It’s an inheritance one!

We have one AC and my original will left nearly everything to him with small bequests to nieces and nephews. In the event of him predeceasing me then a large amount would go to charity with the bequests to nieces and nephews being larger. When I updated my will last year I realised I hadn’t seen my nieces and nephews since pre-covid and my brothers only once in 3 years. I also realised how much of the money donated to charities is spent on staffing and from experience how poor some charities are using their resources efficiently. My new will leaves everything to my friend’s children in the event that my son isn’t around. They’re the ones I’ve watched growing up, have shared holidays with and treat as family. Maybe your sibling doesn’t feel that close to your children and thinks as they have a dad he will provide for them.

However! I do understand why you are hurt. My brother’s only child died a few years ago and he has told me that he is leaving his assets to his GFs grandchildren. The house was purchased with an inheritance from my parents and will go to people they never met who my brother has an on off relationship with their grandmother. I know I’m being unreasonable but I think it illustrates how contrary our feelings can be when it comes to inheritance.

I would be sad that my sibling didn’t feel they had enough of a connection with my children to leave them something in their will.

I'm surprised she doesn't want to leave her money to your DC and yet is prepared to take them in as a guardian if you die first. Being a guardian is a much bigger deal, and suggests a much closer bond. I wonder if she doesn't think she'll realistically actually be in that position of having to look after your DC so has said yes without meaning it.

Do you know who the executor is? If it's all going to charity, she should nominate a lawyer because charities can be relentless when it comes to bequests, and it's not something you want to deal with whilst grieving. Make sure she's not expecting you to sort out her estate!

It's a fine analogy.

People are allowed to do whatever they want with their money. And the fact that they and/or their siblings have/have not had children does not change that.

The fact that someone doesn't have children does not mean that their nephews/nieces are automatically in line to inherit, and that is independent of life circumstances.

That's why we have wills. So people can make a choice. Otherwise the intestacy rules could just be blanket applied to everyone irrespective of circumstance.

I kind of see your pov, but if you die, the mortgage should be paid off if you have the usual life insurance alongside, so that’s an immediate help. I don’t think your sibling has to leave your kids anything, I would prefer to give mine to charity but I’m doing wills tomorrow and bar a trust for any animals, it’s all going to nieces/nephews as we don’t have kids. That, I must say, is just because it’s easy and feels like the right thing, but not everyone feels that way and nor should they.

What shouting? Do you mean the two words I put in capitals for emphasis? I wasn't shouting I was typing in capitals for emphasis.

No reason why your kids won't still recieve help from them if they need it. They'll just have to build up a relationship & ask for it before death like she presumably did with your family memebers

A will is purely for what happens to what's left- if she wants to give it to charity then by all means

Im not comfortable talking to my parents about what my siblings will says but I could ask if anything I would have got could go into trust for my DC without mentioning any reason why.

The only reason why you need to give is your illness and the likelihood that your parents will outlive you. I'm so sorry about your illness by the way.

Your parents might reply "oh but if the balance goes to sibling then it will get to your kids eventually" THEN you could raise that "sibling has made other provisions/no judgement/ just letting you know as it is relevant to this conversation". They may well not have anticipated that.

As to whether your sibling should leave estate to family ... legally sibling has the absolutely right to leave to who he/ she chooses. There is no "family estate" just different individual estates. Morally ... its a bit more complex. If the charity is one very important to your siblings life and beliefs, fair enough. But if its a choice made in the basis that "your kids are already inheriting from you so fuck them, I'll leave mine to as random charity" then that's more shabby.

My husband's uncle did similar. He was a feckless character who dropped out of work and persuaded his wealthy mother to buy him a house, car etc. He got banned from her sheltered accommodation in her final years for turning up and menancing her to transfer cash sums. Fell out with siblings (including FIL) who remonstrated with him. Never married or had children. When he died FIL found he was executor of uncles will. Uncle had left everything to a cat or dog charity that he'd shown zero interest in during his lifetime. FIL felt this was a final "fuck you" to the family. FIL didn't care about the money itself, it was the gesture which was offensive including making him executor to rub his nose in it!

I agree with you, and think the sibling that's implying that you should be giving money to their kids is a graspy fucker, frankly!

I can’t understand this at all. Helping dogs over the financial security of people you love? (Unless you don’t love your nieces/nephews I suppose).

Im childfree. My siblings have various kids. They too assumed that anything I have and our other childfree sister has, will go to them and their kids when we die.
Nope. Our money and we decide who gets it. In my case it is all going to a local,dog shelter and in my sisters case a cat one.
We also own our fathers flat and our siblings have made noises about their share of that when he dies. Not going to happen. We will sell the flat and split it between ourselves and they won't get a penny.

Our money, our decisions. Family means nothing.

I’m in the opposite position to you - no children but one DN and another on the way. I couldn’t imagine not leaving what I have to my DNs.

Beloved not believed

Bad analogy. Sibling potentially dying of cancer leaving two young dc.
DC are sibling's apparently belived but obviously not really N&N. Random executive at charity is not

If I die before my parents then anything they have when they die will go to my sibling. And so then to charity.

Are you absolutely sure of this? Has it been written into their wills specifically? IANAL but when I did my will, it was a given that if one of my children died before me then their share would go to their children if they had any by then and would only revert to the other sibling if there were no children. I presume that I would have had to have asked specifically if I didn't want this to happen.

If they have asked for this on purpose, I think it would be acceptable and understandable for you to have this conversation with your parents. Say that it is not beyond the realms of possibility that they might outlive you, and if this happened please could they rethink this part of their wills in order to leave something at least to your children - presumably their only grandchildren - not to your husband, to the children.

If they are not willing to do this, then I would be rethinking your idea of your family being there to help each other - I think that might only apply to you. Your parents might regret this in their declining years too.

I empathise with you - I would not make a will like your sibling has or your parents have because my family is important to me. I have left my estate (such as it is) to my 2 children - with the proviso about their possible future children - but if, heaven forbid, they both die before me, then I have left it to my sibling's children - and if one of them dies, to their children.

I’m single and unlikely to have children, I have nieces and nephews. A significant amount of my assets came from family inheritance (parents and grandparents). I will be leaving most to charity in my will rather than my DNs. I love them dearly but my siblings (their parents) are homeowners, they will likely inherit from them and should have enough to be comfortable in adulthood. I will be leaving money to help disabled children in the UK and to charities which support health and education in the developing world. My money can help far more children by providing vaccines, meals, medication etc overseas than it will giving my DNs a bit of extra deposit money.

It's their choice.

Their money, and up to them how they spend it/use it.

I assume your sibling accepts that you are going to leave your money to your kids and none to them ?

Would they be unreasonable to expect you to leave your money to them ? Yes. Because that's your money and it is up to you what you do with it.

Was the shouting really necessary

I’m going to go against the grain here somewhat. I agree there is no obligation on your sibling. But at the same time, I think it shows they don’t care, so why would I spend time with them? I would either have a conversation with them about your fears (if you are keen to maintain the relationship), or if not then I would quietly disengage somewhat and accept it’s mainly a superficial relationship.

More importantly though, I would talk to your parents. It seems very unfair that if you die, your share would go to your sibling rather l than your children…hopefully that is an oversight that can be fixed rather than their intention.

I agree. But at least you know where her priorities lie now and when she is old and needs help, your kids shouldn't feel obliged to help her out. They can spend their time volunteering for charities instead! Its what she should want after all right?!

I'd be upset too.

Yes there is no entitlement but if your sibling loved their nieces / nephews then why wouldn't they want to help them - even partially ?

I understand that your kids are not their kids and that they have their own interests and causes but to ignore your kids entirely seems crass to me.

Add on your illness and uncertainty id say that was even more of a reasonable thing to do, to leave at least something to your kids.

I'd deffo have a chat re guardianship and your concerns re their longer term support if the worst happens to you. That peace of mind is so important to you and it may help your sibling to re think and reframe the will in the light of the potential vulnerability of your kids , assuming that she cares about them at all.

As you say your sibling can leave their money to whom they wish, but to leave it all to charity, when they have used family money in the past, does seem a bit of a bitter pill to swallow. But at least you know now - I'd say it certainly makes clear where your true friends are and I'd act accordingly.

@Neriah
It still has no relevance at all. There was no need to mention it at all. The questions is "am I being unreasonable to expect my sibling to leave their money to my kids" and the answer is yes, you are. The only reason to mention the cancer is because one thinks that makes one more entitled to the inheritance. It doesn't.
No. The reason to mention cancer is that the siblings own n@n will potentially end up motherless as children with limited finances due to their mother passing young. If you don't see that as relevant then that's on you. I would be so devastated that my sibling died young and her poor dc were left without a mother and financially unable to rely on their mother that I would do everything in my power to help. Why are you so cold?

I don't understand why she is leaving it all to charity? That seems so weird to me and almost like she's making some kind of point.

Of course, she is perfectly entitled to leave her money to whomever she wishes but considering your circumstances (so sorry to hear that) I cannot imagine the coldness of leaving it to charity when her nieces/nephews have lost their mum. I find that utterly callous. Why not both?- why cant she leave some to charity and some to her family?

Its especially galling considering she benefited herself from family money and it makes her out to be very hypocritical- after all, if charity is so important to her then why did she not gift the money she got from family to charity if charity means so much to her? She is a huge hypocrite despite the fact she has the right to leave her money to whomever she wants- she clearly took the money she got to keep for herself so I don't think she is quite as "charitable" as she likes to think she is

I wouldn’t leave my niblings a penny. We aren’t close and I have friends I’d rather leave it to.