Leaving house to one child and not the other?

Unfair. My grandfather left his property to my uncle (single, lived at home with him) and nothing to my mum because she had her own house (paying a mortgage until she was 65) - my uncle has never had a mortgage or money worries in his life, I don’t think it was a fair decision.

Unfair. People who say they don’t care, don’t in theory until it happens to them. It’s not about money, it’s just comes down to feeling rejected due to favouritism.

Unfair, but I'd be happy if my parent did this in my circumstances. I own my house but my sibling doesn't and may never. I don't need any kind of inheritance so if there was one it would probably be better they got something so they had some security for later life. Its all hypothetical anyway.

I think the only time this is okay is if a child has enduring and complex disabilities which meant that they were never going to be able to achieve anything in life through no fault of their own. Or if there is estrangement of a serious nature. Not some BS like Barbara took my trifle dish home at a Family get together, true story which means MIL has hated her SIL for 50 years.

I can also comment with personal experience both DH and myself were left nothing when my Mother and then his Father died within a year of each other They both left their homes to their favourite children. At least I had 4 other siblings to share the upset.

Both our sisters have always been the type to get people to feel sorry for them. My sister could cry at will and would do fake tears and lie easily. I can still clearly remember her laughing behind our Mothers back as I pled my case that I hadn’t touched my sister who said I hurt her. We were beaten as children if we misbehaved. She is pure evil. DH sister is not so much evil as just a bit thick and shit at life so people feel sorry for her.

And it’s the parents who decide whether one sibling is valued more than the other. Actions speak louder than words. And when they’ve show this kind of favouritism they wonder why the atmosphere has changed.

Just like it's up to the parents what they want to do with their house.
There is no share.
it's the parents who decide

Agree. It a poor excuse and totally shitty behaviour. If it was being left to me and I could not get them to change their minds, I would sell the house and give my sibling half.

No wonder it’s created ill feeling.

And it is very presumptuous to imagine that they can make a plan based on others peoples plans - what if the partners are not still together, or if the inheritance to the spouse is ring fenced so she does not benefit? Its just really shitty.

IMO, if there's more than one child, and there have been no falling-outs or estrangements, any inheritance should ALWAYS be divided equally. There's no telling what the future may hold. For example, if DC1 has been very successful in life (good career, successful partner, potential inheritance from in-laws) but DC2 has been less fortunate, they should still be treated equally because perhaps DC1 will become ill, ot get divorced etc., and maybe DC2 will win the lottery etc., and it's important that all siblings feel equally valued.

I have personally experienced a situation where siblings were not considered equal, and while the siblings who did not inherit have been amazingly accepting, I can see (as an in-law) that this is a potential time bomb waiting to go off.

I reiterate, I completely support non-equal division where some children have chosen to distance themselves, but all others should be considered equally.

I think it depends. I'm leaving my house to both my children but one is very wealthy and owns a home, the other has a lifelong disability. The one with disability will have a right to remain in the home, though it's owned by both in trust.

Generally it's not fair but sometimes it's necessary and not unreasonable.

No, it isnt. Even if one was a money waster I would not pick a favourite to leave more to.

Fine. Provided the other gets cash equivalent. Otherwise not fair at all.

Their partner will inherit 🤔

Sounds like some sexist bullshit about expecting a man will be providing for her. I can't imagine the parents are writing out a son because his wife will inherit.

Anyway, as you've said, they're backfilling the reason, so it's moot. They've already done the damage now, even if they reconsider.

My mom is leaving her condo (I’m American - so an owned flat) to my brother to sell. He doesn’t have a house and I do so she feels he needs it more. Coincidentally I’ve immigrated and he lives just a 6 hour flight away so she sees more of him. I’m sure that’s part of it too.

I 'inherited ' a house from a parent recently (I say inherited but it was slightly more complicated). My brother had nothing. So I sold the property and gave him half.

I reckon my grandmother will do this. It will be both her and my grandad’s legacy. If she does it would seem like the fairest thing that ever happened. She has four children and one of them is her live in carer who would benefit from staying in the house after she passes, it would be beyond cruel to kick her out. It was her childhood home and she has lovingly renovated it while caring for her mother, and her mother benefited significantly from this. In the last few years she has barely been able to leave the house due to caring responsibilities and gave up her job to care.
one sibling is retired and disabled. Sure they would benefit from the money but I expect maybe my grandmother would given them a bequest not an equal portion.
the other two are much better off and mostly unable to help with care due to their responsibilities of their jobs and kids. They are married and homeowners. They are close to their mum and talk to her all the time and will miss her very much but also love their sister who did the caring and are beyond grateful that she sacrificed so much, they wouldn’t be looking at their mum wanting a gift. They might hope for an item maybe with a particular memory. No one will want the sister to leave taht house.

It's up to the parents who they leave their estate to. But it would be enough for me to cut them and my sibling out of my life. It isn't about the money, it's about the principle of choosing one child over another. I'd rather they left the whole lot to charity than show that kind of favouritism.

Well let's hope their partner's parents don't do the same thing...

Oh wow that is not okay on any level at all. Ir tell them so and if they didn’t change it, I’m not sure I’d be able to see them again since they’re clearly a pair of nasty, despicable individuals.

You're probably right, easier said than done. It probably won't come to it because I imagine my parents will be 'fair' and split whatever they have equally. But I hope I have the strength and generosity to make sure it's given back to my sister because she deserves it. She supported me a long time ago when she couldn't really afford to, because noone else could. I could never really repay her, though I try. (She's also too proud to accept it!) It's only through dumb luck that I'll be comfortable for life (barring a disaster) and she will probably struggle for the rest of hers. Of course, our story is quite specific and I wouldn't expect everyone to react the same way. I don't judge anyone either for their specific feelings on it either.

Sorry for the essay!

The parents can of course choose to do whatever they want to do with their assets. That includes them being so dense that they cause a family rift, but that’s still their prerogative. Now it’s known, the harm has been done.

I think it’s unfair

I remember reading an article once from someone well heeled and famous (think it was Cameron Mackintosh but might be remembering that bit incorrectly) anyhow they were saying how much it meant to them that their parents left everything equally between all children. I liked that - he may have inherited and the. Given his share away to siblings but he appreciated being recognised

You could do that when your parent died if you chose.

When FIL died he left his garage to DH and BIL equally. DH has no interest in cars and BIL has built and fixed cars in that garage for years. So DH suggested a deed of variation. BIL received the garage, but DH knew FIL saw them as equal (and given FIL and BIL had the cars hobby in common that could, for some people, have made things feel very uneven had FIL excluded DH).