I have in fact known women (even a couple of Traditional Catholics) to exploit domestic violence regulations and use the fact that the husband occasionally spanked unruly children as a weapon in divorce proceedings ... even when they spanked the children more than their husbands did.

And I have known of children who threaten to call the police on their parents when faced with prospective (just) corporal punishment.  This deters the parent who doesn't want to end up in jail or under the thumb of CPS.

Another reason for a prenup and to avoid the court system.

If you woud've read the quote more carefully, you'd see that there were not accusations of abuse UNTIL divorce proceedings were in process.  And i'm sure such accusations were passive and circuмstantial, with no evidence.

First, the abuse was used as a threat, not a direct accusation to police, and it was not spousal abuse but child abuse (i.e. spanking) that Ladislaus mentioned.

Second, a prenup would be desigend to PREVENT divorce proceedings so the threat of any abuse, especially if done through advice of an attorney, would've never have happened in the first place.  A prenup would say, (in theory):

"Except for church approved reasons, any divorce proceedings you initiate, which would be heinously and violently opposed to the will of God and the Church, would result in the following:

(here the details of the agreement would be listed)"

Signed:  Spouse A
Signed:  Spouse B

-- END OF PRENUP

Once the immoral party decides to go through with the divorce, there would be no divorce arguments or bickering or threats in court.  The goal of a prenup is that it's an "open and shut" case.  Both parties signed the agreement, and here is what the agreement says.  The court rules that the divorce is finalized and the spouses follow the rules of the prenup that they both signed.  There's no advice from an attorney, no arguments, no witnesses - because the prenup explains what happens if there's a divorce.  You sign the divorce papers and you leave court.  10 minutes and you're done. (Actually, you probably dont' even GO to court.  It's probably all handled at the lawyer's office of the god-forsaken spouse that destroyed the marriage).  A prenup, in theory, is a means to avoid court and public disclosures, which is why many wealthy and public figures use them, because they don't want their business plastered all over the newspapers.

The courts don't want to get involved in these things if they don't have to.  Any judge will see that a prenup is signed and they will say "ok, there's nothing for me to do.  This is a valid agreement and both parties must abide by its rules.  Sign the paperwork and i'll get on with the next case.  Good day."

If there turns out to be a squabble over someone not fulfilling the prenup, then that is a civil case and it would be handled at a later date, long after the divorce is settled.  If the wife wants to accuse the husband of child abuse or something, she'd have to call CPS; it would not be part of divorce court.

An accusation of spousal abuse (which Ladislaus never mentioned) might put the husband in jail for a few nights but unless it is proven in a court of law, which would involve witnesses and testimony, then the prenup would still be in force.