While we may never settle the debate over asking for a pre-nup ever acceptable during an engagement, I think many of us can agree it's time to move on to another controversial relationship trend: divorce insurance. It's been around for awhile, but the media only recently picked up on a program designed to keep everyone from ending up broke at the end of one of the 50-plus-percent of failed marriages.
Called WedLock, it's an unusual form of casualty insurance that was dreamed up by John Logan, a North Carolina man who saw his savings disappear when he split from his wife.
Figuring that there must be a lot of other newly impoverished people in the same financial quagmire, he devised an insurance plan that costs around $16 per month for each $1,250 of coverage.
As a way to prevent people from taking out divorce insurance just as they are deciding to split, they would have to pay in advance for at least four years before their policy would take effect and pay out money. There’s an added premium of $250 per unit for each additional year that the marriage lasts after the fourth year.
Say someone who invested in 10 units got divorced after being married for 10 years. The newly single spouse would have paid $19,188 for coverage, and would get back a payment of $27,500. [NY Daily News]
Paying $20,000 for $27,000 in insurance? That's an even bigger ripoff than a wedding ring.
Commentarium (4 Comments)
Wow, like that old blues song (and my own experience) say, "it's cheaper to keep her"
No, it's not cheaper. The fucking you're getting isn't worth the fucking you're getting.
Like that old Guns song said, "I used to love her but I had to kill her."
There's two kinds of sex; sex you pay for and sex you get for free. Sex you get for free is usually much more expensive.
Just thought I would throw in one more slightly sexist aphorism.