Once again, the concept of a marital contract is front and center. A prenuptial agreement has a tendency to do that by assuming central prominence over other matters, especially in a marriage that is notable for one, and sometimes both, of the parties bringing substantial wealth to the union.
Movie and television actress Jennifer Aniston certainly qualifies as such a partner, with estimates of the 44-year-old entertainer’s personal wealth being as high as several hundred million dollars. When Aniston announces a plan to wed, there is no question that the nuptials — and all details pertaining to them — will be splayed across magazine covers and dissected in articles appearing in supermarkets from coast to coast.
And what is being most prominently mentioned at the moment concerning the likely wedding of Aniston and fellow actor Justin Theroux sometime in the next few months is a prenuptial agreement or, more specifically, reports that Aniston intends to forgo executing such a contract.
This blog has noted in past select posts the “coming out of the closet” nature of marital contracts in recent years, with a growing number of people appreciating them for what they truly are, namely, planning devices that help to define a couple’s interests going into marriage and to protect assets if things don’t work out. Rather than strip a marriage of romanticism, more people than ever are understanding that a prenup can be an emotionally neutral document that serves as an optimal planning tool.
It might seem a bit surprising to many people that Aniston would forgo negotiating and executing such an agreement, given her wealth and the fact that her fiance has reportedly offered to sign a marital contract.
If additional news of a material nature regarding Aniston and a prenup surfaces anytime soon, we shall be sure to let readers know.
Source: Source: CP Entertainment, “Jennifer Aniston declines prenup: Justin Theroux divorce could cost $150 milliion,” Benge Nsenduluka, May 1, 2013