He included a clause saying she had to lose all pregnancy weight within one year...or else.

By Samantha Lauriello
Updated February 19, 2019

As much as everyone wants to think of their spouse as their partner for life, we have to be realistic about how complicated marriage can get. That's why many people sign prenups, to keep things fair in the event of divorce. One would-be groom, however, didn't seem to get the fairness memo when it came time to draft a prenup with his wife-to-be. In fact, we're not sure he knows what the word means at all.

A woman recently sought advice on Reddit after she noticed some "odd clauses" in her fiancé's proposed prenup. One clause said she would get "compensation" for each child she has with him, meaning the more babies she pops out, the more cash she gets. There's also a clause that said if she cheats on him, she walks away with basically nothing.

But the most outrageous clause of them all stipulated that she would have to lose at least 30 pounds of any pregnancy weight she gains within one year of the child's birth. Uh, did he seriously just body shame his wife in their prenup?

All women are different, but an expecting mother with a normal BMI should gain between 25 and 35 pounds during pregnancy, according to guidelines issued by the Institute of Medicine. While some of the weight is lost in the delivery room, shedding the rest can take awhile. A postpartum mom needs calories and energy to heal, take care of her new baby, and breastfeed, if she chooses to do so.

The woman said that she has nothing against prenups in general. "My fiance is a neurosurgeon and has been wonderfully successful in his field, so when he asked me for a prenup I wasn't too surprised," she wrote, "and I am all for them actually." But when she saw all of these things in writing, she knew something wasn't right.

To make matters worse, the lawyer who laid out the details of the prenup for her is also her fiancé's father. "I haven't signed yet and would like to get insight from someone other than my future father-in-law as I feel he may mislead me if his son were to benefit from it," she wrote.

First of all, thank the heavens she hasn't signed yet. And second of all, girl, who needs a prenup when there's still time to call off the engagement?

Reddit users expressed some strong feelings about this situation in the comments section. Many pointed out that it's bad practice for her fiancé's father to be representing both his son and his future daughter-in-law, and others said she should heed the red flags and just end things. Others made the case that a prenup needs to protect both parties, not just the husband.

"Lawyer up. You cannot afford not to," one user wrote. "Also, you know...don't marry this guy."

Unfortunately, the moderators of the Reddit channel removed any comments that gave relationship advice instead of legal advice (as per the channel's rules). But thankfully, the comments did help this woman see the situation more clearly and consider hiring a lawyer to negotiate a fairer deal. "Some of the clauses are too beneficial to one party," she later wrote.

Ladies, never be afraid to ask for what's fair. A marriage is an equal partnership, and even if your husband does have more money than you, that doesn't make you less equal in any way. And heed the signs: If a prenup has some douchy clauses in them, ask yourself if your intended spouse might be a d-bag too.