Who should we ask to be legal guardian of our child if something happens to us?

[OtterlyMad]

DH and I need to update our wills to indicate who we would like to take care of our child (and any future children) in case something were to happen to us. We’re lucky to have 2 clear options - one is my sibling, the other is DH’s sibling. Honestly we would be happy for either of them to raise our kids and we are certain that both would volunteer to be guardians, we’re just struggling to decide who should be our first choice. Note that the majority of our estate will go to whomever raises our children, so finances aren’t a huge factor in our decision (but safe to say that both siblings are financially stable and earn well above average).

Option 1: “Jane” 42F

• No parter or children - not necessarily by choice, just never met the right person. Still dates regularly but biological children looking less likely as time goes on.
• Primary school teacher - a massive plus! She works long hours and schedule is very inflexible during term time but she wouldn’t have to worry about childcare during the holidays.
• Owns a 3-bed property which is large enough to accommodate our child(ren) without having to move. However, the area she lives in isn’t the best and the distance means that our child(ren) would have to change schools and leave behind their friends and family (grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.)
• Jane has a couple of friends but no family in the area. This lack of a support network is definitely a concern.

Option 2: “John” 30M

• Has a long-term partner, no children yet but plans to have them. We see this as a positive since it shows they are willing to compromise their lifestyle in a way that child-free people often aren’t, but also recognise that it means a lot of responsibility and stress as they could end up with 3, 4, even 5 children under one roof.
• Owns a 2-bed property nearby which is too small to accommodate children in the long term so they would have to move to a larger house eventually, but they’d stay in in the same area so children wouldn’t have to change schools.
• Management job (don’t want to give away too much but it’s a stable industry and flexible schedule, e.g. allowed to work from home 3 days per week).
• John has a great support network - his parents have already offered us 2 days a week of free childcare, so that could continue if he became their guardian. There’s another sibling who is willing to babysit on an ad-hoc basis, and plenty of their friends have kids.

In terms of values, we’re all pretty similar in that none of us are religious and we all lean left politically. Like us, Jane loves the outdoors so I’m sure would take the children hiking and camping. On the other hand, John shares our passion for foreign travel and culture so the kids would get to explore all over Europe and beyond.

It’s such a tough decision. What do you guys think?

Who would be best to support traumatised children. Who would advocate for them best? Who would ensure they kept contact with the other side of their family?

Maybe Jane would move into your home and move jobs?

Have you asked them and are they both happy to do it?

Jane would be my choice

I'd also choose Jane.

You can express the wish that they decide what is best between them at the time, and leave the estate to your DCs in trust which can then be used to finance their upbringing. A lot can change in their lives over time and they might agree now but eg move abroad later.

I can’t see this happening, she loves the school she works at… but I suppose we could ask her.

I’d probably choose Jane because she won’t have her own children to consider so will be able to make choices which put your children first. Inevitably John and his partner will put their own children first and if your traumatised children went on to have issues with their behaviour or mental health which has an impact on their own children living under the same roof they might not be willing to keep them in the home. Jane won’t have other children to consider and so will put yours first. You may find she will move if finances will be covered to be where your children are or even into your home to avoid disrupting them, primary school teaching is the sort of job where you can easily find a job anywhere.

My set up is similar to that of Jane and I am in the wills for both of my siblings with children to be guardian should anything happen to them and my priority if it were to happen would be the children over my current job/ lifestyle/ home, even though I love my current job. I would still move if that was best for the children at the time because ultimately my nephews and nieces are more important to me than my job or my house.

That’s a good idea, thank you.

I'd talk to both to find out their views. Jane might move into your home so kids could continue at the same school. John and partner want their own kids. This might mean they only had one as bringing up your kids. No reason one siblings could not care for them but the other sibling help. Eg. John look after them but Jane take them over some school holidays. Or Jane take them but John heavily involved in their care too. You are lucky you have 2 options.

If they both agree you could leave it open, to be decided, IF, needed.

Say in 15 years time one was in a position to move in whilst they finished exams, sort of thing.

Basically have a committee of adults who could decide between them at the time. And allocate an independent fund manager to ensure money for their provision is correctly funded.

Not yet. We’re 99% sure that both would agree. We just want to decide who we approach first, otherwise we could end up in a situation where we ask both and then have to tell one of them “ah never mind, we ended up choosing Jane/John instead” which feels a bit rude!

Jane, but sit down and discuss with her first.

I would also have it set so you choose both, and they can decide if it were to ever happen, who would be best placed to have them. Also, you can have the people/person you assign in your will to help find the right person.
My sis lives in Australia, so we have her as the main guardian. Obvs our kids might not want to move to Australia, so she will also be in the position to help choose one of the local people we know to help raise them, if anyone were to offer. So the person you choose doesn't have to be the person who raises them necessarily.

Option 2 definitely!

I’d go with Jane , do you really not have even a gut feeling preference . Do either of them take more interest in the children now . I know when ours were small and we did this it was a no brainer because of my 2 sisters and his twin brother only 1 of my sisters actually did anything with them .

Jane looks to be the much better option.

They’re both wonderful, caring people so would do their best to support our children and advocate for them. Jane obviously has more experience with child mental health thanks to her job, but John comes from a close-knit family and would prioritise maintaining familial relationships.

I would probably choose Jane as she works with children already and is likely to have a more realistic understanding of how much of a lifestyle change it would be. As a teacher she will also be more familiar with the needs that bereaved children would have and accessing support for them.

I would leave the estate to your children with the guardian as trustee and authorised to use it to benefit them.

Definitely discuss it with her first.

I’d go with whoever currently has the best relationship with my children and invests the most time and energy in to them.

Of course you need to have these plans and they have to be acceptable both to you and the potential guardian, but you should also consider that the likelihood of them coming into play must be fairly remote. I mean, you are looking at a scenario when both you and DH die, probably simultaneously (otherwise the survivor looks after the children and has time to reorganise his/her affairs according to the circumstances at the time), and the children haven't grown up.

Also you need to be prepared to reconsider on a fairly regular basis, because situations change - suppose Jane marries late (with or without children), or John divorces. A key factor in your decision-making has gone wrong and perhaps it is no longer the best decision.

I guess in a way you are lucky to have two apparently equally good choices. But it makes me think, perhaps there is a way to organise your wills without having to commit to one or the other at this stage. A lawyer may be able to help find a way.

I'm a bit concerned that you say "the majority of our estate will go to whomever raises our children" and I interpret that to mean that Jane/John get the kids, and the finance to look after them as well. But do note, that doesn't mean at all that your children will receive any benefit from your estate when they have grown up. Indeed, if John has your assets and dies, you could find your assets being shared with his children. To avoid that kind of issue, you need a trust. And for that you 100% need a lawyer.

How old are your kids now? I don't think you should treat this as a once-and-forever decision. Assuming the children are very young, I'd probably say Jane. But things could have changed a lot in, say, five year's time. Your kids might naturally grow closer to one relative or the other. They might get on brilliantly with the other (theoretical) kids or they might fight like cat and dog. John might divorce or have 5 children. Jane could meet someone next year and suddenly have her own family. Your kids might love or hate the outdoor life, and they might love or hate travelling. And so on.

Then once they are into late primary age they should have an increasing say in the decision, and friendships and having to move schools/area could become a much stronger factor (especially if grieving - it's likely they would need stability in other parts of their life).

So whatever you decide or whatever asks you make, be clear (with yourselves and your chosen guardian) that this is a decision that will be kept under review, and might change as the kids grow and develop their own personalities.

Jane.

Both are interested in our child but it’s hard to compare as Jane only sees them every few months whereas John sees every other week.

My gut feeling was John due to his location and support network, but everyone else here seems to be saying Jane so now I’m reconsidering!

We asked both my husbands siblings to be legal guardian if anything happened to both of us.
We asked them both with the understanding that other sibling would be asked as well and that jointly they could organise care for our family as they see fit.
I figured that circumstances change and what might be a good idea today might not be a good idea in 5 years time say. I trust that between them they could sort it out. I must stress that my husbands 2 siblings get along very well, if this wasn’t the case we may have acted differently.