Is a prenuptial agreement in Serbia a cold “piece of paper” or a sensible plan for living together? The June 2015 online survey shows an ambivalent attitude: the largest share of respondents are neutral (35.64%), while positive views prevail overall (17.82% very positive + 24.75% mostly positive = 42.57%). Negative attitudes are a minority (7.92% mostly negative + 1.98% very negative = 9.90%), and a significant share have no opinion (11.88%). In other words, the agreement is not taboo—but it is not widely accepted as a “standard,” either.
Once we move into the details, it becomes clear why. Respondents see a prenuptial agreement primarily as a tool for what is most conflict-prone and sensitive: divorce and children. As many as 69.31% believe the agreement should regulate rights and obligations in the event of divorce “to a great extent,” with an additional 16.83% “mostly”—a total of 86.14% support for legally arranging divorce in advance. The pattern is similar regarding children: 60.40% say “to a great extent,” plus 16.83% “mostly” (77.23% in total). The message is clear: when the stakes are highest—custody, obligations, children’s security—citizens want clear rules.
The material side of marriage is the second major theme. Rights and obligations in acquiring property should be regulated “to a great extent” for 44.55%, and “mostly” for 30.69% (75.24% combined). This points to a growing awareness that marriage is not only about emotion, but also a joint economic project, in which ambiguity can be costly later on.
However, when the agreement approaches privacy, opinions split. On household work, the public is divided: a strong “yes” (27.72%) and “mostly” (15.84%) versus “not at all” (20.79%) and “a little” (9.90%). The split is even sharper around sexual life within marriage: 32.67% say “not at all,” while 23.76% support regulation “to a great extent.” Sexual life outside marriage is almost evenly stretched between “to a great extent” (28.71%) and “not at all” (27.72%), with a high “no opinion” (15.84%)—a sign of discomfort and moral dilemmas.
The least support goes to regulating interference by spouses’ parents: only 14.85% would regulate it “to a great extent,” while 20.79% say “not at all,” and the most common answer is “moderately” (30.69%). It is as if the message is: family matters—but the agreement should not become a tool for the “extended relatives.”
Who are the respondents? Women dominate: “wife” (29.70%) and “single woman” (15.84%), with a notable share of younger and middle generations: 34.65% are aged 26–34 and 25.74% are 35–44. Regionally, most are from Belgrade-centre (25.74%) and Bačka (21.78%). The majority are Serbs (65.35%) and Orthodox Christians (65.35%), with a noticeable share of atheists (14.85%) and those who identify as anti-nationalist (10.89%).
Conclusion: a prenuptial agreement is accepted when it protects children, property, and the “worst-case scenario,” but meets resistance when it enters intimacy, household dynamics, and moral norms. In Serbia in 2015, the agreement is more of a safety net than a handbook for love.
Methodological note: the survey was conducted online (28 June 2015) on a self-selected sample (N≈101). The results are not representative of Serbia’s population and reflect the views of participants at the time they completed the survey.