We all know some people are crazy and crazy people add crazy things to their prenups and postnups! From weight gain to pets to drug use, there is no shortage of crazy in this article. But we want you to know that many of the clauses in this article would not hold up in a court of law. The clauses below are known as “lifestyle clauses,” and many state courts will simply not entertain them. Regardless, it’s still interesting to see what wild things people come up with!
No drug use
A no-drug use clause in a prenup or postnup is essentially saying, “my spouse will pay me $X if they do drugs.” This is typically seen with drug addict spouses who are in recovery and promising to stay clean. However, beware that this may not hold up in court. For example, a case stemming out of California in 2004 threw out a postnup that stated the husband could not do cocaine, and if he did, the wife would be awarded certain property. The court explained that to evaluate the husband’s misconduct (i.e., use of cocaine) would be against Cal. Fam. Code. § 2335, which disallows a judge from looking into either party’s conduct in a divorce proceeding.
Another classic “no drug use” clause allegedly comes from Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban’s prenup. Urban was reportedly addicted to alcohol, cocaine, and ecstasy and had trouble controlling himself. Supposedly, the prenup states that Keith would get $600k from Kidman for every year that they stayed married, but only if he were to abstain from drug and alcohol use. Apparently, Urban struggled for a while at the beginning of the marriage, but eventually went to rehab and got sober. They are still happily married today (as far as we know)!
Promise to love me forever?
Lisa Zeiderman, a managing partner at Miller Zeiderman LLP, explained how one client included in their postnup a clause that said the husband shall pay the wife $10 million if she promised to love him forever. She eventually filed for divorce, and he argued that she breached the contract (she did not love him forever, hence the filing for divorce) and he shouldn’t have to pay. Unfortunately for the husband, he did end up having to pay, and the clause caused a lot of disappointment and stress. Not to mention the added legal fees he incurred trying to argue his case.
Some prenups have allegedly been known to include clauses regarding time spent with in-laws or restrictions around in-laws. Whether that be a requirement to spend every Sunday with the fam or spending no time with them at all, this clause may be desirable for those spouses who believe their in-laws are “difficult” or too involved in the marriage. Again, this is a lifestyle clause that may be difficult to enforce in a court. There’s no guarantee that an in-law clause will stand.
The subheader speaks for itself. Some prenups claim to restrict the weight gain of their partner. If the partner does gain weight, they may be required to pay their spouse some money. Yikes!
An infamous example of the weight gain clause was allegedly present in Jessica Simpson and Tony Romo’s prenup, even though they never ended up getting married. The rumored prenup declared that Jessica would pay Tony $500,000 for every pound she gained above 135 pounds. No wonder their relationship ended before they could actually get married!
Who “gets” the babysitter?
For those folks with domestic help, such as babysitters, pool boys, gardeners, maids, etc., etc., they may have established a connection to such domestic help and be devastated should they lose them (cue tiny violin!). Allegedly, some prenups have been known to include which spouse “gets” which domestic service worker. Again, people have free will, and domestic service workers may work for whomever they choose. So, this clause is very unlikely to hold up in court, but at least they know their work is truly respected!
Have a workaholic spouse and want to make sure you get that one-on-one face time with your boo each week? That’s allegedly what Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, put in their prenup. To be exact reports state that Priscilla is granted one date per week and at least 100 minutes of alone time outside of the home and office. Aww, how… sweet? Luckily for this couple, they’re still happily married and have been together for over 20 years now.
Ahh, the famous infidelity clause (sometimes referred to as the “no-cheating” clause). This clause basically says, “if you cheat on me, you pay me!” Now, as a forewarning, this clause may not hold up in many states, including California. California has been known to strike infidelity clauses, along with other lifestyle clauses. There are some states out there that may uphold this type of clause.
A well-known infidelity clause from the celebrity world comes from Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones. Michael Douglas was allegedly a sex addict (although he publicly denied this), and their prenup required him to pay her $5 million if he cheated. Lucky for them, they celebrated their 22nd wedding anniversary in 2022 and are still happily married.
Another famous infidelity clause reportedly stems from Jessica Biel and Justin Timberlake’s prenup, who are also still married. Allegedly, the prenup states that Justin will pay Jessica $500,000 if he ever cheats. C’mon Justin, $500k, that’s it??
You knew this one was inevitable, right? Yes, supposedly, there are prenups out there that include how often the couple should have sex. According to Huffpost, one older couple’s prenup required sex once a month, and another younger pair required sex five times per week. The worst one? Brace yourself… some prenups have included obligatory sexual positions. Yikes!! Again, these are extremely unlikely to be upheld in court. I mean… how would you even prove that anyway!?
Pay me for being married and having children?
Some prenups or postnups may include payment for having children. The Queen of Pop and the King of Rap (that is, Jay-Z and Beyonce, of course) supposedly have a very interesting prenup that includes Jay-Z paying Bey $5 million for each child they have. They now have three children, so Bey should have a cool $15 million just for having kids! The prenup also includes giving Beyonce $1 million for every year they remain married, up to the 15-year mark. Again, if these clauses were ever contested, they may not hold up in court.
While the term pet “custody” is not a real legal term, the custody of couples’ pets is frequently included in prenups nowadays and dictates “who gets Fido.” It’s more likely to be referred to as a “pet clause” or “pet ownership.” Regardless of the name, it’s quite a FURtastic clause. Pet clauses are much more likely to be upheld in a court these days compared to other lifestyle clauses. Historically, pets were treated as mere property, but as we all know, pets are family now, and courts are beginning to recognize that sentiment. Fluffy and Fido are truly part of the family unit, and to lose them would be devastating.
Nicole Sheehey is the Head of Legal Content at HelloPrenup, and an Illinois licensed attorney. She has a wealth of knowledge and experience when it comes to prenuptial agreements. Nicole has Juris Doctor from John Marshall Law School. She has a deep understanding of the legal and financial implications of prenuptial agreements, and enjoys writing and collaborating with other attorneys on the nuances of the law. Nicole is passionate about helping couples locate the information they need when it comes to prenuptial agreements. You can reach Nicole here: [email protected]