Prenuptial agreements are on the rise – so why do they still feel taboo?

Published

11 months ago

May 18, 2024

admin

As Olivia* was picking her wedding dress, she and her partner Leo were also discussing divorce.

Despite being in love and ready to commit, having a prenup, they both agreed, was simply the sensible thing to do when starting married life.

“You go into it with love and hope for the future,” Olivia says. “But also realism.”

They are not alone. Once the preserve of Hollywood celebs and the super-rich, prenuptial agreements are on the rise among “normal” people too, with legal and marriage experts saying numbers have increased dramatically in recent years; around one in five weddings in the UK now involves some form of legal agreement, according to several polls.

Olivia and Leo got engaged last year after meeting on a dating app. Olivia, in her early 40s, is a business founder and Leo, who is in his late 30s, now works for her company. He was the one to initially broach the subject of a prenup.

“I didn’t want to at first as it doesn’t feel very romantic,” says Olivia. “It kind of puts a dampener on things – you’re at this really happy stage of getting married and then you’re potentially talking about, what happens if we split?”

Both have children from previous marriages, both have been through divorce. They decided a prenup was the right thing to do. Now, just a few weeks after their honeymoon, they are happily reminiscing through their wedding day photos; the prenup filed away, no longer a talking point, but there should they ever need it.

“It didn’t feel right that if something was to happen in the future, I could just have what she had built with her business,” says Leo. “I wanted to make the decision from my heart and do what’s right and to focus on building shared assets together.”

“Both of us had amicable divorces,” Olivia adds. “But we know what can happen. It’s reality, and I think life is more complex these days.”

The law on prenups in the UK

A prenuptial or premarital agreement is one made before a couple marries or enters into a civil partnership, setting out how they wish assets to be divided in the event of a split. They are not automatically enforceable in England and Wales, but following a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010, courts now take them into account as long as they have been made in good faith.

They have long been commonplace for celebrities: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie reportedly had one, as apparently did Britney Spears and Sam Asghari. Catherine Zeta Jones reportedly told Vanity Fair back in 2000, the year she married Michael Douglas, that she thinks prenups are “brilliant”. And over the past few years, they have filtered into the real world, too.

Co-op Legal Services says prenup sales in 2023 were up by 60% on 2022, as were cohabitation agreements – and that postnup agreements almost trebled (an increase of almost 185%) in the same period. It says 21% of married people in Britain, or one in five couples, now have some form of an agreement in place, tallying with research published by marriage advocate charity the Marriage Foundation in 2021.

The average value of the assets included in Co-op prenups sits between £500,000 and £600,000, it says. Family law firm OLS Solicitors also reports a big increase in requests – a rise of 60% between 2021 and 2023, with a further 26% increase in the first quarter of 2024 compared with the same period last year.

Experts put the rise down to a number of factors: women earning more; more people remarrying and going into partnerships with children; the internet increasing savviness and accessibility when it comes to the law. Millennials and younger generations are also generally getting married later in life than their parents, therefore accruing more assets individually ahead of the milestone.

Plus, these generations have grown up experiencing divorce between mums and dads or other people close to them, in a way that was far less common for their parents and grandparents.

‘Break-up talk isn’t romantic – neither is death, but we make a will’

Despite the rising number of couples choosing this route, it seems few are comfortable talking about it publicly. The idea of a prenup being “unromantic” still prevails.

Olivia and Leo did not want to give their real names, saying they did not feel ready to share the details with the world. They arranged their prenup through Wenup, an online platform aiming to make couples’ deals more accessible and affordable, launched in the UK in 2023 in response to the increasing demand.

“Prenups are considered taboo, unromantic and are something very private to most people,” says Wenup co-founder James Brookner.

“This is changing for younger generations who have a more open, pragmatic and non-traditional view of marriage, but for many people, thinking about what will happen if they break up in the lead-up to a wedding is a difficult enough conversation to have in private, let alone public.”

Nicole*, who moved from the UK to New Zealand several years ago and married her husband, Will, after three years together in 2019, says they discussed getting a prenup – or contracting out agreement, as they are known there – before she moved in with him, six months into their relationship.

“[He] raised the idea because he had worked hard to buy his first house and wanted to ensure he retained his rights to ownership should our relationship break down,” Nicole says.

The 38-year-old admits she was “caught a bit off guard” when he first broached the subject, but due to the law in the country – the Property Relationships Act, which means any individually owned property is shared equally in the event of a break-up after three years of a couple living together, regardless of marriage – it felt like the right thing to do.

They reached an agreement they were both happy with and Will, 42, covered legal costs as they had to have independent advice. The couple now have a young daughter and are happily married – and for this, you have to balance romance and practicality, says Nicole.

“Talking about breaking up isn’t romantic – nor is talking about death, but we all have to write a will at some stage. I think the reluctance is often because one party is trying to protect assets from the other, with no ill intent usually, but I can see why the other party may feel a little despondent about the suggestion if they don’t understand the law.

“Personally, I have seen too many nasty break-ups that could have been a lot cleaner had the proper agreements been in place at the outset.”

What do prenups cover?

While couples in the UK might not be showing them off along with their engagement pics, attitudes are changing privately. A YouGov poll in 2023 found that 42% of British people consider prenups a good idea, compared with 13% who consider them a bad idea. A similar poll on prenups 10 years earlier found that 35% would sign a prenup if asked to, with 36% saying they would not.

Family law solicitor Tracey Moloney, who is known as The Legal Queen online – with more than a million followers across her TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube accounts – says social media has made legal advice more accessible.

Up to about five years ago she would probably get one prenuptial request a year, if that. Now, she averages about one a week, taking cohabitation agreements for unmarried couples into consideration as well. She says she would always advise couples to have one.

“I think any family lawyer is going to say that because we see so many divorces. We’re realists. I think people can forget that when you say ‘I do’, you are entering into a contractual relationship anyway… financial ties exist because your marriage has created a binding contract. If you’re going to go into a contract in any other scenario – buying a property, buying shares in a company – you’re going to take advice. I don’t think marriage should be seen any differently.”

Prenups can cover anything from money to property to assets – including future assets such as expected inheritance – whether they are worth millions or simply of sentimental value, she points out, citing a recent agreement drawn up to protect an antique writing desk. It was “really dear to that person, passed down from generation to generation”, but of no real monetary value.

At the other end of the scale, she recalls one divorce after a long marriage which didn’t involve a prenup; the wife had inherited jewellery worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. “It was never intended to be sold but it had significant value and it was added to her side of the balance sheet. She kept the jewellery but as a result, the ex kept a lot more of his pension, which she was entitled to. If she’d had a prenup, it could have been ring-fenced.”

Michelle Elman, a TV life coach and author known as Queen Of Boundaries, says when it comes to prenups she encourages any conversations about finance early on in a relationship.

“It’s hard to say, black or white, whether prenups are good or bad as it depends on the couple,” she says. “Some people might think a prenup is going into a marriage with bad faith, but if you’re going into the marriage with more certainty and clarity because you have it, then that’s best for you.

“The unhealthy option is not going into a prenup because you’re scared to have the conversation. I think for any healthy marriage to survive, you need to have already spoken about money before you get married, whether it’s because of a prenup or not.”

From proposal to prenup

Harry Benson, research director for the Marriage Foundation, says he was surprised at the results of the charity’s survey findings. “I thought this was something we would only find among the very richest people,” he says.

The 20% having some form of agreement applied to those married since 2000, compared with just 1.5% who were married in the 1970s, 5% in the 1980s and 8% in the 1990s. The charity’s poll did find higher earners were more likely to have prenups; higher earning women in particular. In terms of education, the findings were the other way round.

Mr Benson says he personally finds the idea of “dividing up the spoils before you even get started” as “deeply” unromantic. “Divorce law, broadly speaking, protects people,” he says. “For the vast majority, there’s not an awful lot of point to getting them. And of course, there is the risk that you make the proposal, down on one knee, and then say, ‘please sign my prenup’. The response? ‘Get stuffed! Are you the type of person I want to marry?'”

However, he says the research found no link to divorce rates – that having a prenup did not make it more or less likely that a couple would go on to break up.

“It’s not for me, but it is for some people,” he says. “I can see why people do it and I can certainly see the benefits for some… I just personally find them a bit oxymoronic.”

But the idea of the prenup being unromantic is definitely changing. Wenup says making the process more equitable and open means they are seeing the shift firsthand, with customers who don’t necessarily fit the stereotype of rich wealth protectors.

“If you’re not sure you need one, you probably need one,” says the Legal Queen. “They’re a bit like insurance – you hope you never have to claim on it, but it’s there to protect you if you do.”

*Names have been changed

UK

Widow has ‘no regrets’ over assisted suicide of husband despite ‘ongoing’ police investigation

Published

13 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

Widow has 'no regrets' over assisted suicide of husband despite 'ongoing' police investigation

A woman who is under police investigation after assisting the suicide of her husband at Dignitas in Switzerland has told Sky News she has no regrets.

Louise Shackleton has spoken publicly for the first time since her husband’s death in December, as parliament prepares to vote again on legislation to introduce assisted dying in England and Wales.

Mrs Shackleton surrendered herself to police after returning from Switzerland having seen her husband Anthony die. He had been suffering with motor neurone disease for six years.

“I have committed a crime, which I have admitted to, of assisting him by simply pushing him on to a plane and being with him, which I don’t regret for one moment. He was my husband and I loved him,” she said.

“We talked at length over two years about this. What he said to me on many occasions is ‘look at my options, look at what my options are. I can either go there and I can die peacefully, with grace, without pain, without suffering or I could be laid in a bed not being able to move, not even being able to look at anything unless you move my head’.

“He didn’t have options. What he wanted was nothing more than a good death.”

The law in the UK prohibits people from assisting in the suicide of others, but prosecutions have been rare.

In a statement, a North Yorkshire Police spokesman told Sky News: “The investigation is ongoing. There is nothing further to add at this stage.”

The next vote on the assisted dying bill for England and Wales has been delayed by three weeks to give MPs time to consider amendments.

The legislation would permit a person who is terminally ill with less than six months to live to legally end their life after approval by two doctors and an expert panel.

‘He was at total peace with his decision’

Mrs Shackleton says she saw her husband “physically and mentally” relax once on the flight to Switzerland.

She said: “We had the most wonderful four days.

“He was laughing. He was at total peace with his decision.

“It was in those four days that I realised that he wanted the peaceful death more than he wanted to suffer and stay with me, which was hard, but that’s how resolute he was in having this peace.

“I was his wife, we’d been together 25 years, we’d known each other since we were 18. I couldn’t do anything else but help him.”

‘We need to safeguard people’

She said the hardest part of the journey came after her husband’s death.

“There was this panic and this fear that I was leaving him,” she said. “That was a horrific experience.

“If the law had changed in this country, I would have been with family, family would have been with us, family would’ve been with him. But as it was, that couldn’t happen.”

Opponents to the assisted dying bill have raised concerns about the safety of vulnerable people and the risk of coercion and a change in attitudes toward the elderly, seriously ill and disabled.

They say improvements to palliative care should be a priority.

“I think that we need to safeguard people,” said Mrs Shackleton. “I think that sometimes we need to suffer other people’s choices, and when I mean suffer I mean we have to acknowledge that whilst we’re not comfortable with those, that we need to respect other people, other people wishes.”

Anthony, who died aged 59, was a furniture restorer who had earned worldwide recognition for making rocking horses.

“I think the measure of the man is that nobody has ever said a bad word about him in the whole of his life because he was just so caring and giving,” his widow said.

‘This is about a dying person’s choice’

She said she had chosen to speak publicly because of a promise she had made him.

“I felt that my husband’s journey shouldn’t be in vain. We discussed this on our last day and my husband made me promise to tell his story.

“He told me to fight and the simple thing that I’m fighting for is people to have the choice.

“This is about a dying person’s choice to either follow their journey through with disease or to die peacefully when they want to, on their terms, and have a good death. It’s that simple.”

UK

Feminists ‘feel braver about speaking out’ after gender ruling – but critics say it ‘stokes culture war’

Published

16 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

Feminists 'feel braver about speaking out' after gender ruling - but critics say it 'stokes culture war'

A former Labour MP who quit the party over Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership has welcomed the landmark Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman as a “victory for feminists”.

Rosie Duffield, now the independent MP for Canterbury, said the judgment helped resolve the “lack of clarity” that has existed in the politics around the issue “for years”.

She was speaking to Ali Fortescue on the Politics Hub on the same day the UK’s highest court delivered its verdict on one of the most contentious debates in politics.

Politics latest: MPs respond to Supreme Court ruling on gender

The judges were asked to rule on how “sex” is defined in the 2010 Equality Act – whether that means biological sex or “certificated” sex, as legally defined by the 2004 Gender Recognition Act.

Their unanimous decision was that the definition of a “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to “a biological woman and biological sex”.

Asked what she made about comments by fellow independent MP John McDonnell – who said the court “failed to hear the voice of a single trans person” and that the decision “lacked humanity and fairness” as a result, she said: “This ruling doesn’t affect trans people in the slightest.

“It’s about women’s rights – women’s rights to single sex spaces, women’s rights, not to be discriminated against.

“It literally doesn’t change a single thing for trans rights and that lack of understanding from a senior politician about the law is a bit worrying, actually.”

However, Maggie Chapman, a Scottish Green MSP, disagreed with Ms Duffield and said she was “concerned” about the impact the ruling would have on trans people “and for the services and facilities they have been using and have had access to for decades now”.

“One of the grave concerns that we have with this ruling is that it will embolden people to challenge trans people who have every right to access services,” she said.

“We know that over the last few years… their [trans people’s] lives have become increasingly difficult, they have been blocked from accessing services they need.”

Delivering the ruling at the London court on Wednesday, Lord Hodge said: “But we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.

“The Equality Act 2010 gives transgender people protection, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender.

“This is the application of the principle of discrimination by association. Those statutory protections are available to transgender people, whether or not they possess a gender recognition certificate.”

Asked whether she believed the judgment could “draw a line” under the culture war, Ms Chapman told Fortescue: “Today’s judgment only stokes that culture war further.”

And she said that while Lord Hodge was correct to say there were protections in law for trans people in the 2020 Equality Act, the judgment “doesn’t prevent things happening”.

“It may offer protections once bad things have happened, once harassment, once discrimination, once bigotry, once assaults have happened,” she said.

She also warned some groups “aren’t going to be satisfied with today’s ruling”.

“We know that there are individuals and there are groups who actually want to roll back even further – they want to get rid of the Gender Recognition Act from 2004,” she said.

“I think today’s ruling just emboldens those views.”

UK

Arsenal reach Champions League semi-final with dramatic win over Real Madrid

Published

16 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

Arsenal reach Champions League semi-final with dramatic win over Real Madrid

Arsenal have reached the semi-finals of the Champions League after a dramatic victory over holders Real Madrid in Spain.

The north London side, who became the first English team to win twice at the Bernabeu following their triumph there 19 years ago, will face Paris Saint-Germain in the last four after the French side beat Aston Villa on Tuesday.

It is the third time the Gunners have made it through to the semis of the top club football tournament in Europe, and the first since 2009.

Arsenal went into the second leg of their quarter-final clash on Wednesday with a 3-0 lead.

Backed by a raucous home crowd, Madrid tried to get off to a strong start and Kylian Mbappe scored after two minutes. However, the goal was disallowed for a clear offside.

Arsenal had the chance to go ahead in the 13th minute but winger Bukayo Saka missed a penalty.

The Spanish hosts were awarded a penalty of their own about 10 minutes later when Mbappe stumbled under pressure from Declan Rice in the box – but the decision was overturned by VAR.

Saka atoned for his tepid penalty as he chipped the ball past Madrid’s keeper Thibaut Courtois when put through on goal by auxiliary striker Mikel Merino in the 65th minute.

But Arsenal were pegged back just two minutes later as Vinicius Junior caught William Saliba dawdling on the ball and fired Real Madrid level.

Arsenal’s resolute defending kept the home side at bay until Gabriel Martinelli made a late break through the home side’s defence to put his side 2-1 ahead three minutes into injury time, as the Gunners made it 5-1 on aggregate.

‘We knew we were going to win’, says Rice

Arsenal midfielder Declan Rice has insisted his team are intent on winning the Champions League after their victory in Madrid.

Speaking to TNT Sport, Rice, who was named player of the match, said: “It’s such a special night, a historic one for the club. We have the objective of playing the best and winning the competition.

“We had so much belief and confidence from that first leg and came here to win the game. We knew we were going to suffer but we knew we were going to win. We had it in our minds, then we did it [in] real life. What a night.

“I knew when I signed, this club was on an upward trajectory. It’s been tough in the Premier League but in this competition we’ve done amazingly well.

“It’s PSG next, who are an amazing team.”

‘We have to be very proud of ourselves’, says Arteta

Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta told TNT Sport: “One of the best nights in my football career.

“We played against a team with the biggest history.

“To be able to win the tie in the manner we have done, I think we have to be very proud of ourselves.”

He added: “The history we have in this competition is so short. The third time in our history of what we have just done and we have to build on that. All this experience is going to help us, for sure.”

Real Madrid were seeking their third Champions League title in four seasons.

Mbappe twisted ankle

Their forward Mbappe twisted his right ankle during the game and was jeered by part of the crowd when his substitution was announced after a lacklustre performance.

The French star, who is still looking for his first Champions League title, was replaced by Brahim Diaz in the 75th minute following his injury. He was able to walk off the pitch by himself, but was limping slightly.

The other semi-final will be between Barcelona and Inter Milan.

The first legs are set to be played on 29 and 30 April, with the second legs on 6 and 7 May.

The final will be on 31 May.