Inheritance Drama: You Got Any? Stories Wanted.

[BabyShark]

It's also an argument for keeping your will updated as life events happen.  It's possible that the will was never updated when the children died so state law kicked in and said per stirpes for the grandkids rather than per capita.  The will can circumvent that but it has to be written in. 

Either way, @SheWhoWalksAtLunch, you're my hero for that.

[merula]

When my great-grandma died, she had been predeceased by one child and one grandchild, while leaving others in each of those generations living. (Three children, call them 1, 2 and 3. 1 had children 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D. 1D was the predeceased one, who left 1Di and 1Dii.)

Per stipes was therefore the only way to distribute with impacting the original "one third to each child" principle.

2 and 3 each got 1/3. 1A, 1B and 1C each got 1/12. 1Di and 1Dii each got 1/24.

Me? I'm 1Bi. I got nothing, but I have my mom, which neither she, her siblings nor niece/nephew can say.

[K-ice]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

Ooohh. I get to google some Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_stirpes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

"Primogeniture (English: /praɪməˈdʒɛnɪtʃər/) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate son to inherit his parent's entire or main estate."

Primogeniture is your preference? Really?  I can see making the oldest child the executor (if they were responsible) but giving them everything?  The way you said "put them in charge" is OK with me but it is hard to trust anyone would split things fairly.


Per capita sounds like a good idea to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita

I don't consider myself any more or less deserving than any of my cousins. 

My one grandparent clearly listed and named their grandchildren who then all received the same generous gift. In that list even non-blood descendants were named to make things clear. 

However, a gift is a bit different than a % of the remaining estate.

Has anyone ever seen gifts of a certain amount upto a certain percentage?   I have heard of cases where the gifts were so generous that there was almost nothing left for the heirs.

[DadJokes]

First of all, @SheWhoWalksAtLunch , that was awesome!    Well done!

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

But if we wanted to talk fair, they gave each of their kids the same amount of money.  That's fair.
If their kids wanted to have a different number of kids, that's the kid's business, not the grandparents.

The grandkids have advantages and disadvantages from having more or fewer siblings.   This particular distribution falls into the disadvantage category for those with more siblings.   Having more siblings to help you out when things go wrong in life is an advantage.   Perhaps you could view the larger amount to those with fewer siblings as compensation for that... :)

Agreed. Receiving even 1% is usually more than those receiving the inheritance have earned. It's entirely the prerogative of those bequeathing the inheritance to decide what to do with their money. If they chose to give 99% to one grandchild and make the others split the last 1%, they certainly have the right to do so. And I'm sure if they saw that grandson behaving that way, they might have written him out altogether.

[geekette]

My DH got a "per stirpes" inheritance a couple years ago, and it was interesting to see how things got divided since it went back pretty far.

DH's grandmother's sister and her husband left their estate in some sort of trust to their one child, who had suffered brain damage at birth. I think this was back in the 70's.  Their son, despite his disability, had a great life in their small town, but when he died in his 80's in 2016, the remaining estate was divvied in two, then that portion was divvied equally between each parent's many siblings (all of whom were long gone by then), then further divided amongst their progeny and so on.  DH ended up with a little over 1% (he didn't expect any). 

[talltexan]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

Ooohh. I get to google some Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_stirpes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

"Primogeniture (English: /praɪməˈdʒɛnɪtʃər/) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate son to inherit his parent's entire or main estate."

Primogeniture is your preference? Really?  I can see making the oldest child the executor (if they were responsible) but giving them everything?  The way you said "put them in charge" is OK with me but it is hard to trust anyone would split things fairly.


Per capita sounds like a good idea to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita

I don't consider myself any more or less deserving than any of my cousins. 

My one grandparent clearly listed and named their grandchildren who then all received the same generous gift. In that list even non-blood descendants were named to make things clear. 

However, a gift is a bit different than a % of the remaining estate.

Has anyone ever seen gifts of a certain amount upto a certain percentage?   I have heard of cases where the gifts were so generous that there was almost nothing left for the heirs.

Disclaimer: I cannot imagine actually doing Primogeniture: the other night, my two kids helped me pick up the play room, and I paid my daughter--who did it with energy and vigor--$1, while my son--who did it with reluctance--received $.50. The latter thought it was so unfair.
 

[Sibley]

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

Um, I did... I have a trust for my cat if I died. The cat would be quite well taken care of.

[Gail2000]

Before my grandmother died a couple of years ago, my aunt had power of attorney.

My mother only told me last night that two of my cousins hit up my aunt (their mother) to "dip into" my grandmother's estate (which was funding her aged care) for them.

Thank god my aunt had the balls to tell them where to go.

Thank goodness for stories like this to restore faith in one out of three members of humanity.

Fixed that for you...

You’re right when you’re right. I’m not sure what came over me to produce that optimism. It won’t likely happen again.

[Gail2000]

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

Um, I did... I have a trust for my cat if I died. The cat would be quite well taken care of.

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty reliving considering they , relieved balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

[ender]

You’re right when you’re right. I’m not sure what came over me to produce that optimism. It won’t likely happen again.

Guess it depends on how low your expectations are on most folks ;-)

Maybe 1/3 is better than your feeling of society overall  ;-)

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

Um, I did... I have a trust for my cat if I died. The cat would be quite well taken care of.

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty reliving considering they , relieved balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

Well, if the cat was alive, I understand that completely. I knew one woman who left orders that her loyal dog be euthanized after she passed away because she didn't trust anyone to give the dog a good home. Her executor had the dog... executed.

[shelivesthedream]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

Ooohh. I get to google some Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_stirpes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

"Primogeniture (English: /praɪməˈdʒɛnɪtʃər/) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate son to inherit his parent's entire or main estate."

Primogeniture is your preference? Really?  I can see making the oldest child the executor (if they were responsible) but giving them everything?  The way you said "put them in charge" is OK with me but it is hard to trust anyone would split things fairly.


Per capita sounds like a good idea to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita

I don't consider myself any more or less deserving than any of my cousins. 

My one grandparent clearly listed and named their grandchildren who then all received the same generous gift. In that list even non-blood descendants were named to make things clear. 

However, a gift is a bit different than a % of the remaining estate.

Has anyone ever seen gifts of a certain amount upto a certain percentage?   I have heard of cases where the gifts were so generous that there was almost nothing left for the heirs.

Yup. My grandmother's will say £X each to me and my brother and then the rest divided equally between my childless uncle and my mother. If she dies today we will get about 0.25% each. If she needs long term care, that could end up being the whole estate! My mother tried to dissuade her from naming a fixed sum and go for a percentage instead but she wouldn't.

[K-ice]

Disclaimer: I cannot imagine actually doing Primogeniture: the other night, my two kids helped me pick up the play room, and I paid my daughter--who did it with energy and vigor--$1, while my son--who did it with reluctance--received $.50. The latter thought it was so unfair.

Fair enough ;)

[Sugaree]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

....

I do wonder about the fairness of these next generation distributions.  But if the Grandparents were really worried about it they would split it 20% to each Grandchild.  Didn't all the cousins know how things would be split before the grandparents passed?

I suppose that argument could be made since the grandparents outlived their children.  Maybe.  In a case where at least one child is still alive, I do feel like it should be split equally between the children, regardless of the number of children they have.  What happens if one child decides not to have children?  Are they just cut out?

[talltexan]

I know Dave Ramsey gets a lot of hate on this website, but I think he's got the legacy stuff pretty much nailed. Some thoughts:

• Don't surprise people: while you're still alive, tell that no-good, deadbeat son why you're leaving his share to the humane society
• Have periodic (he does annual, I doubt most of us have complex businesses we're leaving behind) readings of the will with the family
• If you get remarried late in life, it's completely reasonable to use pre-nup's, etc., to work out financial arrangements for step-children
• Approach the wealth we accumulate as something we are looking after to preserve it for the future, a duty to wise management rather than as something you're entitled to drain
• Finally, if you are an heir, be thinking how to use what you receive to unite the family, not divide it

[merula]

Disclaimer: I cannot imagine actually doing Primogeniture: the other night, my two kids helped me pick up the play room, and I paid my daughter--who did it with energy and vigor--$1, while my son--who did it with reluctance--received $.50. The latter thought it was so unfair.

Fair enough ;)

Primogeniture doesn't necessarily mean sons over daughters. Male-preference primogeniture does, but you can retain primogeniture without the male preference. See most continental European monarchies for reference.

[BeanCounter]

I've been kind of reading this thread on and off for awhile. I'll tell my story-
I am an only child my, father died when I was 17. His parents were both still living. His parents and his four siblings (and my father when he was living) all ran a large corporate farm. A million or so in crop revenue and a couple million in land and equipment. It's a corporate farm so there is stock etc.
When my father's first parent (my grandfather) died I was called to come see the attorney to sign the paperwork. I was very surprised to find out that after my father died they cut me out of the will completely. And if you know anything about wills you will know that to cut someone out you have to write a paragraph that specifically states what that person WILL NOT get. which was everything. The reason stated was that my uncles persuaded my grandparents to change this because "none of the other grandchildren were getting anything". Nevermind that my cousins will through their parents inherit their portion of the estate. So at some point they will get something, and I got nothing despite the fact that my father was a full contributor to the success of the business when he was alive.
Anyway, I didn't contest anything I let it go. I know my Uncles are just trying to protect their own business interests and I forgive them for that. I'd rather have the family than the money. And I assumed that this was a one off case.
BUT fast forward 20 years, my mother dies last year. She was preceded in death by her mother who had a trust that gives my still living grandfather living rights to the money. My mother was a named beneficiary on the trust and then it's per stirpes. So it goes to me. My mother was getting a 1/3 distribution from the trust every year. 1/3 to her, 1/3 to her brother and 1/3 to her dad (my grandfather). I thought that I would start getting a 1/3 distribution after my mother passed. NOPE. My grandfather didn't like that my cousin wasn't getting any money. So he changed the distribution to be split in fourths- me, my cousin, my uncle, and my grandfather. Because it's my grandmother's trust I will still get half of the principle when he passes (split between my uncle and I), he cannot change that. But he can change his trust. Which if your talking about what's "fair", it really isn't fair because if we split his estate in thirds, and my uncle and cousin each get a third then my cousin will actually have 2/3 by lineage.
All this story to say that when parents out live their children the distribution often gets really complicated and what makes sense mathematically may not make sense emotionally.

[K-ice]

Bean C I am sorry that has happened to you.

Primogeniture is not fair monetarily but I understand it is sometimes the best, and only, way to keep family businesses and farms whole.

It may even be the best way to keep a cottage or vacation home in the family.

I know a daughter that was completely left out of the family business and therefore any inheritance. It included  a multi million property fortune that neither could have paid the other sibling 1/2 for.  Yet it would have been nice for her to still be a silent partner and receive a small dividend every year or be guaranteed something if some of the property was sold.

I really like this tip:

• Finally, if you are an heir, be thinking how to use what you receive to unite the family, not divide it

[BeanCounter]

Bean C I am sorry that has happened to you.

Primogeniture is not fair monetarily but I understand it is sometimes the best, and only, way to keep family businesses and farms whole.

It may even be the best way to keep a cottage or vacation home in the family.

I know a daughter that was completely left out of the family business and therefore any inheritance. It included  a multi million property fortune that neither could have paid the other sibling 1/2 for.  Yet it would have been nice for her to still be a silent partner and receive a small dividend every year or be guaranteed something if some of the property was sold.

I really like this tip:

• Finally, if you are an heir, be thinking how to use what you receive to unite the family, not divide it

Thanks. Writing someone out of a will, even if it makes business sense, is ugly. It definitely hurt. I felt like a bastard child. I think that this did push my desire to become FI. A sort of fuck you. I'm rich without you anyway.
I will say this-
I am very happy with my choice to put family over money. I enjoy seeing my family for holiday's and vacations more than I would ever enjoy another annual distribution.
My Uncles did do one thing nice for me. They bought a bunch of different vacation properties throughout the country and they give me and my children the right to use them whenever I want. So that's something.

[talltexan]

BeanCounter-

It just doesn't seem possible to read the sum of what you've written here and think that your uncles are anything approaching decent human beings.

[marion10]

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

[BeanCounter]

BeanCounter-

It just doesn't seem possible to read the sum of what you've written here and think that your uncles are anything approaching decent human beings.

Here is the way I choose to see it- My Uncles got bad legal advice by a lazy attorney. I believe that they wanted to protect the farm which is their only livelihood. I was in college when the will was changed and I think they were afraid that if I received 1/5 I might, in my own need, ask for my portion and they would have to sell property to buy me out.
Could they have constructed a will that would have given me 1/5 of revenue or something for life and rights to the property if the farm corp were to ever be dissolved? Yes. A good attorney would have figured that out. Or at least that's how I choose to look at it. I can also see where my Uncles being the ones that run the place wouldn't want to cut their own income for me.
None of it is fair really.

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

I'm quite sure that I could have contested the will, especially since it was signed after my grandfather had a stroke. I'm sure I could have argued that he was not able to make a decision like that at that time. But I would have been left with lots of money and no family. Is that worth it?
In the end I have plenty of money, and my uncles will have to live with the knowledge that they left their brother's (the war hero who died from agent orange) only child out to figure it out on her own. Maybe there is a possibility they will rethink their choices and leave something to my kids? Probably not.
Am I still angry and bitter? Only when I let myself think about it. ;)

[Villanelle]

This thread makes me grateful I don't have children!  Most of our estate will go to charity.  Siblings (I have one and DH has 1) will receive a set dollar amount, with the rest going out to do philanthropic work.   I suspect one sibling (also the executor) will be pleased with whatever she receives, and the other would be displeased no matter how much he were to receive unless it was at least 50% of the estate.  Thankfully, I don't much care, though I do feel somewhat pained for the executor that she will have to deal with that.  She's a badass who has no problem putting people in their place or being the bad guy when necessary and since this other person is really no relation so her, I don't see the fall out making any long term waves.

This all does make me think that maybe the will should state a higher than standard % to her for doing her executor duties! 

I'm also grateful that my parents have been very up front with us about who gets what (50/50 split among siblings), where every thing is located, and other details of the estate, down to a few specific sentimental items I want and things of that nature.  I think my sister will be entirely reasonable, and it helps that while anything we will receive will be a wonderful boon, neither of us are desperate for it or counting on it. 

[ysette9]

I admire the peace you have made with your situation. That shows a lot of maturity

[Captain FIRE]

In the end I have plenty of money, and my uncles will have to live with the knowledge that they left their brother's (the war hero who died from agent orange) only child out to figure it out on her own. Maybe there is a possibility they will rethink their choices and leave something to my kids? Probably not.
Am I still angry and bitter? Only when I let myself think about it. ;)

Have you ever asked them to do so? 

Not in a confrontational way, but in a polite, one time request of "you can make this right if you choose".  I mean, we're told you need to ask for raises at jobs or the company has limited incentive to do much for you.  Same thing here.  If you keep silent they 1) likely managed to forget about it, and 2) figure you don't care at all.  You obviously can communicate it very softly - understanding why they did it, such the desire to keep the farm going and not be split up, recognizing that your father wasn't contributing any longer to working of it - but also gently noting that as it stands, you have lost both your father at an early age and any emotional/supportive benefits he might have provided, and any family legacy he might have otherwise received if he had lived longer.

(If it were me, I'd put it in writing and copy my cousins so that they know too.  Who knows, if the uncles don't fix it maybe the cousins will.  But I get that even asking the uncles may be more aggressive already than it sounds like you're willing to do and rock the boat.)

[mm1970]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

I don't think it's weird really.

By the time my grandfather's estate/ trust was settled (when his second wife died), it was really wonky.  She was 98.  I was 46.  By then:
- two of his 4 daughters had died.  So their 1/4 (each) got split among their children.  They each had 3 children.  So, those 6 grandchildren got 1/12 a piece.
- one his daughters was alive, she got her 1/4
- the fourth was actually a DIL.  His will left her 1/8, and left the other 1/8 to her children.  She had 6 children.  But one of them died.  So each of her children, instead of getting 1/24, got 1/20.

Nothing wrong with wonky.  He wanted to leave 1/4 to each of his daughters and the family of his son, who died relatively young.

[honeybbq]

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

Why would you disinherit your own minor children??

[Psychstache]

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

Why would you disinherit your own minor children??

Given that the person committed suicide, I would imagine they had some distorted, irrational thinking going on.

[ABC123]

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

Wait, is that legal?  A parent with a minor child can legally give her entire estate away, no legal requirement to financially care for her child?  Seems like there should be something that requires at least part of the estate to be put in some sort of account or trust to be used for the care of the child.

[Goldielocks]

ABC123   ... I think that is why the portion regarding the minor child was overtured upon appeal....   A parent can not absolve their responsibility for a minor dependent child by fully and intentionally disinheriting them.  If there are assets, they need to be used to meet the dependents' minimum needs first, and the remainder can be distributed as directed.

[BeanCounter]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

I don't think it's weird really.

By the time my grandfather's estate/ trust was settled (when his second wife died), it was really wonky.  She was 98.  I was 46.  By then:
- two of his 4 daughters had died.  So their 1/4 (each) got split among their children.  They each had 3 children.  So, those 6 grandchildren got 1/12 a piece.
- one his daughters was alive, she got her 1/4
- the fourth was actually a DIL.  His will left her 1/8, and left the other 1/8 to her children.  She had 6 children.  But one of them died.  So each of her children, instead of getting 1/24, got 1/20.

Nothing wrong with wonky.  He wanted to leave 1/4 to each of his daughters and the family of his son, who died relatively young.

I think my situation is a great example of how it becomes wonky.
Trying not to over share too much here. Because my mother died young, it is likely that if my grandfather doesn't change anything I will (at a fairly young age) inherit a couple million. My uncle would get the same. My only cousin (my uncle's child) will get nothing until his father passes. So my life changes, my cousin's doesn't.

On my dad's side, with the farm that's just a lot more complicated. But again I think they had a hard time with the notion that they would have been paying me an income on money they made and their kids would have gotten nothing. And they didn't want to buy me out. So the simplest thing, however painful was to cut me out.

[BeanCounter]

In the end I have plenty of money, and my uncles will have to live with the knowledge that they left their brother's (the war hero who died from agent orange) only child out to figure it out on her own. Maybe there is a possibility they will rethink their choices and leave something to my kids? Probably not.
Am I still angry and bitter? Only when I let myself think about it. ;)

Have you ever asked them to do so? 

Not in a confrontational way, but in a polite, one time request of "you can make this right if you choose".  I mean, we're told you need to ask for raises at jobs or the company has limited incentive to do much for you.  Same thing here.  If you keep silent they 1) likely managed to forget about it, and 2) figure you don't care at all.  You obviously can communicate it very softly - understanding why they did it, such the desire to keep the farm going and not be split up, recognizing that your father wasn't contributing any longer to working of it - but also gently noting that as it stands, you have lost both your father at an early age and any emotional/supportive benefits he might have provided, and any family legacy he might have otherwise received if he had lived longer.

(If it were me, I'd put it in writing and copy my cousins so that they know too.  Who knows, if the uncles don't fix it maybe the cousins will.  But I get that even asking the uncles may be more aggressive already than it sounds like you're willing to do and rock the boat.)

Before my mother died, she did. She told them she didn't think it was right, and it was a dishonor to their brother.
I'm sure they weren't too worried about it because they know that my mother's family was well to do.
I would only ask for something to change if I though my children had an interest in farming. Or if myself or my kids needed a place to live, I would ask to have the right to live in one of the homes on the property.
I don't see the point in asking for anything I don't need.
Is it fair? Probably not. Life isn't fair, but it's still beautiful.

[Goldielocks]

May parents are approaching 80 and have quite a substantial retirement portfolio.   One that would be hard to spend down even if they pay for high quality long term care.

They may choose to bypass my sister and I and give all their money to the grandkids, plus a could of charities.   I could very, very, very much use that money (but not desparate because I could also just un-FIRE).    I feel weird about my feelings on it.. Not my money and all of that, but also, Dad himself inherited the equivalent of $120k at age 40... which he admits was a huge help to him at that time.    I truly think the reason may be that my sister's husband is very well compensated exec and they obviously don't need money, and my parents wanted to always be fair and equal with us, and they don't want to give sis more money that she doesn't need.

On the one hand, i am delighted to have an excellent personal relationship with them.  On the other hand, I have a lump of <<feelings>> about the money side which I just look away from.   

Does that happen to anyone else?  That not-entirely complementary <<feelings>> about inheritance arise despite everything being great otherwise?   

[cloudsail]

May parents are approaching 80 and have quite a substantial retirement portfolio.   One that would be hard to spend down even if they pay for high quality long term care.

They may choose to bypass my sister and I and give all their money to the grandkids, plus a could of charities.   I could very, very, very much use that money (but not desparate because I could also just un-FIRE).    I feel weird about my feelings on it.. Not my money and all of that, but also, Dad himself inherited the equivalent of $120k at age 40... which he admits was a huge help to him at that time.    I truly think the reason may be that my sister's husband is very well compensated exec and they obviously don't need money, and my parents wanted to always be fair and equal with us, and they don't want to give sis more money that she doesn't need.

On the one hand, i am delighted to have an excellent personal relationship with them.  On the other hand, I have a lump of <<feelings>> about the money side which I just look away from.   

Does that happen to anyone else?  That not-entirely complementary <<feelings>> about inheritance arise despite everything being great otherwise?   

Oh yes. I wrote earlier in this thread about our inheritance story when DH's mother passed away. Before she died she stated that she wanted DH's older brother to have the house and give us half its original purchase price (the house has since appreciated). It is a substantial amount. For various reasons, we only got less than half of that money. Everyone is on great terms, I just try to forget the original wishes of my mother in law, and the fact that DH's brother is now living in a very HCOL city without a mortgage.

[marion10]

For the awful suicide story- yes it was illegal to disinherit the minor child (I assume this was a do it yourself will)- the will was left with the body. There obviously was some disordered thinking going on.

[Dicey]

For the awful suicide story- yes it was illegal to disinherit the minor child (I assume this was a do it yourself will)- the will was left with the body. There obviously was some disordered thinking going on.
[/quote
Oh, so sad for that family. The repercussions of her actions will never end for them. Good for the ex for stepping up for the kids.

[Gail2000]

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty relieving considering they released balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

Well, if the cat was alive, I understand that completely. I knew one woman who left orders that her loyal dog be euthanized after she passed away because she didn't trust anyone to give the dog a good home. Her executor had the dog... executed.

That evokes nature vs nurture debate in my mind.

[sherr]

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty relieving considering they released balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

Well, if the cat was alive, I understand that completely. I knew one woman who left orders that her loyal dog be euthanized after she passed away because she didn't trust anyone to give the dog a good home. Her executor had the dog... executed.

That evokes nature vs nurture debate in my mind.

I think it was just a pun. I'm sure the executor had the dog peacefully euthanized at a vet.

I'm generally all about being a faithful executor and following the deceased's wishes to the letter, but this is where I personally would draw the line. I would consider this an immoral request, refuse, and fight it legally tooth and nail if anyone objected. Dogs obviously are not close to humans in the sanctity of life, but intentionally killing a loving, loyal companion for no reason other than postmortem jealousy? That's just evil.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty relieving considering they released balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

Well, if the cat was alive, I understand that completely. I knew one woman who left orders that her loyal dog be euthanized after she passed away because she didn't trust anyone to give the dog a good home. Her executor had the dog... executed.

That evokes nature vs nurture debate in my mind.

I think it was just a pun. I'm sure the executor had the dog peacefully euthanized at a vet.

I'm generally all about being a faithful executor and following the deceased's wishes to the letter, but this is where I personally would draw the line. I would consider this an immoral request, refuse, and fight it legally tooth and nail if anyone objected. Dogs obviously are not close to humans in the sanctity of life, but intentionally killing a loving, loyal companion for no reason other than postmortem jealousy? That's just evil.

Agreed, and to explicitly require it in her will was over the top. I blame the brain cancer that killed the bitch. I didn't find out about what happened until well after the fact because I was living in another country.

[Sugaree]

May parents are approaching 80 and have quite a substantial retirement portfolio.   One that would be hard to spend down even if they pay for high quality long term care.

They may choose to bypass my sister and I and give all their money to the grandkids, plus a could of charities.   I could very, very, very much use that money (but not desparate because I could also just un-FIRE).    I feel weird about my feelings on it.. Not my money and all of that, but also, Dad himself inherited the equivalent of $120k at age 40... which he admits was a huge help to him at that time.    I truly think the reason may be that my sister's husband is very well compensated exec and they obviously don't need money, and my parents wanted to always be fair and equal with us, and they don't want to give sis more money that she doesn't need.

On the one hand, i am delighted to have an excellent personal relationship with them.  On the other hand, I have a lump of <<feelings>> about the money side which I just look away from.   

Does that happen to anyone else?  That not-entirely complementary <<feelings>> about inheritance arise despite everything being great otherwise?   

I get it.  I suspect that my in-laws' estate will have the potential to get ugly.  As the outsider, it's my job to look out for my son's interests and that carries a lot of those <<feelings>>.

[Hula Hoop]

May parents are approaching 80 and have quite a substantial retirement portfolio.   One that would be hard to spend down even if they pay for high quality long term care.

They may choose to bypass my sister and I and give all their money to the grandkids, plus a could of charities.   I could very, very, very much use that money (but not desparate because I could also just un-FIRE).    I feel weird about my feelings on it.. Not my money and all of that, but also, Dad himself inherited the equivalent of $120k at age 40... which he admits was a huge help to him at that time.    I truly think the reason may be that my sister's husband is very well compensated exec and they obviously don't need money, and my parents wanted to always be fair and equal with us, and they don't want to give sis more money that she doesn't need.

On the one hand, i am delighted to have an excellent personal relationship with them.  On the other hand, I have a lump of <<feelings>> about the money side which I just look away from.   

Does that happen to anyone else?  That not-entirely complementary <<feelings>> about inheritance arise despite everything being great otherwise?   

Yes, I had this for a while before my parent finally made a will, due to a step parent issue.  Now we have certainty and we know exactly what each of us (me, step parent and sibling) are in line to inherit so things are way smoother than they were and there are fewer <feelings>.  There was a lot of tension before and that's all gone because my parent plans to divide things in a way that we all think is fair.

Are you able to talk to your parents about this?  Maybe they could leave the money directly to you and to the grandchildren in lieu of your sister?  Would your sister be OK with this?  Also, your sister's husband may be a well compensated executive but, what does she earn? Unfortunately, if something were to happen in her marriage she might have financial troubles.  Leaving the money directly to her to do what she wants with it seems wise as you just never know and it's important to have your own money not just that of a spouse.

[RetiredAt63]

Are you able to talk to your parents about this?  Maybe they could leave the money directly to you and to the grandchildren in lieu of your sister?  Would your sister be OK with this?  Also, your sister's husband may be a well compensated executive but, what does she earn? Unfortunately, if something were to happen in her marriage she might have financial troubles.  Leaving the money directly to her to do what she wants with it seems wise as you just never know and it's important to have your own money not just that of a spouse.

So much this.

My Dad's will was worded so that it was clear the inheritance was to my sister and me, and not in any way to our husbands. 

[Hula Hoop]

Are you able to talk to your parents about this?  Maybe they could leave the money directly to you and to the grandchildren in lieu of your sister?  Would your sister be OK with this?  Also, your sister's husband may be a well compensated executive but, what does she earn? Unfortunately, if something were to happen in her marriage she might have financial troubles.  Leaving the money directly to her to do what she wants with it seems wise as you just never know and it's important to have your own money not just that of a spouse.

So much this.

My Dad's will was worded so that it was clear the inheritance was to my sister and me, and not in any way to our husbands.

Isn't that standard in wills?  Obviously, within a marriage people share finances but an inheritance goes to one person not both members of a married couple normally.

I think it's a mistake to see someone has "rich" and not in need of money becuase their spouse earns a lot of money in this day and age.  If someone gets divorced, the law in most jurisdictions certainly does not see it this way.

[BeanCounter]

Are you able to talk to your parents about this?  Maybe they could leave the money directly to you and to the grandchildren in lieu of your sister?  Would your sister be OK with this?  Also, your sister's husband may be a well compensated executive but, what does she earn? Unfortunately, if something were to happen in her marriage she might have financial troubles.  Leaving the money directly to her to do what she wants with it seems wise as you just never know and it's important to have your own money not just that of a spouse.

So much this.

My Dad's will was worded so that it was clear the inheritance was to my sister and me, and not in any way to our husbands.

But my understanding is that if you co-mingle the funds in any way it could become marital property.
I have some accounts that I keep totally separate from my spouse because if something were to happen to me I want it to go into trust for the benefit of only my children so that my DH could feel free to remarry without giving his new spouse and children access to my family’s money.
So complicated. It gives new meaning to the phrase “mo money mo problems”

[talltexan]

Better then my fella’s grandmother who wanted to be buried with hers. After her passing the family came together and decided this was one wish they would not respect. This is pretty relieving considering they released balloons, sang a Celine  dion song at the funeral and kept ashes in a locket.

Well, if the cat was alive, I understand that completely. I knew one woman who left orders that her loyal dog be euthanized after she passed away because she didn't trust anyone to give the dog a good home. Her executor had the dog... executed.

That evokes nature vs nurture debate in my mind.

I think it was just a pun. I'm sure the executor had the dog peacefully euthanized at a vet.

I'm generally all about being a faithful executor and following the deceased's wishes to the letter, but this is where I personally would draw the line. I would consider this an immoral request, refuse, and fight it legally tooth and nail if anyone objected. Dogs obviously are not close to humans in the sanctity of life, but intentionally killing a loving, loyal companion for no reason other than postmortem jealousy? That's just evil.

Agreed, and to explicitly require it in her will was over the top. I blame the brain cancer that killed the bitch. I didn't find out about what happened until well after the fact because I was living in another country.

hehe nice pun!

[Villanelle]

Are you able to talk to your parents about this?  Maybe they could leave the money directly to you and to the grandchildren in lieu of your sister?  Would your sister be OK with this?  Also, your sister's husband may be a well compensated executive but, what does she earn? Unfortunately, if something were to happen in her marriage she might have financial troubles.  Leaving the money directly to her to do what she wants with it seems wise as you just never know and it's important to have your own money not just that of a spouse.

So much this.

My Dad's will was worded so that it was clear the inheritance was to my sister and me, and not in any way to our husbands.

My parents adore my husband.  (My sibling and I joke that he's actually the favorite child.)  Still, my dad has taken me aside to let me know that their preference would be that I am careful with my future inheritance so that it remains mine, no matter what.  (There was also some conversation about... difficult BIL, which I think was intended to imply that they'd hope that if I predecease DH, the remaining inheritance money would maybe go to my sister, at least in part, if there was a lot left, rather than DH's brother.)

The reality is that it will be spent as joint money by me and DH, but I will open a separate account in my name only where it is kept.  How the drawdown works (what is spent from that account vs. joint accounts) is something I've get to figure out, and I likely won't put a tremendous amount of thought into it. The intent to keep it separate and not spend all of it before we spend all of our "regular" money will be maintained.  It's probably not something about which I'd have thought unless dad mentioned it, so I'm glad he did. 

[Just Joe]

Bean- you are way nicer than I would be. I have a friend whose sister had two children by artificial insemination- she had a long time partner but she had sole custody and was their only legal parent. When her children were 19 and 12, she and the partner broke up. She rewrote her will leaving her substantial estate to the Humane society and disinheriting both children. She then committed suicide. My friend was able to get the part of the will disinherting the youngest over turned. She then reached a settlement with the Humane society for the 19 year old where they got a sum but the 19 year old got a good chunk. She threatened them with bad publicity taking money from an orphan. Those poor kids.

Gosh I don't understand people's minds...

[Just Joe]

May parents are approaching 80 and have quite a substantial retirement portfolio.   One that would be hard to spend down even if they pay for high quality long term care.

They may choose to bypass my sister and I and give all their money to the grandkids, plus a could of charities.   I could very, very, very much use that money (but not desparate because I could also just un-FIRE).    I feel weird about my feelings on it.. Not my money and all of that, but also, Dad himself inherited the equivalent of $120k at age 40... which he admits was a huge help to him at that time.    I truly think the reason may be that my sister's husband is very well compensated exec and they obviously don't need money, and my parents wanted to always be fair and equal with us, and they don't want to give sis more money that she doesn't need.

On the one hand, i am delighted to have an excellent personal relationship with them.  On the other hand, I have a lump of <<feelings>> about the money side which I just look away from.   

Does that happen to anyone else?  That not-entirely complementary <<feelings>> about inheritance arise despite everything being great otherwise?   

Yes. My parents inherited enough money to buy a nice house (a yardstick value)- which they did not need. So they invested it. And spent a little of it on themselves for fun. I listened to one of my parents having a frank discussion with relatives about how my parents really didn't need that money at their age but how they really needed it earlier in life.

Meanwhile I sat there listening and in an early part of my life with wife and kids and daycare and a (modest) mortgage and received nothing. I wasn't desperate for the money b/c DW and I are independent sorts but at the time we were very much living paycheck to paycheck and finishing college at our own expense. This was very much pre-MMM (couple decades ago). The mental disconnect was what caught my attention. My sibling was also early in their marriage and starting a family. Don't know if they received any money from our parents b/c while our parents talk about fairness, it doesn't always work that way in reality. I have long played second fiddle to sibling. For example parents paid for sibling's deluxe university experience while I had to pay for my own.

In theory sibling and I'll see that money after my parents are gone but DW and I are already comfortable now (decades later) and have good incomes of our own at this point and my parents will likely live until my 60s. Maybe we'll be able to help our own children who will then be in their late-30s.

The other elephant in the room is to taking care to not breed dependency and expectation in the younger generation. In my mind there is big importance in being self-reliant without an inheritance. I've watched families struggle like a King's Court over future inheritances. Politics, favors, will revisions, etc. The older generation holding it over the younger generation while the younger generation stepped all over their siblings to get first in line. Very unhappy messes.

[Hunny156]

Didn't want to thread-jack, and this is a long, drawn out story, so if you are interested, check out the Case Study I just posted:

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-studyyou-need-to-plan-for-getting-old-(-what-can-happen-when-you-don't!)/

[ysette9]

Didn't want to thread-jack, and this is a long, drawn out story, so if you are interested, check out the Case Study I just posted:

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-studyyou-need-to-plan-for-getting-old-(-what-can-happen-when-you-don't!)/

Wow, what an unbelievable headache. I can’t imagine how tough that has been on you. Do you and your sister speak at all? What will she do now that the cash cow has dried up?