Leaving house to one child and not the other?

If you want to ruin the relationship your children have by playing favourites then go ahead.
If you want them to continue to be friends and keep in touch, you split it all evenly.

In an earlier post, you said it was because one child has a partner who would inherit from parents.
However, circumstamces change.
Maybe they get divorced; maybe the partner's parents end up in care, which is funded by their expected inheritence.
The child who lives close may emigrate, or move further away.
If one child has done more to help very elderly parents, then it might make sense to leave them something extra, whether this is monterary, an antique, or jewelry, with the rest divided equally.
Otherwise it says that one child if favoured more than another.

You say that the parents are divorced. What does the other parent (the non will maker parent) think of this?

So does the sibling that will inherit everything live rent-free in their parents' home?

The more independent child who pays their own way will lose out on any inheritance because they live further away?

It all sounds very unfair to me. In my will, I have split everything equally between my three adult children. I'd hate to be the cause of any resentmentt between them after I've died.

Wrong, should be treated equally

So is the disinherited one your partner and you are the person who will (the parent thinks) inherit from your parents? Are they trying to split you up/ punish him/ her for being with you?
It doesn't make sense to do this if the parent has got a good relationship with the disinherited one.

With Wills you can never anticipate how well off someone will be in the future. The child now that is doing well might get divorced and be made redundant. The child who is struggling might win the lottery. Or find themselves married to someone very well off indeed.

It's hard to comment without more information. Perhaps the parent thought one of her children needed it more than the others.
I don't think fairness always comes into bequeaths

I can understand it if you lived in a stately home a glorious pile that as per usual is inherited by the oldest sibling.
And you may well feel you have invested in your property and want to see it handed on. But only one child has had children. But it isn’t a stately home in proportions.
I think if you wanted to leave a home to one child and not the other you have to provide the equivalent in assets to the child who is not getting the house. Cash, fine art, jewellery. But equal to. Not less than.

The simplest thing to do is that the children sell the house and share the proceeds. Else it looks as though you are more invested in one child than the other.

I know of a family where the eldest daughter still lives at home with her Mum, plus her partner and two children. They've paid off the younger sister and the eldest one will inherit the house. Unless that's the situation, it sounds very unfair.

And that’s great if everyone is ok with it and understands the reason. I have always thought it’s really hard if someone has lived with a parent to care for them and is suddenly homeless after their death because other people want a payout from the house.

But unfortunately there are a lot of families where inheritance is another way to favour one child unfairly. In OPs post, she says that non inheriting child is still expected to run around after their parent. In my case my mother could never really give a good reason for favouring my sister other than feelings. And had no answer when it was pointed out that, by selling a property to sister at way under market value(no idea quite how they got away with it other than claiming sister had paid them some money directly when she hadn’t) they had effectively given her a large sum, as she never would have been able to afford the property otherwise. She’s been selling off bits of the land with it ever since. As I said, DF is now trying to balance it up, but mum took care of most of this stuff when she was alive and was just adamant this is the way it had to be. It has tainted family relationships. Unfortunately some parents dont care about siblings having good relationships with each other or actively enjoy making trouble. My mother loved it when the kids were not getting along and would actively stir up trouble. It’s horrible to be in a family like that.

I have wondered about doing this as I have 4dc at very different stages of life. The eldest two both own their own homes and dd2 lives in one worth a couple of million. Ds will probably buy one in the next year and dd3 is 18. I think though I'd leave it to them equally and let them manage any variations they want to make.

My Dad has already made it clear that he is leaving his house to my sister.
He has however left a note in his will that there is a condition that she must take in my brother or I if we ever need a roof.

My brother and his sons are furious over it but I totally understand it - our sister lives in the family home and to be fair she has given up much of her life caring for Dad as he's got older (because she lives with him - I also care for him and help with his needs).

I have absolutely no problem with her inheriting the house and I think it's fair.
My brother and I have our own houses.

The idea that its ok for someone to do lots more elder care without recompense because they are child-free is hil

I have asked my Mum to do this. Leave her house to my twin sister and not me. I own my own house. Twin is in a council house. I have no kids. Twin has 2 kids. My husband has a daughter and our house will go to her. Me inheriting half of my Mums house just makes no sense. Ultimately we would all want the money to end up with Mums Grandkids and not my step daughter. So it just complicates things Mum leaving it to both of us.

Except in no contact situations (unless the parent was the one at fault, in which case splitting equally could be the one last good thing they do for their children), I’d say it’s unfair in most situations.
Even if the included child did a huge amount of care for ageing parent, it still might be unfair not to split equally. The one who did the caring might have different circumstances to the one who didn’t- eg no children, not working, live closer , health problems etc and therefore it wouldn’t be fair to punish the other child for not being able to provide care.
You give limited information, but moving further away is NOT grounds to be left out of the inheritance IMO.
The wealth of each respective child is also not relevant.

You could always give your sibling your half when you've both inherited. If my parents had tried this malarky, I wouldn't bother seeing them again.

My dad wasn’t left anything by my grandparents, and my uncle never moved out of their home, even after grandparents died. My dad had his own house, family and a good job, and that was seemingly grandparents justification to plan for uncle to inherit the house when they died.

I feel for Dad sometimes - especially now my uncle is in full time care. Dad has managed the care plan, managed the sale of the house to fund it & sees my uncle every other day. He is the only sibling my uncle has, plus he never married or had a family of his own.

Unfair Dad wasn’t included in the will (we are a close family, there were no issues) and he’s now managing what’s left, and watching his ‘half’ disappear back in to the care system at a princely £4k a month.

When the house sold people made jovial comments how he must be happy now he got the house, will be booking a cruise with all that cash, treating himself. Couldn’t be further from the truth.

Treat your children the same.

It’s impossible to say.
What one person considers unfair another person may consider totally fair. As an outsider, you will not have a full picture of the lifetime relationship the parent and child had and ultimately it comes down to what the parent feels is right for them. Getting bogged down in the fairness or otherwise of it is not going to lead to a happy place.
if the person who has not benefitted feels there has been coercion or the parent was not of sound mind at the time of the will being written than they can and should get legal advice. Other than that just tell them gently they need to suck it up and get on with living their life.

Is it your partner? I would be fuming if so
(sorry had to edit as clicked post before I should have)

But its not your friends share.

Unfair. Each child should be treated the same. If you omit 1 child, you are potentially causing a rift between them as your legacy.

This is a recipe for trouble down the line. My parents left 2/3 of their estate to my sister because I was child free and she had "given" them grandchildren. They were quite open about it. In later life when they developed health problems and became needy they wondered why I was not around and they barely heard from me. I deliberately moved to another city to study and work and never returned. To this day there is still a coldness between my sister and I.

You reap what you sow.