positive and helpful ways than requiring that couples sign contracts at the time of marriage, suggesting the union could fail.

No doubt many people at this time would be thinking about that most public of recent divorce cases, where Heather Mills was seen to have fleeced Sir Paul McCartney of a grossly over-inflated sum from the fortune he has accumulated throughout his lifetime. To be honest though, I think the shame and indignity of this case has more to do with the betrayal and humiliation of a beloved public figure by somebody seen to be a gold-digger than how the division of his fortune affected him.

It's not like he doesn't still have a phenomenal fortune to his name - way more than he can ever put to use. It's the principle of the abominable way she has behaved and treated him in a very public domain that is at the crux of matters and has outraged supporters of this iconic figure.

Signing a prenuptial agreement might have prevented the high-profile court case. However, it might not have stopped her acting vindictively to humiliate him and from seeking to drag his name through the dirt. It's very likely she would have been even more motivated to do so if she could not have fought for what she felt to be a fair claim from his wealth.

Should

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

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!