Wife Shares Her Controversial Marriage Contract — Including a Three-Month Suspension Clause

Marriage, in and of itself, is basically a contract. You’re agreeing to commit to one person, devoting your time, energy, and love to them. It’s a big deal — huge, even. So adding anything else on top of that almost feels like overkill … unless you’re someone like Kim Kardashian, who just so happens to be a billionaire with a few assets worth protecting. In that case? Yeah, a prenup makes sense.

But beyond that, what more could anyone ask for beyond “till death do us part?” Well, apparently this couple found a few more things to add, taking their marriage agreement to a whole new level. TikTok user Elle (@ellivalife) gave folks a glimpse at some of the controversial clauses baked into her marriage agreement (that both she and her husband agreed to!) and it’s, well, sort of concerning. Here’s a look at their wild terms.

First up is the Spousal Political Alignment Clause (yep, that’s what it’s called). Under this, both Elle and her husband cannot change their ideological or political beliefs mid-marriage. So however you entered the marriage, you’re stuck with it. If either was a Christian Republican (just a wild guess), well, they'd have to stay a Christian Republican for the duration of the marriage, possibly until death if they stay together forever.

So I guess they don’t believe in evolving? Because anyone knows, as time goes on, our thoughts, feelings, and beliefs change, and sometimes that’s reflected in our religious and political affiliations. Oh, but wait, it gets better!

The next wild clause this couple is “bound” to is the Income Parity Requirement, which states: “Our incomes must have a 50/50 ratio to prevent financial power imbalance.” In other words, they’re expected to earn the same amount of money throughout their marriage.

While the idea of both partners pulling their weight might sound fair on the surface, it’s the principle behind it — financial power imbalance — that I (and presumably many others) am taking issue with.

Does this mean Elle or her husband wouldn’t be OK if one of them starts earning more? Or maybe they came up with this clause to keep one person from pulling the “I make more money” card in arguments. If that’s the case, maybe this one gets a soft pass. But still, what happens if someone gets sick, pregnant, or simply can’t work for an extended period of time? How does that work?

I’ll leave that one alone for now and shift focus to this next clause, which is kind of strange, considering this isn’t typically how marriage works.

Under the couple’s Marriage Expiration Date clause, their “marriage expires every seven years unless both partners want to reapply … since we got married young.”

While traditional marriage usually comes with the intention of forever, maybe Gen Z is putting their own twist on it, especially with so many young couples out there who got married early and are now just trying to hold their end of the bargain.

Still ... strange.

If you’re still with me … I’ve got a few more to share.

So Elle and her man also have a Marriage Suspension agreement, where “either partner can request a temporary three-month marriage suspension, but only once every three years.”

Smells like a hall pass to step outside the marriage if you ask me, but hey, to each their own. And now, here's a look at the rest.

Additionally, the couple has agreed to a Surveillance-Based Relationship, so yep, they monitor each other’s location and computer/phone activity. Oh, and they also “legally forbid” remarriage if they ever decide to divorce.

While some users were confused by this clause, many believe it means they can’t remarry each other, not that they’re banned from marrying anyone ever again. Either way, people are utterly shocked by these controversial marriage clauses.

Some are calling it toxic. Others are saying, flat-out, this isn’t marriage. While a few were convinced it had to be some sort of bait trap, several pointed out that the couple is from Utah … so maybe that explains some of it?