s/o cross cultural marriages: agreements in advance

[Ester Maria]

Just curious.

 

DH and I are not exactly a cross-cultural marriage - we have a shared passport and a shared ethnic heritage - although some of the differences between us run as deep as in fully fledged cross cultural marriages. Fellow tribe members will understand what I may be talking about.

 

So, to get to the point: DH and I had an elaborate written agreement as a sort of an attachment to a more formal prenupt. Some elements of that agreement technically could not be legally reinforced, but we still wanted to put certain things black on white for the sake of our own mutual accountability. We felt it necessary to keep some things straight from the very beginning and to clearly define, in cases of disagreements, whose opinion will be given more weight in which aspect.

 

Some of the things we covered, in light of prospective children and a shared household, were:

 

• children's citizenships - as well as whether and under what circumstances those may be changed, eliminated, or gained;
  
• children's language and culture of education - spelled it out black on white which language and culture take priority, what happens when we live abroad, under what circumstances children would attend international schools rather than local schools depending on the location where we might live;
  
• what happens in terms of living arrangements, schooling changes, and taking the children abroad in a case of a divorce;
  
• where do we meet in terms of religious practice and how do we raise our children as regards that.
  

Now, it may seem very... less than romantic? :tongue_smilie:... agreeing on all things like that strictly in advance (but then again, there is nothing romantic about financial agreements either, and they also need to be done), with hypothetical children, but even though we have a very stable, relaxed marriage and are quite easy-going about many things, there were a few situations in which we were both very thankful for having agreed on some things explicitly in advance, rather than allowing everything to be a matter of improvization.

 

So, I am just curious if you are in a cross-cultural marriage.

 

Did you explicitly agree on things in advance? If so, on what things?

Was it a loose, oral agreement - or you actually put it in writing, or even in formal writing that can function as a legal agreement?

Ever regretted doing it? Ever regretted NOT doing it and taking the improvization route?

[KnitWit]

No, we didn't do that. I don't know that we ever really even talked about it. When I met him, I didn't want ANY kids so I didn't think in those terms.

 

I don't regret it. But nothing has ever happened to cause me to regret it.

[Mabelen]

We did not have it written in black and white like you guys but we did discuss seriously most of those issues before hand. We pretty much have stuck with those decisions. I believe those conversations helped a lot to keep smooth sailing when children came along.

[sahm99]

While we didn't have a written agreement and I never regretted that, I DO regret not having talked much, much, MUCH more about specifics...

 

I was youngish when we got together (and married) and very naive as far as the implication of our very different backgrounds was concerned...

 

We have been married for almost 14 years and our marriage is more solid than ever, but we could have spared ourselves many misunderstandings, disappointments and much hurt if we had been better prepared.

[Laura Corin]

We didn't do that and it hasn't been an issue. We have always worked things out flexibly over the years.

 

Laura

[Ester Maria]

One thing we never talked about though was homeschooling. Neither one of us had ever heard of it.

Same here. That was totally unexpected.

While we didn't have a written agreement and I never regretted that, I DO regret not having talked much, much, MUCH more about specifics...

 

I was youngish when we got together (and married) and very naive as far as the implication of our very different backgrounds was concerned...

 

We have been married for almost 14 years and our marriage is more solid than ever, but we could have spared ourselves many misunderstandings, disappointments and much hurt if we had been better prepared.

:grouphug:

I think this is exactly the reason why some of our family members insisted on these things. While I know cases of marriages in which improvization turned out well, there were also cases of marriages with the bitterness of some rough patches in these cultural-linguistic things. I think few people can assess the implications when they get married, like you say. I guess the difference is also how soon you marry, e.g. had we married after many years of dating, maybe we would not have put anything in writing because by that point things would have been more or less informally agreed upon - but we sort of "rushed" to get married, and our elders kind of did us a favor with the "talk about these things NOW and preferably write them down" approach.

[cathmom]

IMO this really is a marriage question, not just a cross-cultural marriage question. Our faith requires a pre-marriage retreat where many things are discussed. Dh and I were flabbergasted that many of the couples on the retreat with us had not discussed these issues: children and issues surrounding them, marriage, where to live, etc. These couples were all getting married in the next few months! Dh and I had talked everything out beforehand (as much as possible), and we did not get engaged until we were on the same page in regards to religion.

[JennyD]

We are not cross-cultural, exactly, but we are an interfaith and interracial couple. No prenup because we had no money, and no agreement because we are both lawyers and the idea of writing up and signing a totally unenforceable agreement would be bizarre to both of us. :tongue_smilie:

 

That said, I think that the value in doing something like that comes not from actually having agreed on certain issues ahead of time -- circumstances always change and it is impossible to foresee the future -- but more in having gotten a sense of how the two of you are as negotiators, how good you are at working through disagreements and coming to a consensus. I see *that* as the heart of marital compatibility, much more so then the actual substance of agreement or disagreement.

 

ETA: There's actually some scholarly research/commentary on these sorts of 'aspirational prenups' floating around -- I'll see if I can find it later.

Edited March 21, 2012 by JennyD

[desertmum]

 

Some of the things we covered, in light of prospective children and a shared household, were:

• children's citizenships - as well as whether and under what circumstances those may be changed, eliminated, or gained;
  
• children's language and culture of education - spelled it out black on white which language and culture take priority, what happens when we live abroad, under what circumstances children would attend international schools rather than local schools depending on the location where we might live;
  
• where do we meet in terms of religious practice and how do we raise our children as regards that.
  

 

:iagree:also:

 

 

• Money: where it is kept and how it is to be spent.
  
• Family obligations: pretty much to the last detail who takes care of what.
  
• Telly: I wanted to be free to watch a certain soap and not have dh make fun of me.
  

 

I think this is it. I don't see any of this as strictly "cross-cultural" but as things most couples should discuss before getting married.

[sahm99]

IMO this really is a marriage question, not just a cross-cultural marriage question.

 

While I agree to a certain extend, any differences are amplified by lack of a common cultural / linguistical / social background.

It is difficult to fully grasp the importance of a common "language" (and I mean much beyond sharing a verbal heritage) before having faced situations where your life partner is talking about something very different from you...using the same words.:lol:

 

Basics, as beeing a "good father/mother, wife/husband" can be perceived brutally different in various cultural contexts. The most "obvious" suddenly is not...

 

So, yes, I agree that talking before marriage is important for ALL couples. But even more so for cross-culture couples. Much more.

[cathmom]

While I agree to a certain extend, any differences are amplified by lack of a common cultural / linguistical / social background.

It is difficult to fully grasp the importance of a common "language" (and I mean much beyond sharing a verbal heritage) before having faced situations where your life partner is talking about something very different from you...using the same words.:lol:

 

Basics, as beeing a "good father/mother, wife/husband" can be perceived brutally different in various cultural contexts. The most "obvious" suddenly is not...

 

So, yes, I agree that talking before marriage is important for ALL couples. But even more so for cross-culture couples. Much more.

 

Definitely!

[chiguirre]

We lived together for 18 months before we got married so we both knew what we were getting into. We also sat down and discussed money, career plans and kids. Since we got married in our early 20s and didn't have children until our 30s, we'd already bought an apartment near a school we could agree on and had a good handle on family obligations, both in our home and with dh's extended family. Of course, all of our carefully laid plans came to naught and we had to fly by the seat of our pants when the boys were diagnosed with asd. We managed to develop a new plan of action and it's worked out well. We couldn't have prepared any better than we did and our major issues haven't been cultural.

[Ester Maria]

For one thing, I did not live with my husband prior to marrying him. Almost all of our time spent together was fun, happy, and carefree. I wondered how we would fare when life got real.

Me too.

We are not cross-cultural, exactly, but we are an interfaith and interracial couple. No prenup because we had no money, and no agreement because we are both lawyers and the idea of writing up and signing a totally unenforceable agreement would be bizarre to both of us. :tongue_smilie:

 

That said, I think that the value in doing something like that comes not from actually having agreed on certain issues ahead of time -- circumstances always change and it is impossible to foresee the future -- but more in having gotten a sense of how the two of you are as negotiators, how good you are at working through disagreements and coming to a consensus. I see *that* as the heart of marital compatibility, much more so then the actual substance of agreement or disagreement.

 

ETA: There's actually some scholarly research/commentary on these sorts of 'aspirational prenups' floating around -- I'll see if I can find it later.

Well, only some elements of it were additions without a legal value. :) But some things we actually signed, attorney and all.

 

What are "aspirational prenups"?

 

Yes, the process of getting to the agreement was actually very interesting.

, as beeing a "good father/mother, wife/husband" can be perceived brutally different in various cultural contexts. The most "obvious" suddenly is not...

 

So, yes, I agree that talking before marriage is important for ALL couples. But even more so for cross-culture couples. Much more.

:iagree: Definitely.

Though I get what cathmom meant, it is a sort of a general marriage concern too, but I do think it gets amplified when you get different cultures, languages and "languages" in the mix...

[JennyD]

 

Well, only some elements of it were additions without a legal value. :) But some things we actually signed, attorney and all.

 

.

 

 

Was this in the United States? Because American courts have generally been quite iffy about upholding noneconomic provisions in prenuptial agreements and they have all pretty much agreed that provisions in a premarital agreement relating to children are unenforceable. And these are agreements that come up in divorce contexts -- it's almost impossible to imagine a court would ever enforce a noneconomic prenuptial agreement between two married people. (And you cannot give an unenforceable document legal force by signing it or notarizing it or whatever -- the process is irrelevant.)

 

Here's a case, for example, in which a California court held that an antenuptial agreement to raise a child Jewish was unenforceable post-divorce:

 

http://law.justia.com/cases/california/caapp4th/42/106.html

 

You might find it interesting to know, however, that one of the exceptions to this general rule is that secular courts have sometimes been willing to construe a ketubah as an antenuptual agreement and enforced the 'get' provision. Here's one example: http://174.123.24.242/leagle/xmlResult.aspx?page=1&xmldoc=1990981196IllApp3d785_1877.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006&SizeDisp=7

Edited March 21, 2012 by JennyD

[Ester Maria]

Was this in the United States? Because American courts have generally been quite iffy about upholding noneconomic provisions in prenuptial agreements and they have all pretty much agreed that provisions in a premarital agreement relating to children are unenforceable. And these are agreements that come up in divorce contexts -- it's almost impossible to imagine a court would ever enforce a noneconomic prenuptial agreement between two married people. (And you cannot give an unenforceable document legal force by signing it or notarizing it or whatever -- the process is irrelevant.)

 

Here's a case, for example, in which a California court held that an antenuptial agreement to raise a child Jewish was unenforceable post-divorce:

 

http://law.justia.com/cases/california/caapp4th/42/106.html

 

You might find it interesting to know, however, that one of the exceptions to this general rule is that secular courts have sometimes been willing to construe a ketubah as an antenuptual agreement and enforced the 'get' provision. Here's one example: http://174.123.24.242/leagle/xmlResult.aspx?page=1&xmldoc=1990981196IllApp3d785_1877.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006&SizeDisp=7

Okay this is all making my head spin. :lol:

 

No, not in the US. The formal signed stuff, however, were most definitely "concrete", enforcable stuff, because those were the only ones that could be put into a formal agreement - and because of that some considerations had to be added on a separate agreement without strict legal value. But the money, one spouse taking minor kids abroad if divorced, etc. stuff were in the formal signed agreement.

Edited March 21, 2012 by Ester Maria

[elinnea]

No, we didn't do any of that and I don't think that it would have helped in our situation because I don't see any of the problems that have arisen for us are really "cultural" differences.

[Embassy]

No, no formal agreements. The country where we both planned to reside has changed anyway. The religious positions we both had at marriage have changed greatly too. We just adapt and change together and it has worked well for us.

[stripe]

We talked about many things but made no formal written agreement. We have been shocked at how little others know about each others' finances.

[Ester Maria]

We have been shocked at how little others know about each others' finances.

You mean other couples, in general?

[stripe]

You mean other couples, in general?

 

Yes. Money is the number one cause of divorces, supposedly.

[Ester Maria]

Yes. Money is the number one cause of divorces, supposedly.

It does not surprise me.

 

Does English have an equivalent of "patti chiari, amicizia lunga"?

[Classical Katharine]

"Good fences make good neighbors" isn't it exactly, but has some overlap.

[Sahamamama]

We are in a cross-cultural marriage, probably.

 

He is of first-generation Egyptian parentage and was raised in an affluent, professional, bilingual, authoritarian, non-religious home on the West Coast (US).

 

I am of mixed fourth? fifth? not certain-generation Northern European parentage and was raised in a middle-class, working-class, monolingual (English), authoritative, extremely religious home on the East Coast (US).

 

We met online, through eHarmony, so we had already passed the test on 29 measures of compatibility, LOL. :) We "met" in August, he came to visit in October, I went to visit him in November, he moved across the country in December, proposed in February, and we were married in May. Whew!

 

We had no prenuptial agreement, no written agreements of any kind prior to marriage. Nor do we now. We work it all out, what there is to work out.

 

I must say, we get along so splendidly well. We really don't disagree on much of anything, or if we do, we talk about it until he sees it from my perspective. :lol:

Edited March 22, 2012 by Sahamamama

[OrganicAnn]

DH and I are different religions and we discussed and decided on what religious upbringing for our children before marriage.

 

I don't think it is "un-romantic" to have agreements (in writing or not) about things like children. It is rather like a will. Sometimes you need to have down what will happen 'in case of'. Now if were more areas that are personal between a husband and wife, then that would be un-romantic.

[cathmom]

Though I get what cathmom meant, it is a sort of a general marriage concern too, but I do think it gets amplified when you get different cultures, languages and "languages" in the mix...

 

I agree - it can get amplified and sometimes messy. Although I think it's hard to predict how one will feel about things regarding children before they are born. I think of the "Not Without My Daughter" story, where an American woman married a man of Iranian heritage who was very Americanized. However, things started to go badly in the US, he became less American in outlook, and eventually wanted to go back to Iran with his wife and daughter. She eventually escaped with her daughter (hence the title).

 

This happens in other couples with religion. Say a lapsed Catholic marries a person who was raised evangelical but is also lapsed. They don't care about religion for themselves, they're happy together, they get married, they have a baby, and pretty soon, one wants the child in Catholic religious ed and to attend Mass, and the other won't have anything to do with it. It happens, and like I said, it's hard to know how you will feel once you are actually a parent.

 

But definitely, being from different cultures makes it a lot harder potentially. My dh and I grew up about 5 miles apart, from similar socioeconomic and religious backgrounds (biggest difference being that his parents were divorced), and in our first year of marriage I was amazed at the differences we had. I wonder how anyone with larger differences gets through it! :D

[Xilka]

When I met dh, my son was almost 2yo. I am Guatemalan and my dh is English.

 

When he (dh) told me that he was romantically interested, I totally freaked out.

 

I went on to give him a very long list of all the reasons why he shouldn't be interested in me.

When he said that none of them deterred his interest, I proceeded with a two hour check list/interview.

 

My requisites included the full understanding that my son was #1, that we would sleep in a family bed, that I would not have more children, and that we would stay in Guatemala.

 

He agreed to them all.

Very unromantic, yes. But very practical to just go ahead and put all the cards on the table.

 

We also have a very happy and stable marriage (7.5 yrs).

Edited March 22, 2012 by Xilka

[Jean in Newcastle]

We talked about anything and everything before marriage. I thought I had covered all the important stuff - including the fact that I wanted to homeschool any children. I didn't realize that there were many culturally distinct ways of approaching life that I wasn't even aware of to talk about. And it was the same way for dh. Some cultural assumptions are so ingrained that we don't even see them as negotiable or that there might possibly be another way to see the issue. Having said that, we've managed to work through those things without anything on paper.

[T'smom]

I don't have a cross-cultural marriage but we discussed everything under the sun before we got married. Yes, people change and not everything can be anticipated, but at least you get started in a good place!

 

I am always amazed when I find out that people didn't discuss major things before getting married. My aunt and uncle found out after they were married that they couldn't have kids. Her attitude was "okay, point me in the direction of the adoption agency" His was that he didn't want to adopt at all. He finally came around 10 YEARS later and I know my aunt cried every day of those 10 years. At one time she told me that they did not discuss that beforehand- I find that shocking, but apparently it hadn't occured to either of them that they wouldn't be able to conceive.

 

I didn't marry a guy that professed to not want kids. I was pretty sure he'd change his mind, his brother told me he was sure to change his mind- but I couldn't take a chance on something like that.

[jennynd]

No, we didn't discuss those.

I think I trust him enough that he will do the right thing and 11 yr past, I think we are doing just fine.

we were in graduate school together so I knew him quite well even before we started dating. I think that helps

[Audrey]

Ours is an unusual cross-cultural marriage (but what that means is too personal for a forum). There were many things that each of us thought would be deal breakers and then it turned out that they weren't even issues for the other person, but there were 2 things that needed to be "set in stone," so to speak.

 

We did explicitly, and in writing, agree that I was not going to be a brood mare and I alone got to decide when I felt I was approaching that status. Also, that our kid(s) would learn French to the goal of bilingual fluency.

 

As it turns out, those 2 things didn't really need to be put in writing either.