It's another will one. What do you think about this will?

[LindorDoubleChoc]

Single parent dies. They have two children in their 60s. I'm using children in the broadest term here because obviously they are not children.

One of these has two children in their early 20s (their only grand children). The other "child" has none.

The child who has no children is pretty well off. The child with two children is not so well off (possibly because apparently it costs £180,000 per child to raise them from birth to 18).

The parent divides the will one third each to her two children, and one third for the grand children to be split 50/50 between them.

What do you think of that?

If the grandchildren weren’t grandchildren, ie related, but neighbours or The Donkey Sanctuary and Cats Protection league, would people feel so aggrieved that the money was going outside the immediate children.

Thise who feel it’s unfair should maybe reframe the situation in this context. Consider the grandchildren as non- relatives and then it doesn’t feel so unfair.

Unfair

As ever I am amazed that people think they have a right to declare what is fair or unfair.
It's the person who has died's right to leave their estate to whoever or whatever they choose.
Honestly all this winging and whining by grown adults is like watching toddlers have a tantrum

Why and how do I sound "quite grabby"? You sound quite thick - I trust it's ok for me to say this.

As executors of a will where the person died left 5k to the cleaner and everything else to cancer research, the family were very aggrieved. But it was her money.

Perfectly reasonable to make provision for all descendants.

It seems fair to me although I might do 25% for each.

It should be 50/50 between the children. I would expect the one without children to be hurt by this. I know I would be.

I think that is fair. The young ones are probably at an age where they need money to set them up. The money belongs to the parent making the will and they are looking at the good of all family members .DM believes in everything being equal and would divide between her DC , DMil would prioritise DGC to help them along in life , both scenarios are thoughtful and fair imo. If I were the childless sibling and the will was made like this I wouldn't feel hard done by as I was receiving exactly the same as my sibling despite arguably being in a better financial situation.

I considered that too. Perhaps the DGC getting a third between them rather than an equal share for all four descendants is an attempt at compromising between the two positions.

It is being left equally to the person's children. Each is getting 1/3.

I’m also finding it fascinating / scary to see how many people seem to think of children, even adult children, simply as an extension of their parents rather than separate individuals with their own relationships with people

Thanks for the comments, it's been very interesting. From conversations I've had with my sibling, I believe he thinks along the lines of our mother had 4 people she wanted to leave money to and she shared it out as fairly as she could.

He knew what was in her will and it was infact him who told me about a year ago.

If the OP hadn't had kids, if the OP predeceased her parent, if the sibling leaves something to the kids. If, if, if all over the place.

The OP has had kids, they can't be put back. The existence of those kids has meant the grandparent wants to give them something of their own, to acknowledge and show their love for those people. Any interpretation which suggests the sibling is hard done by because of a life choice they also made, not to have kids, is ridiculous. It comes from a place of greed and entitlement. The grandparent could have left it all to charity, or used it all on care and then there would be nothing for any of them.

I cannot imagine getting to my 60s and begrudging my nieces what they are likely to get from my parents. My sons will likely get nothing from them, and I am ok with that, because it isn't my money to divide up.

This is similar to my Dad's will, although the proportions are slightly different.

Db and I are in our 60s: I have an only child (not for wanting of trying ) and db has two children. Dad left a few small bequests to our cousins of a monetary amount (in fact, at my encouragement when he asked for advice as to whether he should bother, as I said it would be a nice surprise for them) but the remainder of the estate is split 40:40 between db and me, with the remaining 20% being split amongst the 3 grandchildren.

It means that technically db's "side" of the family is getting slightly more but I'm perfectly fine with that as it is (or was ) Dad's money, dad's choice and b) I don't begrudge db's kids their share. Ironically, it's dh who has (or had - I've persuaded him otherwise ) more of an issue with that, but that's more to do with his fractious relationship with his own dm and one of his siblings .

Dad above all wanted to be fair

Dad died unexpectedly last year but he'd already given us a copy of his will so it didn't come as a surprise. He used to update it every couple of years - but mostly to do with contact details and his attachment with all his bank account details.

LindorDoubleChoc - I don't think you sound grabby at all and your parent did a lovely thing giving ( directly ) your two children a share. It's something they will really appreciate

Exactly. If someone left all their money to charity, their children would understandably be disappointed, but it isn't unfair.
Everyone has a right to spend their money how they want to, while they're alive and when they die.

Writing this in case anyone else is pondering their will.
Ido think the proportions suggest that the two GC are an extra child/sibling, which suggests the childless is one of three not one of two.
Using slightly different maths to achieve the same end makes it clearer they are individuals, not units of family.

I find it quite astonishing that you think you are entitled to a particular percentage of your parents' money and would feel like anyone else getting a bequest would be coming out of your "share".

If the will maker wanted to leave some money to a friend or a cousin's children or anybody at all in whatever proportion she wanted, it would be fair. You are lucky to get anything!

So do you mean ONLY the children can inherit and the deceased can't leave a chunk to anyone else before splitting the rest equally between the children (as OP's parent has done)?

@TheSmallAssassin the OP asked a question, I answered it. I don't actually expect anything, it will probably go on care fees.

I can still feel aggrieved at the principle, that my sibling's poor financial choices, and DC, result in me being seeing as less of a priority. Family dynamics can be long-lived and complicated, there is more to feeling aggrieved than just financial.

Hmm @LongCareerOfNearMisses. Your post has made me think more.

And I think you're right. People should feel free to leave their estate in whatever way they wish. And to whoever they wish.

In OP's scenario, both she and her sibling are being bequeathed an equal amount. Neither should feel more loved or more important than the other.

The parent obviously loves the grandchildren too and has chosen to give them a share to help them at an earlier stage in life (presuming the estate doesn't get spent on care fees or a spontaneous round the world cruise!).

I'm totally on the fence with this one! I can see why it seems fair from some angles, and I agree that a person should be able to leave their money to whomever they wish.

However, I can also see why the childless sibling might feel a bit aggrieved. One side of the family is (directly or indirectly) receiving 2/3 of the inheritance. Some people will think it's fair, some won't. I think that the sibling with children will be more likely to find it fair than the one who doesn't!

Regardless, OP, if you think it's fair, and your sibling seems to be ok with it, why were you asking if what people think of it? Do you think that your sibling is unhappy, despite what they are saying?

For what it's worth, I will leave my estate (if there's any left by then) exactly in 1/3s between my 3 children, regardless of their circumstances at the time. It seems the easiest and fairest way to do things. It will be up to them to then pass on any money to their kids if they choose to.

I'm not sharing the contents of my will.

It could all be eaten up by care home fees anyway

The parent of the grand children could be grumpy about not getting 50% of the will and then onward distributing it as they feel fit (they could decide not to pass on as much if anything).

Right- so what did the above mean then? As I’m reading it as the parent of the adult grandkids could be upset by NOT having a 50/50 split- then you’ve denied saying this? I never said anything about your siblings will…. Not sure why’s that’s relevant?

I found that comment of OP's odd as well. She takes time out to think that the parent of the DC might be annoyed. But the sibling is brushed over with a 'yes all seems very fair, equal split etc'.