Woman Plans Platonic Marriage to Best Friend of 20 Years

A woman who owns her home outright and has no children or other dependents is asking whether she should leave her property to her platonic best friend of 20 years — a man she is preparing to marry in a non-romantic union. The unusual arrangement raises pointed questions about estate planning, property rights, and the legal weight a marriage certificate carries regardless of romantic intent.

Platonic marriages, while uncommon, are fully legal in the United States and grant both spouses the same rights as any other married couple — including inheritance claims, spousal benefits, and, critically, rights to jointly or individually held property. That legal parity means the decision to marry someone, even without romantic involvement, is never purely symbolic and demands careful financial planning.

Read more Should You Decline an Inheritance Before It's Offered? →

Estate attorneys generally advise anyone entering a non-traditional marriage to treat the arrangement with the same rigor as a conventional one. That means drafting or updating a will, considering a prenuptial agreement, and explicitly naming beneficiaries on financial accounts and insurance policies. Without such documents, state intestacy laws could override a person's actual wishes — handing assets to a spouse the deceased may not have intended to fully provide for.

For a homeowner with no heirs, the stakes are particularly high. Leaving a paid-off property to a platonic partner could be a meaningful act of care, but it could also expose the surviving spouse to estate taxes, maintenance costs, or complications if either party's circumstances change before death. A trust arrangement or a transfer-on-death deed may offer more flexibility than a simple bequest through a will.

Financial planners stress that good intentions are not a substitute for binding legal documents — especially in marriages that fall outside conventional expectations. Continue reading at MarketWatch.com