About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

46 N.M. L. Rev. 354 (2016)
Rethinking Premarital Agreements: A Collaborative Approach

handle is hein.journals/nmlr46 and id is 368 raw text is: RETHINKING PREMARITAL AGREEMENTS: A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH Elizabeth R. Carter* I. INTRODUCTION Premarital Agreement. Prenuptial Agreement. Matrimonial Agreement. Antenuptial Agreement. Whatever they choose to call it, every couple contemplating marriage should also contemplate a premarital agreement. Yet, scholars and lawyers have told us to be wary of premarital agreements-unfairly characterizing them as being coercive, unfair, sexist, unromantic, and even predictors of future divorce.' Critics argue, and the law often presumes, that default marital property laws benefit women-an argument that is outdated, at best. Modifications of the default rules, they claim, must be viewed critically in order to prevent women-who are typically in an economically inferior position-from being harmed. In order to protect a woman from the harms of negotiating with her economically superior spouse, the common law grants courts expansive authority to review marriage contracts for procedural and substantive fairness. This approach-the approach taken by most major common law jurisdictions-causes more harm than good. It is premised on several sexist and faulty presumptions and it is rarely supported by any actual data. In an effort to protect women from their own ignorance, weakness, and stupidity, the common law creates barriers to entering into premarital agreements that fail to achieve any meaningful protection. The legal profession-in viewing entry into a premarital agreement as an antagonistic process-has erected additional ethical barriers to hiring an attorney to prepare a premarital agreement. For those couples that do decide to pursue a marriage contract, the barriers put in place by the common law and by the legal profession inject unnecessary expense and adversarial decision-making to what could-and should-be a relatively inexpensive and collaborative process. Common law and the legal profession have, in a sense, created a self-fulfilling * Judge Anthony J. Graphia & Jo Ann Graphia Associate Professor of Law, Louisiana State University. B.A., B.S., University of Memphis; J.D., Tulane University; LL.M., University of Alabama. Yes, my husband and I do have a premarital agreement. 1. E.g., Gail Frommer Brod, Premarital Agreements and Gender Justice, 6 YALE J.L. & FEMINISM 229, 240-52 (1994); Katharine B. Silbaugh, Marriage Contracts and the Family Economy, 93 Nw. U. L. REV. 65, 81-82 (1998); Jerome H. Poliacoff, What Does Love Have to Do with It?, 33 FAM. ADVOC., Winter 2011, at 13-14; Beth Potier, For Many, Prenups Seem to Predict Doom, HARV. U. GAZETTE (Oct. 16, 2003), http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2003/10.16/01-prenup.html; PrenuptialAgreements: Are They Necessary? Two Legal Experts Debate, HUFFINGTON POST (Sept. 14, 2012), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/14/prenuptial-agreementsn_1874636.html. 354

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most