Insane Prenup Demands Bride-To-Be Lose All Baby Weight One Year After Giving Birth
A bride-to-be has shared details of her proposed prenup agreement that requires her to lose all of her baby weight within a year of childbirth -- among other unusual demands.
The unnamed 29-year-old from Gilead ... er, we mean New York City revealed in a Reddit post that she would also be left with "nothing" if she is unfaithful to her husband-to-be and stands to receive payment for every child she produces.
Now, the woman's fiancé is a "wonderfully successful" neurosurgeon so it wasn't too much of a surprise when he asked her to sign a prenup -- "I am all for them actually," she wrote in the post.
It's unlikely she feels the same way now ...
Before she (literally) signed her life away she decided to go through the document with her prospective father-in-law, who she says is a lawyer, but soon came across "a few odd clauses" that rang alarm bells. Thank God.
One was a cheeky infidelity clause that stated any cheating on the bride-to-be's part would result in her walking away with " basically nothing." No word on what a spicy fling on the "wonderfully successful" neurosurgeon's part would result in but hey -- who cares?
And then came the baby weight demands. You might want to sit down for this.
Along with that, he put in a clause that stated that I have to lose any weight I gain after childbirth, at least 30lbs of it in the first year following childbirth.
In case it is unclear let us spell this out to y'all. This man is asking his future wife to sign a legally binding agreement that places specific -- and some may say unrealistic and unfair -- demands over her physical body.
Later, the Ofneurosurgeon popped up in the comments to shed more light on this explaining that her pre-pregnancy weight and her peak pregnancy weight would be recorded -- followed by an "annual weigh-in" to see if she has complied.
For the love of all that is good.
As per the prenup she has to lose ALL the baby weight by the one-year mark. All of it. If she dared to *gasp* gain more than 13 kgs (30 lbs.) she'll have to drop at least the first 13 kgs within the year and the rest by the following year -- unless she gets knocked up again of course.
Oh -- we ain't done yet.
The oddest part of it all -- in her opinion -- was something she calls the "compensation for children clause" in which she is set to receive "a chunk of money" for each child she bears him.
At this point, the poor thing starts to wonder "this doesn't sound legal but maybe it is?" while the entire readership of Reddit screams GET OUT OF THERE NOW.
My main question is are all these clauses enforceable in court? What makes any of them invalid? I haven't signed yet and would like to get insight from someone other than my future father-in-law as I feel he may mislead me if his son were to benefit from it.
Unlike Mr Neurosurgeon Snr, we are not lawyers. But we do know when something stinks. And this prenup, friends, is rancid -- and we're not the only ones to think so.
Nearly everyone commenting on the post advised her to consult her own lawyer.
"Definitely consult your own lawyer," wrote one Redditor. "Remember marriage is a partnership and you have assets to protect as well as he does.
You should not sign his pre-nup, you should both sign a pre-nup that protects you both.
"Definitely talk to a lawyer in your area before signing. Don't just rely on the internet. It will be money well spent," wrote another.
Others suggested the woman throw in some of her own clauses for her hubby-to-be.
"So for example, assuming you are OK with his stipulations, have counter stipulations -- what if he cheats? What about his weight? (Men gain weight to!)
"And about those kids he wants you to have -- what if one of you is infertile and you use medical interventions (surrogate, egg donor, sperm donor, etc) or adopt -- are there protections or clauses for that situation? Are there other concerns you have?"
"Out of curiosity, is there a similar fidelity clause for him? What are the consequences if he has an affair?" asked another.
According to some, the infidelity clause and even the child compensation clause weren't too unusual, but "that weight-loss clause sure sets off alarm bells."
"I've seen a few compensation for children clauses, so I'd guess that is either common or at minimum; not crazy," wrote one Redditor, who called themselves a lawyer.
"The losing weight thing is insane. What is the penalty if weight is not lost... walk away with nothing?
"So if you ever wanted to get into powerlifting (and the muscle mass that brings), you can't with this guy," he joked.
Another instructed her, "Consult your own lawyer. The father is not your lawyer. I suspect he is also not a family practice attorney because if was and he's representing his son (which would be a BAD idea in any case) he would never try to put these clauses in AND he would insist on you getting your own representation (even to the extent of telling your fiance to pay for one).
Why? Because the inevitable challenge to the prenup upon your divorce (because you're marrying a cad) is a lot more likely to be successful if you didn't have legal representation and especially more likely if there are particularly onerous clauses and with some holding out as if you are being given legal advice by your future father-in-law.
"That said, none of that means you WILL be successful in challenging the most important parts of the prenup and it will be exceedingly painful to do so. So lawyer up. You cannot afford not to.
"Also, you know... don't marry this guy," they concluded.
The Reddit thread has since been locked by moderators and the bride-to-be has yet to update us with further details.
Feature image: The CW Network.