0:02 Hi, everyone, thanks for joining. This is John Jay and today I'm going to talk about what I'm going to call the title of this. 0:08 It's going to be the pre and Post Nuptial Agreement for Families and for Couples. 0:14 And I guess the the beginning title to get Everyone's Attention is: Div...

Hi, everyone, thanks for joining. This is John Jay and today I'm going to talk about what I'm going to call the title of this.
It's going to be the pre and Post Nuptial Agreement for Families and for Couples.
And I guess the the beginning title to get Everyone's Attention is: Divorcing, the State.
We've overlooked this part.
And the reason why I've been motivated to talk about this is because I've been watching the discussion on the latest social trend I suppose where men have decided not to get married because they think that would prevent them from having their stuff pillaged later on in a divorce proceeding or separation of grain or something like that.
And vice versa. But mostly, it's, it's the men.
Since women initiate, I apparently from all of these interviews I'm learning 8% of Divorces and separations.
Now, what people don't realize, is that you don't have to be married to suffer the same consequences, and I'm going to just pointed out that it's the state, it's the, it's the court system that is being used to subsidize divorce There's an incentive for women to divorce a man. There's an incentive for a woman, to make a complaint against the man. Maybe they're living together, or they have some arrangement where she can make a complaint.
I'm not just gonna blame only women, but I'm just going off that statistic.
OK, so, I'm not just biased against women, I'm just telling you that this this subject originates from the fact that 8% of women typically are the ones initiate separations of courses, and they do that using the power of the state.
They do that using the police power and they're paid to do it, then rewarded, they get money and so forth. And so, whether or not you actually have a marriage agreement, my wife and I have been married for 23 years.
We don't have a marriage license, but the state would easily recognize our marriage.
If I had a living girlfriend, that would be, you know, say a living girlfriend of minimum, let's say six months, the court would recognize, uh, or let's say it this way, the court would take jurisdiction. Now, maybe I'm wrong on the six months. It could be two years, I'm not sure, Depending on what state you're in, I'm in Florida.
So let's just say six months, so you're not immune from these problems.
So I'm just going to sell an unrealistic in some cases, because you got to think to yourself, how am I supposed to get this person I care about or that I want to be with to agree to this sort of thing? And yeah, you do have to have an agreement.
There has to be, at some point an overt consent, Some evidence of consent that you agreed to start things.
Now that could just be simply a paragraph of text. It doesn't have to be complicated.
And the idea behind what I'm going to show you is that you're divorcing, the state so that the laws and conditions and terms that I'm going to call it arbitrary terms cannot be used against you and your property.
Speaking for men, OK, cannot be used against men too and cannot be used to subsidize divorce and reward women for initiating these types of things that we can write agreement. You'll find out that we can write an agreement that would discourage a woman from initiating a separation or divorce or trying to get some sort of claim financial claim against the man just because she's in the household.
Now, of course, this works both ways, but again, I'm going out the statistic here.
So, the first thing we can do, and I'm not going to show you this agreement, because it's kind of dangerous if I'm going to make it look like your life is much simpler, or better, or you have some sort of magic wand, that if you have this document, that all of a sudden, everything your life is better. It's not like that.
Every document is a little different, every agreement's a little bit different has to be written according to your situation, it actually formed to fit your lifestyle, But let me just show you the basic concepts of how this plays out. So the first thing we do is, let's say, let's identify some relationships.
First relationship, let's just say, a family, mom and dad said children, OK, the mom and the dad, Before they have children or husband or wife, and that's what they are, only husband or wife, or let's just say, boyfriend, girlfriend live in couples, OK, That is a private relationship.
No one else is in that relationship. No one else can be in that relationship.
It's exclusive to those two people, so let's call that a private membership association.
It is outside the purview of the states jurisdiction.
Already, from the beginning, what we're probably run into is, we don't realize this, right? We think we can just go to the court every time we have a problem in our allies.
And the court says, great, thank you very much, because the court is a business, it is a business, it's a franchise.
So in any case, understand, when you have your initial relationship, man, woman, husband, or wife, whatever, that is, a private membership association, you bring in some children, forget, as I'm talking about People sort of bringing children, or they've adopted them are, whatever the deal is, are your own children.
Now you have it different.
Private membership association, you got the mom and the dad and the children.
The children by themselves and association have to be with the parents until they are adults.
So you have the private membership association that includes the mom and the dad of the children.
And whether or not there's children, we still have the original association, which is husband or Wife boyfriend, girlfriend, or Mom and dad. Do I call it that? They said there's really two associations there.
It's important to make that distinction.
And, in that relationship, to make that function on a day-to-day basis, you need stuff in the property. You need money, a cash flow.
And so, these are the things that risks, and so, here's the way we were going to do because the problem that we're not really comprehending here, I'm listening to all these interviews, and I listen to the attorneys from Florida, OK.
And I listen to how they disrespect agreements. I listen, I had them talking about pre-nuptial and Post National Agreements are important.
Then the next bread, they talk about how they succeeded at breaking through them, this despicable: You have to respect agreements, OK?
If you're a lawyer, if you're a bar member, shame on you for talking about selling your client, a postdoctoral, a pre-nuptial agreement, and in the same breath, talk about how you were succeeded at breaking one and another case.
That is not what they're for, they're supposed to be respected.
That is not what your job is. OK, well, maybe I should take that back, because the tiniest job is to take property so they convert it so it's really be aware of what you're dealing with to this by the way, as you can tell, I have a bias against lawyers.
So that's another motivating factor for me to do this. Or I'm not a bar, I never would.
So we have this, this relationship there's several types of relationships going on the arcade. And to make this work, we have property.
So when I say property, I'm talking about, there's a few things here, we got three groups of property, we got real estate, OK. So, the family itself: the husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, they live in a place.
Presumably it's a, you know, building out a car or something, It's a little bit of building at rent a place, you have to buy a house or whatever.
And you would then have chattels things in the household. You got furniture and appliances, electronics. These are these things, OK. These are things that come into play when you're talking about divorce or separation, pay, that's my stuff, I'm taking it with me, this sort of thing.
Then you have other types of problems, which are known as intangible private property rights. These are the rights that you have to make decisions every day. These are the rights. You have, the right that actually form the association in the workplace. You have a right to choose a boyfriend, girlfriend, husband, why you have a right to bring children into the world. And you exercise those rights. And these are intangible private property rights.
You also have other private rights, and we'll get into that.
But, because, by default, you haven't become the good steward of these rights and this property. And this relationship, you haven't actually become an adult and actually like an adult.
And taking responsibility for this relationship, you, just, by default, fell into the relationship, just like you did in junior high school and high school. It wasn't, it wasn't a moral act.
But when we get onto the world becomes Immoral Act and so, for most people, the reason why I have these problems is because I think, by default, we just go by default. We just do our thing.
We don't really have a rational understanding of the future. We don't deliberately planned for the future and I can tell you this right now.
I have clients that are high net worth.
And they use marriage very pragmatically, marriage as a tool and managing well maintained.
Well preserving.
Well, hey, We don't use it that way for middle-class or whatever. We don't see these things.
So, I'm just trying to share with you some of the some of the ways that some of the concepts here, that are used by very wealthy people, they're not going to share this with you, unless you have a close relationship.
So we have marital assets, but it's not really assets asset.
Literally the proper accounting term for asset is something that is that you don't work for, that you own, possibly you own a portion of and it pays you on a regular basis, OK. That's an asset. Your car is not, your asset, your house is not your asset. Your 401 K is not your asset, OK. Someone else's someone else who's benefiting financially unless you're the, you're the dead or you're the one with the liability in this case. Now if you own a duplex in your neighborhood that can be an asset. Hopefully it's got positive cash flow. I would say that's an asset. Yeah. It's not your job, but you own it. And the people hopefully got tenants in there, and they're renting their pay, and it's working out what really well. That's an asset, OK.
Marital property.
This compete, they could use the term marital assets, OK? Marital property is all the shovels in the household.
So so what we do in the this post national agreement, I'm just gonna call it Post National Grid. It can be three Nuptial it doesn't have to be from a marriage. That could be for couples live in couples, OK.
What we're going to do is, NJ, the ownership of the property.
The things that make your life comfortable, right, Furniture, fixtures in the house, clothing, family, heirlooms, OK, electronics, appliances. All these things where they convey, simply by declaring the existence of a trust inside the post central grid, so we declared the existence of a trust, and yeah, we can write up a trusted government. That's not important.
What's important is that we declare the existence of a trust, and we describe what's in the trust.
So, all the things that are in the household, that make the marriage work, but make a family work, that thing, that, you know, the remote control. It turns out, the TV, you know, the TV, all these things that make your life comfortable.
All those are now held in trust for the benefit of beneficiaries. Well, guess what? They were already being used for the benefit of beneficiaries. We just never said it like that.
We, we just never said who they trust iwas. Well, who's the trustee is Probably the mom and the dad bought those things. I was part of the dad who pay for these things.
Whoever pay for these things for, like, like, the way my whiteboards and if I pay for stuff like she sees that as far as and fine, you know. So it's, you know, it's ours, right.
So the mom and the dad typically really trust the beneficiary is possibly the mom or the dad, but also the children.
In any case, I'm just speaking generically here.
So we declare the existence of a trust, We identified that trust property, we remove all the channels from the mayor or community, why don't we do that?
Trust is written in a way, that it will remove the channels from the Maryland community, because if, if that is not part of the Maryland community, it's not something that can be discussed if there's a dispute or divorce And it goes before a judge.
And I'm going to show you how to get out of that situation, but let's just say, go to the court judge or an arbitrator, a third party for dispute resolution, OK.
That is not on the table.
It's already a subtle matter.
What we want to try to do is be responsible for our relationships.
Stuff is important in our relationship.
So as money, right, The things that money can buy are important. They become important in our relationships. Let's use them.
Let's describe them the way that they are actually being used. They are being used to benefit us. So someone has to be the trustee, and someone has to be the beneficiary.
So let's declare that and, therefore, remove the property.
All the channels from the marital community is no longer on the table in the event of separation or divorce. I need to speeds at this time. There is nothing.
This is what rich people do, by the way.
Rich people removed property from their state so that there was nothing of probate suddenly the old pickup truck which is the joke, OK? This is how it works.
So, it's not so much rescued akhada, rest of your call that means it's already been adjudicated. And a judge would say, Well, yeah, if I didn't sign off on it, then it wasn't adjudicated.
I'm going to tell you that because we created the court system, we have the we have the legal authority to adjudicate matters, OK?
When you create this trust, when you when you declare the existence of a trust, and you've secured and identify the ownership and how the properties held, you've adjudicated the property rights of the shadows for the Mayoral community property.
And it cannot be revisited.
You've divested anyone.
Even if you ask for someone to get involved with a dispute in the marriage or relationship, that trust pulls all the channels, and it's not part of the discussion.
It's a settled matter, Not part of the mental state.
However, all the things in that trust still serve our community and will continue to serve American community, even if the marriage results in a divorce. Now, a lot of this that I'm talking about here, I'm not trying to talk about divorce. what I'm talking about is let's get the state out of your relationship.
Let's say you have a boy, friend, girlfriend situation, the states in there, you just don't know it yet because I wanted you can go to the court petitioned for separation and the court will recognize and take jurisdiction and you can't do anything about it because you didn't set it up properly.
I'm showing you right now how to divorce the stage and prevent the State, I say divorce, because it's dramatic. But let's prevent the State from applying its arbitrary terms conditions where those come from. Your state legislature, where those come from. Like, who gets what property weren't all that come from?
Some legislators that don't know you, corporation, that doesn't know you.
Why not use the standards that are already part of your relationship.
So, let us go on to, let's go on to.
What do we do about the use of resources in the relationship?
Well, that's already established, right? Because you figured out how to, who's going to pay the bills and how it's gonna work. What percentage goes here? Or there, how much money's going to allocate for different things? How much money we're gonna allocate for Christmas presents. Right.
The children's clothing or whatever pleasures you have in your relationship, that money, if you never even give it a second thought, the record of how you spent your money is the agreement, let's just call it, this is how actually is the courts. Solve problems where there's no written agreement, They actually go to financial transactions.
the judges do and they review how the money flowed, what it was used for, the ratios, percentages and how it was allocated.
And from there, they reverse engineer, agreements, provisions of an agreement between the we're in the relationship or whatever it was, purposed partners, marriage, whatever.
What I'm saying is, if there's going to be a separation, like a person leaves the household for somebody, then the the money the way was allocated should be consistent.
Like same ratios If, if Johnny, you know a little boy, that's, you know, the child got so much money, or so much money was allocated for him to buy clothing.
Every it will then that number should be about the same, it should be that ratio should be about the same, we shouldn't be following the state skyline.
Let's just get rid of the trial court. Let's just get rid of family court.
Let's use our family as the Court.
Our family, our relationship, like I described earlier, the relationship between the husband, Wife, Girlfriend Boyfriend, and then you have the relationship of the all, the children.
This is, this has the same legal authority as a court.
We just don't realize that the parents have, and the, the two people that adults have, all the authority that A judge does, they just fail to exercise it, they think, they know they're watching TV and watch A Judge Judy, they're watching girls and their friends, and they learn, by example, they're not, they're not learning from actually studying law.
So, the parents can exercise their authority now, They should plan, just like you plan for the weather, OK, just like you plan for retirement, what the heck, you're not even planning for a marriage. Planning for the ugly event, where you want to separate. Hopefully, it never happens, But it did. Did you ever consider that? Don't you ever plan for, and I've had this discussion with my parents before they died.
What about their stuff, right?
Bidet, when you're when you die, what do you want to be done with this stuff? I've had this conversation with my dad. He was cool with that.
My parents weren't interesting, but I could talk to them, like that.
But it's uncomfortable, it sounds morbid.
But whoever has a conversation about, Hey, if you just hate me one day, and you want to take my stuff, or something, what does that look like?
Let's work that out now.
Let's be mature.
OK, I think the first measure of what we want to do is not so much the other person.
It's about, let's protect this relationship from third parties. Third parties that want to apply arbitrary conditions, that they don't know us.
Let's divorce the state, meaning let's get rid of the ability, the trial court to come into our marriage or relationship, or living couple's relationship, or interfere with our parents and, I'm sorry, would interfere with the children.
And here's where we get into the issue of, once we've figured this out, just like I just described, if you have a settled matter, it can't be work.
You have, for example, if you have it in this agreement, we get into establishing child support and custody.
This has to do with who makes the money? This has to do with what makes sense, OK. This can be settled right now. This can be settled in a post national agreement, pre-nuptial agreement.
Let's just talk about custody for a second, If we already have that matter settle, The state can't intervene.
Now, there's an exception to this, if there's abuse or neglect, we can even deal with that to some extent.
But when it comes to abuse or neglect, by having an agreement of this nature, it puts the brakes on the state.
Now, the state will just run you over without an evidentiary hearing on the claim that there's an Eastern Bloc and they will just literally y.p.. Well. I've seen this work, however.
Even if that were to happen, if you had a post an actual grant, you would be protective.
They would put the brakes on the process, and the court would have to have an evidentiary hearing now show you something really powerful. This is for the perceptual. This is why it's going to work. So that's just child support.
But what about child?
It's not really child support. It's about child custody.
If I have this agreement, I can prevent the state from taking custody of my children because I've already settled that matter.
Why? How? Because I exercised an intangible private property. Right.
I did that in writing and I settled the matter before the Court before the stakeout.
And yeah, maybe that someone opened a can of worms so to speak with a claim of abuse or neglect. Hopefully that wasn't the case.
And I can deal with that now because I have a written agreement. I've already kept that situation.
So, that's child custody.
Child support is similar.
Because child support like I was explaining before is based upon how the childless was supported before the change in the relationship. If there is going to be a change, 1 is 1 person is going to be a husband or wife. It's going to leave mount that is going to lead, right?
So, that is already a step.
Then we get into Alamo. Well, it costs money. Let's say that let's say the dad is the one bringing the money in a mom stays home with kids, get a simpler version.
Well, if one person leaves, let's say the mom leaves, she had the abuse of some resources she needs to, she needs the continued use of resources, and maybe it's going to be a little bit more expensive.
It's gonna cost a bit more so that she can sustain herself per period of time. There has to be an arrangement. And again, we can settle this matter in already in a postdoctoral grant.
Let's say we don't really.
Let's say, we kinda settled matter, but we leave it a little open, because we're not sure. We don't really want to talk about that situation, but we're just kinda barely touching the surface. But we, we kinda put something in writing and we've got a framework there.
What we want to then do is bring in not the court we want to bring in where there's dispute. It hasn't been resolved or cannot be, It has been determined. Right, and an agreement ahead of time.
We want to be able to bring in an arbitration facilitator and arbitrator.
Not the judge.
We want to bring in what's called binding arbitration.
The reason I say it's fine is because if there's a dispute between the Parties Pleasant, Wyeth girlfriend, boyfriend, mom or Dad. There's a dispute.
That has to be brought before an arbitrator. It's a private forum. It's private.
It's not in the court.
It cannot be in the court if you write this a certain way.
This is where all the power of y'all.
We bahrainian Pre-nuptial agreement and allow only dispute resolution through private arbitration.
If anybody tries to go to the Court with the exception of a claim for abuse or neglect, which we can get around that if there isn't, there's no other time if anyone from either party tries to go to the court to gain this incentive, to get this reward, to take advantage of the subsidy for separation, like when we talk about it, again, this discussion.
Like I mentioned, the judge will have no choice, but to defer the matter back to arbitration, you cannot be involved in the Mayor's case.
It has to go back to arbitration. You hire a private arbitrator, according to the contract.
And you can make that arbitration, the result of the arbitration when it's finished.
You can make that subject to appellate review in different ways so you can make it started to review in the court, which is fine. Because it's not the chalkboard.
We have a big problem with the chalkboard, OK? We don't have a problem with the appeals score.
We can also we don't have to go to the GL score on a Post National Agreement that's been arbitrary. We can actually set up an appeals panel of arbitrators, three arbitrator's, let's say, which constitutes the Appeals Panel.
And we can bring the whole manner to the Appeals Panel after arbitration, according to the agreement. And we can even do what's called a total review from beginning to end, what's called a de novo review.
So we can have an appellate, appellate review panel of a post snapshot arbitration.
The termination award, We can have that reviewed in an appeals forum, under standards, that we agree on one of the standards being de novo. Meaning, let's, let's look at all the facts from the beginning. Let's not look at what one little air division of the whole arrangement.
See how powerful this is.
OK, so there are other things in here, I'm not going to get into all the detail, but I wanted to share this with you, OK.
This is another way to manage risk. I mean, I know I just destroyed the Romantic aspect of Marriage, OK?
And the boyfriend, girlfriend live in relationship Yeah.
It's This is just, you know, a rational way to look at things, but look, when it comes down to it, if, if you want to, if you want to bring in the law and things of that nature, it's not romance.
So realize that there is that aspect to any relationship. So how do you establish an agreement like this?
You can do part by part. I've had situations where at the very minimum, I couldn't do much until I got the other party to agree to simply binding arbitration.
OK, once I got out of the court, and we actually had a fire The attorneys, OK?
Sometimes you have to fire your targets, If I can do that with one party, at least one party, kinda derails their game. So you have, again, like, I get into that too much, but we also want to get away from the attorneys game. We wanted to get away from the trial court. Want to get a family court. We want to get away from the says, the subsidies that are being awarded to someone, wrecking family, or wrecking a marriage.
Now, sometimes it's called form.
I'm not saying that, you know, every time it's not, but for the most part, marriage should be preserved or relationships should be, you know, that are intended to be, long term should be preserved.
My intent here is to preserve it and to eliminate the state's ability to get and interfere with it.
No matter what I'm writing here, I'm never going to prevent the state from getting a ball where there's a criminal matter, OK. No problem, I'm never going to prevent the state from investigating abuse or neglect, it should.
But having this agreement gives you a leg up.
It gives you a lot of power, a lot of power because it defines what the court can do and cannot do. Mostly, it's going to be what the court cannot do.
When there's an abuse and neglect, the court has what's called a compelling interest. The state has a compelling interest and that will only take a certain time. In other words, you're going to end up with an evidentiary hearing Alec or now that should end the matter.
And by the way, the results of the evidentiary hearing that were to take place are subject to a pilot review. So that's kind of interesting because that can be, that can branch off this agreement and melons prejudice.
Just don't be involved in a decent work.
Now, if someone wants to make a false accusation, I really feel sorry for that person.
Anyways, with that said, I just wanted to share that with you. If you guys want to talk about this, please schedule time with me or join the join the cause. We'll have call on Thursday Evenings. that is announced.
In fact, the invitation is, is in the case of coins dot com.
It's at the bottom of the website, first page, and also on my telegram group called Async coins. It's pinned at the top.
So, if you click on that link on Thursdays at seven eastern time, Florida time, you can join and talk about this. Now, Sometimes I just talk about this, sometimes. I talk about other subjects, if you want to know in advance, If you want me to talk about this subject, we can certainly do that. If you want to book a time when you go to ...
dot com, use my calendar, book a time, and I will talk about this. I will look at your situation.
I can talk to yourself enough with the other party, however you want, And I can suggest a possible agreement, and I have very proven strategies to establish the agreement, so that it cannot be broken.
Are you attorneys who don't respect agreements, you don't respect the law.
If you don't respect agreement's, you don't respect the law, but I'm gonna tell you this, the lawyers out there that you can break my agreement, you won't be able to.
You won't be able to and I know you're thinking yourself, anybody get broken? And that's where you're wrong because you don't respect the law, that just shows that you don't respect the law.
so the agreement that I have here will guaranteed it will prevent the state getting involved and abusing either part it'll, it'll obliterate, it will remove all all the incentives and rewards for what's going on right now.
And I'm not going to tell you the exact secret of how I do it, but it's nothing new, It's just something that's not practiced. Because if you look around and you talk to lawyers, are always going to tell you that, oh, yeah, there's always a way to break it.
Yeah, because that's what their business is. That's what they do. They practice a tournament.
They want to break agreements so that they can get billable hours. It sounds very basic. Sounds very mundane, but that's what they do.
And this, this is to everyone's detriment.
So, what my purpose here is to not only avoid that situation, I'm going to avoid cost of litigation because that's what I do anyways. I mean, I do that for businesses.
I avoid costs litigation, this situation here, You're not going to need a lawyer, in fact, you're not going to want to. You're not going to want a lawyer.
Sorry, lawyers.
This is not when my clients have this agreement in place.
We don't need you, we don't.
So if that appeals to you, I hope it does.
Give me a call set, something up. I'd love to discuss it.
If you want, we can do a private recording and you can share it with your spouse or not, you can know, back at Rutgers.
Thanks so much. Appreciate your time.


1. John Jay’s talk, “U109 – Divorcing the State Pre/Post Nuptial for Couples & Families – Privacy Fight,” discusses avoiding state involvement in marital asset division and child custody issues.
2. He recognizes a trend where men avoid marriage to protect their assets from potential divorces, as women statistically initiate most separations.
3. Jay highlights that cohabitation and other non-marital relationships can also invite complicated asset divisions through state interference.
4. He proposes “Divorcing the State” through the creation of pre and post-nuptial agreements that function outside the state’s jurisdiction.
5. The concept of a “private membership association” is introduced, an exclusive relationship outside the purview of the state.
6. Jay suggests holding relationship property in a trust, benefiting the individuals involved and safeguarding it in the event of a separation or divorce.
7. He encourages detailed financial planning within these agreements, reducing potential disputes later.
8. Jay recommends creating child custody agreements in advance to protect children from state interference during separations.
9. He emphasizes customizing each agreement to fit individual couples’ unique situations and ensures meticulous detailing of all legal aspects.
10. By adopting these strategies, Jay suggests that couples can better manage relationship risks, divorce the state, and gain more control over their lives and assets.