CALL me unromantic, a party pooper or a spoilsport, but there is no truth at all to the statement that "love conquers all".

As much as the little girl in me wants to believe so, it is naive to think that every love affair will end happily ever after.

Practicality and some amount of risk management are needed in every relationship because two people cannot live on pure love alone.

It is the amount he claimed to have contributed to the purchase of their shared condominium unit and car during the 5 1/2 years they were together.

But both the car and the apartment were under her name.

I don't know the details of the case beyond what have been reported in the papers. But if he thought they were going to get married anyway - and presumably did not see the need to add his name as part-owner of both possessions - Susilo was, in my opinion, naive.

Everyone owes it to himself - and his partner - to have some preparation for that possibility of a separation.

Of course, I'm not saying that pre-nuptial agreements, or in this case, "couple contracts", should be de rigueur, but to pretend that separation isn't an option shows over-optimism and a lack of common sense. Perhaps in some cases, arrogance and over-confidence too.

When I bought an apartment early last year with my boyfriend, now fiance, marriage was not on our minds.

Yes, we cared deeply for each other. The truth is, if he had proposed then, I would have said yes immediately.

Well, after he flashed the goods (read: diamond ring).

But as the case was, he wanted to invest some money in property and I wanted out of the rental market. I had been renting a three-room HDB unit for close to two years by then and was sick of paying close to $700 monthly, with no flat to my name at the end of the day.

Since Singapore does not legally recognise civil unions, we had a legally-binding agreement to sell off our apartment and divide whatever profit from it 50-50, should we break up.

Also, in case either one of us dies, the other would legally and automatically get the deceased's share - something that's not guaranteed if a couple aren't married.

Some friends thought I was being too practical and a few warned I was tempting fate by making such "doomsday" plans.

A married female pal even said I wasn't sincere. She said: "If you really love him and believe in your relationship, you won't need such insurance."

A fair point for some people, but I'm not the kind to take huge leaps of faith, not even with the love of my life.

Even in marriage, I'd rather err on the side of caution - although I don't believe in divorce.

Good thing is, there are established laws governing the splitting of assets in this case.

Besides, there are other aspects of life that I also feel we should take responsibility for. Things like organ donation, specific bequeaths upon one's death and the making of living wills - for deathbed considerations.

Grieving relatives, or traumatised spouses, should not be left wondering what an individual's choices would have been. And surely, you wouldn't want your nearest and dearest fighting over your assets.

Still, I'm not saying my way is the right way. Understandably, it may be too cut and dry for most couples.

All I'm saying is, if you don't wise up and take care of yourself, who will?

For more my paper stories click here.

Is this article useful to you?