Talk

Advanced search

Can't take it with you... anyone else find this thought-provoking?

(55 Posts)
elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:15:12

I thought this was a really interesting programme and got me thinking about my own will, which needs renewing.
Specifically, how much of your estate would you leave to your children? how much is too much? And if not to them, to what?

My children are about to inherit an amount of money that I feel uncomfortable about and that I certainly don't want to add to (assuming I live long enough to see them to adulthood and independence). But would they feel resentful if I left a large proportion to charity? And how to choose what charity?

And of course, this is assuming I die with something to my name!

Cyb Fri 14-Jan-11 22:16:04

I thought the wife of the army guy was vile

Those are my thoughts!

elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:21:00

I thought she redeemed herself towards the end - and in fact both couples surprised me by the extent they did manage to move towards greater understanding of each other (but then of course that was probably the intended narrative of the editors...)

Cyb Fri 14-Jan-11 22:23:20

Ah you see I think she realised she was being completely unreasonable and how upset he was and was ashamed, and realised she couldn't bulldoze him into her wishes.]

Glad Gerry pointed out to him how weird the set up was

Stillchuckingit Fri 14-Jan-11 22:24:35

I was so gob-smacked by this programme, I was just about to start a thread myself!

I thought Keira (wife of army Tom) evil.

And Tom himself, although very decent, gullible and weak.

The thing that outraged me the most was that Keira wasn't actually honest about her intentions at the family gathering. She was completely hypocritical. Her reasons for not wanting to leave money to Tom's dc were patently so different from the ones she was expressing.

This would never happen where I live (mainland Europe). Here, a substantial part of your estate HAS to go to your children which is morally right in my view.

op - I think your circumstances are slightly different if your dc are going to be very comfortably off. Surely, in that instance, they would understand that there was no need for you to add to their estates. Perhaps you could opt to give them very personal, sentimental tokens to remember you by. Or another option would be for you all to choose a charity between you? Or a charity for each child?
Could you discuss it with them?

Stillchuckingit Fri 14-Jan-11 22:26:02

Do you think she did see reason in the end?

Didn't she want to leave ALL the money to HER parents?

Did you see the hurt in Tom's eyes when she said that?

Or have I completely misunderstood though (I'm a bit thick about this sort of thing!)

Meglet Fri 14-Jan-11 22:26:52

Mad cat woman and horrible army wife - who didn't the kids should get it but her parents should.

This is a sore point for me as I think my stepmum has been left everything in Dads will. He never told us how it was all set up and she has never mentioned it confused. Mum has told me exactly how she's dividing her money up, can't see the need for secrecy when it comes to wills and death TBH. My will is all done and dusted.

Stillchuckingit Fri 14-Jan-11 22:27:05

that should have read

'misunderstood THAT'

typing too fast

WikiSpeaks Fri 14-Jan-11 22:27:20

yep. just watching it on sky+ now.

Keira - yuk

Although i do think people shouldn't be waiting for parents to die before getting their cash. I think there shouldn't be so much reliance on inheritance.

When most people's parents die they're in their 50s - close to retirement. They should have made their own way in life by then.

<gavel>

Cyb Fri 14-Jan-11 22:27:44

Still, yes you have sussed it

I felt so sorrry for him

He was on the brink of tears everytime he mentioned his girls

Stillchuckingit Fri 14-Jan-11 22:28:55

And, and ...

- sorry - so completely outraged by this programme

what would have happened if Gerry hadn't stepped in during the meeting with the solicitor to support the position of Tom and his dc?

I would be interested to know if it is the solicitor's role to step in in those circs, or would she have just presented the options and left Tom to decide on his own?

Cyb Fri 14-Jan-11 22:30:35

Tom would have to decide on his own

I'm glad Gerry spoke up too

freshmint Fri 14-Jan-11 22:31:32

Kiera only backed down because gerry kept saying "well you see I just think that is utterly inequitable" and she was on national television. You could see how FURIOUS she was when she signed the will. Actually I think she loved Tom but hated and was madly jealous of his step daughters. And Tom was sweet and lovely and deserves a nicer wife.

Thank god for gerry robinson...

freshmint Fri 14-Jan-11 22:32:32

Actually in those circs I would hope the solicitor would have said "actually there is a bit of a conflict here, I think you should be separately represented"

or at least spoken to them each seperately

elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:33:27

Well, I thought she was extremely unempathetic about Tom's feelings for his children - and probably jealous. But she may have had reasons for that in her own upbringing. And I do think she reeled back after he had made his feelings clear.
And I do think she has a point about inheritances in general.

Regarding my own dcs, they are too young to discuss with at the moment! And I have no idea whether they will be comfortably off or not - it depends on what line of work they pursue and how well they apply themselves to it - but I do have a problem with a large amount of money falling into their laps without any effort on their part.

Rainydaze Fri 14-Jan-11 22:37:22

I didn't like the way that Dave (was that his name?) thought Lesley (was that her name??!!) should give her half of the estate to his children. It was absolutely right that her money should go to animal charities. Her money, her choice. His children, his responsibility!

quietlysuggests Fri 14-Jan-11 22:37:38

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BellaMagnificat Fri 14-Jan-11 22:38:07

Am I alone in being a bit gobsmacked by the amounts they are discussing? confused

Also, I agree Keira came round in the end but still think her v hypocritical - these days much of the money people have 'worked so hard all their lives for' including hers I bet - has inevitably come from fortuitious property transactions - luck and chance, in other words, not exactly hard work.

Which kind of answers my first point I suppose.

Found the various emotional subtexts very interesting and all the more so for not being totally spelled out.

Also amde me sad as I have no blood descendants to leave my money to either.

Also I thing GR is rather fabulous.

elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:39:58

I do agree with you all that she did not come across well - but suspect that she has her own deep hurt to explain the jealousy. We don't know why she was childless but its possible lots of unresolved issues there.

pointydog Fri 14-Jan-11 22:42:55

Kiera had issues.

If she doesn't agree with inheritance, she shouldn't have a penny from her husband. And she shouldn't consider giving anything to her ol d parents.

Screwed up. No sense.

pointydog Fri 14-Jan-11 22:43:17

Any deep hurt she may have doesn;t cut it.

elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:44:48

Yes and her obvious double think about not wanting the daughters to have money to 'fritter away', but instead she should have it to, um, fritter away...I wonder what the subtext about the parents was - I think some deep thing about making a statement about her own family links? She perhaps feels she is less valuable because she doesn't have a family line to link in to?

The thing I didn't agree with GR about was when he kept saying that Tom was leaving his money to 'lots of causes he didn't feel strongly about' when actually, he was leaving (60% of) his money to his wife, who he loved, for her to do what she liked with (and for all he knew, his daughters might have given it to things he didn't care about too!) So I think there was an element of competition there between the wife and daughters

elliott Fri 14-Jan-11 22:45:56

Why not pointydog? Most people are screwed up for a reason. I find it interesting to speculate what those reasons may be.

BellaMagnificat Fri 14-Jan-11 22:50:30

Re my second par - she used the reason of the daughters never having worked for not wanting to give them any (or, comparatively speaking, very little) money. And implied that she had 'worked hard' for hers - which may well be true, but...

I think she was very, very insecure, probably deeply jealous of the close bond he had with the girls and was playing not so subtle power games to assert her position as the new wife. He was very lovely but malleable.

They seemed to be the kind of people who keep everything lovey dovey on the surface with seething issues just below - ideal camera fodder for this kind of thing in other words.

choux Fri 14-Jan-11 22:52:37

Just want to point out that Tom's daughters were actually step daughters so from that persepctive neither of them had a blood line to bequeath to.

I was amazed that anyone would agree to be on this show as it's so personal - how much money you have and who you 'value' enough to put in your will - and full names were used when reciting the will contents. Why broadcast all that to the nation?

I was also shocked when Keira said on camera 'the younger daughter has never worked a day in her life'. Factually that may be true but to hear it said like that by your stepmother on a TV show?!?

I thought that Keira had had a poor upbringing, a lot of worry and insecurity in her younger years and was almost resentful of how fortunate Tom's daughters had been. I don't think it was jealousy for Tom's affection but for the ease of their lives.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: