To wonder if parents' will isn't "fair"

[toastedbeagle]

My parents have written wills recently and decided to split their estate etc equally between descendants rather than children. Do you think this is fair?
For the sake of argument let's say there are three children and three grandchildren, but unequally distributed. So estate divided into families would go 50%, 33%, 17%... But each person is only getting 16.6%.

I'm not sure if this feels fair, but on the other hand wills are for doing YOU want aren't they, not to keep people happy.

Of course it's fair. You are not entitled to anything. It is a gift, not a right.

Ugh...grabby, horrible post.

I think it depends whether all their descendants are likely to have finished their families before your parents die. Otherwise grandchildren born after their death will get nothing which seems a little unfair. But... It's up to them! Their wills, their choice.

Either way would be 'fair' to me, to be honest.

You could say that it's fair to split equally between children, regardless of how many children they had as that was their choice.

Or you could say it's fair to give each descendant the same as they had no choice which family they were born into, they're all on equal footing to your parents.

I don't think fairness should come into it. It to is up to your parents to decide how they wish to make their will. The worst thing to do would be to fall out with them or siblings about money.

It doesn't matter about "fair"
It matters what they want.

They've obviously thought about it and they think it is fair. I agree it seems unfair for any of their offspring who are younger and haven't had kids yet.
They could have left it all to donkeys or hedgehogs though.

In terms of 'fairness': lots of people receive nothing from their parents (as the estate has no value), so you are lucky to receive anything.

I think the will would be worded so that any one alive at time of their passing would get an equal share, not just alive now.

Sorry you think it's grabby Annie, interesting you assume it's about money... I'm more bothered about the effect on sibling relations. I think this will be damaging.

PS, why should grandchildren born after their death get anything? My son will be sorted for his entire life if/when I die. I'm not putting aside money for his future children who I have never met though, why should I.

Wills are often a cause of problems. I think splitting an estate could be seen to be fair especially if all the people involved are independent adults.

It might be seen as less fair if there are dependent children and some family units end up receiving a fair bigger share than a smaller family unit.

I can't tell you if I think it's fair or not and it's up to your parents.

My parents wills leave everything equally divided between their children as do my and DH's wills. I think it's easiest and least likely to be seen as unfair.

So basically divided between 6 people - but it just so happens that some of those 6 belong to bigger families than others?

If I've understood that correctly, I would say that it's not the usual way of doing things and it would irk me as their child (even though they can do what they want with it yadda yadda yadda)

They can do as they like - my father died 2 weeks after spending his life savings on day and night dementia care at home which cost him £130k in the last year!! So none of us necessarily will inherit anything.
However I think it should be by child and not give to grandchildren at all (unless you are a Lord XYZ and have to avoid inheritance tax or the estate is destroyed).

Seems perfectly reasonable to me ,why would it be detrimental to sibling relationships if each sibling is getting the same amount ?

It is of course entirely up to them to whom they leave their estate but it does seem that it is perceived as fair/unfair in either situation based on whether you are the child with more children or not.

In this case if each child has one offspring then the estate is divided equally among the three branches but if all the grandchildren are from one of the 'children' then it may be annoying to the ones without kids of their own.
A member of my family barely spoke to her mother during the final months of her life because she had willed her estate to be split equally between her two daughters. The one with 3 children felt she should receive more than her sister with only one child as she felt her children would be disadvantaged in the long run.....
I'm encouraging my parents to spend every penny so I don't ever have to worry about such things!

Would I be right in thinking you have no children or fewer children than your siblings and are resenting your nieces and nephews for eating into "your share" of the inheritance? If so, that really does sound rather nasty and greedy. Inheritance isn't a right. Your parents could very well spend every last penny and leave nothing to anyone. It's none of your business what hey do with THEIR money.

Why would it cause problems between siblings?

Are some not planning on having children? That's entirely their choice and shouldn't have an effect on what your parents want.

I assume the money is going straight to the grandkids not the parents of the grandkids.

And yes it's fair.

The money isn't being left to the "family units", though, it's to the individual people concerned, and will be theirs absolutely and not part of the family pot.
How and why do people know so much about how others intend to dispose of their cash? What a distasteful question to ask conversation to have.

Pseudo no you wouldn't be right at all. The exact opposite.

Why would it damage sibling relations if the sibling are getting the same as each other?

In that case I apologise for my assumption. i don't mind admitting if I'm wrong.

If it's the other way round and your siblings are complaining that your family unit will as a whole will inherit more than their family unit because you have more kids then they're the one's being nasty and greedy. Has anyone actually commented on it though or are you worrying about a problem that hasn't happened yet?

Why is it "interesting" that I assumed it was about money? It is about money and the impact you believe the disproportionate distribution of it will have on the siblings.

So I am assuming that you (because of your children) will be receiving a larger share than your siblings? Who the hell cares? Your parents want to bequeath amounts to their family, not just their children.

The siblings are getting the same as each other, but as some have young children ie under 5 their family would get more. The sibling without children (not by choice unfortunately) might feel hard done by?

I felt upset by the split, as I think I am incredibly lucky to have children and now my parents final act will be to reward something that's essentially luck / chance. If I didn't have children and struggling with infertility I might feel a bit shit that my fecund siblings also get more of my parents estate (which until this new will had been split equally between siblings).

And none of this has happened yet and might not be an issue for 20 years!

I shall refer back to this thread if anyone is disgruntled by the outcome and explain Mumsnet wisdom deems it fair so therefore it must be.

Well, I apologize OP. My knee-jerk reaction was to assume that you were being grabby and I can see now that you are concerned on behalf of your siblings'. I apologize for my 1st post.

That being said, regardless of whether you feel guilty, it is no one's business but your parents how they choose to distribute their estate. You shouldn't feel guilty for having children.