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.

OP, if you think the sibling who doesn't have children may find your parents' wills hard to accept emotionally, could you perhaps broach this with them before the wills are drawn up?

(I'm assuming that because your parents have mentioned their intentions, they wouldn't mind you discussing this with them, but of course I could be wrong.)

Assuming from your posts that there's a third sibling (who also has DC), does s/he agree with you?

I think that it is divisive. Could you speak to your parents about it? If they want to leave money directly to the GC, maybe split it in equal shares with kids dividing one share between them?

definiteissues - can I ask about what you are planning to do to potentially achieve immortality?

I'm intruiged by the if/when you die part of your post..

Thank you, PrincessFiorimonde and to you too.

I think my mum genuinely finds that her DGC are the most rewarding, interesting thing in her life, and would rather talk about them than anything else.

Just remember that they might lie.

My family member did.
Every time we saw them the words "I'll treat you fairly" were used
but the will did nothing of the sort - and had been written years before.

Otherwise they might change their will the day after showing you a fair one

Or they might leave it all to charity

or they might get dementia and it will all get spent on care home fees

DO NOT consider the money as yours until it is in your bank.

i am giving to decendents but in equal chuncks ie the kids of each sibling get one third split between them. ie chid one has 3 kids each get 11 % child 2 has 2 kids each get 16.5%, child 3 has one child he gets 33%. I wanted to split equally between the children but benefit the grand kids as they are the ones that could do with a head start. Undoubtedly that won't be right in some peoples opinion but thats the way I am doing it.

Talk I think there is a difference between banking on an inheritance, and feeling less loved if you feel it isn't fair.

My parents are currently well off, but it might all go in care home fees.
We don't do any financial planning assuming we are going to inherit. They might choose to give it all to charity.

But my currently childless DB would be within his rights, I feel, to be put out if my side of the family got the lions share just because I have kids.

However you look at it, most wills could be considered unfair by someone. The usual split is equally between the testator's children. If any of them die, their share is divided between their own children. This could mean that some grandchildren get considerably more than others, so that the ones with more siblings get less money. That strikes me as hugely unfair, ( particularly as my own 3 dc would be adversely affected by this). So their cousins could inherit enough ( say) for a substantial down payment on a house, whereas my boys wouldn't. That gives them very different starts to their adult lives.
So personally, I think your parents decision is reasonable, treating each person as an individual.
But its almost always the case that someone feels hard done by.

Clearly a polarising subject!

I think hopefully that my parents will
not die soon, and thus the grandchildren will be grown up and adults or nearly so. I think it won't feel so divisive if the money is genuinely needed for uni etc rather than being left to a baby (held in trust anyway til 18 I gather).

I spoke to my DH who agrees we won't fall out about it with family, and if needed I can just give up my share and keep the peace.

I think this is a very risky way to divide up an estate. It doesn't allow for changes in family circumstances, more children, divorce and new blended families, etc.

Or the fact that children are people's life choice, and sometimes the lack of children isn't a choice at all.

At least it is obvious that your parents are attempting to be fair, toastedbeagle. Different people will always have different views on what is actually fair. Family peace and harmony is the most important thing though, really. Presumably, if you are aware of the proposed arrangements, then so are your siblings. Have they said anything? Have you asked them how they feel about it, or asked your parents to ask them, or mentioned your concerns to your parents?

I disagree with the notion, however, that giving money to grandchildren has anything to do with your children's "life choice." They are separate human beings, not a life choice.

Everyone's perception of 'fair' will be different though.

Personally, I think I would like to assign a nominated set amount to any grandchildren - £Xk each, regardless of whose child they are - but not a significant proportion of the estate.

Then the remaining estate is split equally between our children.

I do think it's a little odd to split equally between dc and g/c. What if you had five kids, one of whom had five of their own and the others childless. You'd be giving 60% of your estate to one of your children and their family, leaving the other dc with only 10% each.

To me that does seem hugely unfair (and if I was one of the four i'd be pretty pissed tbh).

I think those who are saying they think it is unfair need to clarify whether they think it unfair regardless of the grandchildren's age. If all the grandchildren were adults and no longer financially dependent on their parents, would it still be unfair? Would it still be one "family" benefiting over another?

roundabout
fair is as fair does

I inherited a wodge of cash at the same time as my siblings.
I used it to pay the last year of my mortgage off and then deal with a lack of retirement planning.
One of my siblings who has a fab DB pension used it on private school fees
Another sibling used in to buy their first home

which of us got the most benefit?

I think so. My gran was 100 when she died. It would have felt v awkward if our side of the family had inherited more because my dad has 3 children and his brother has one. We are all 40+

TalkinPeece - don't think I get your argument, tbh. Are you saying fairness depends on the amount of benefit someone gets from something?

roundabout
I was in my late 40's when I got the money, one of my siblings was nearly a generation younger
I'd managed to get through all those early tough years without help
so that sibling got the help
from their point of view I got play money as I no longer needed the hard work money

when very elderly people die, they leave money to their children
who are often retired, secure, mortgage paid
so they choose to help out those who are younger and NEED it more
but by definition they are people who have had children so find the childless harder to gauge

on the other hand there is a will brewing (of bugger all value but hey) where I am the sole beneficiary and the person who to the outside ear should get it all has been cut out - for reasons that a read of the legal files would make abundantly clear .... but nobody external will ever see those files - so it will look v bad from outside

Some wills though are designed, whether consciously or unconsciously, to cause trouble. And if that trouble happens, the effects will ripple down many years.

Our mother was talking about leaving shares to grandchildren. The problem though is that one grandchild is rated as top, one is rated as middle, and one is rated as nowhere. If she were to leave money according to her preferences this could cause horrible family rifts. When it became clear that she wanted to leave nothing to nowhere grandchild, very much against my inclinations I intervened and made an attempt to persuade her to leave shares only to her kids who she rates equally.

Yes, people should be free to leave their money however they see fit. But I feel free to criticise if it's likely to cause horrible problems to the people who remain.

I agree with that, nauticant - as I said, family peace and harmony is the most important thing and I think the OP is in the best position to pass comment to her parents, being the one who could be perceived as being the largest beneficiary (if you hold by the principle that benefiting your children is benefiting you - something divorced couples often bicker about!). If toastedbeagle is worried about the way this could be perceived, it might well be better to raise it now than to discover the festering resentment later on. She might not, in any event, be hugely happy with the idea of her children inheriting money at the age of 18 if it turns out to be a substantial chunk - she might rather have control over it when they are that age, if they turn out to be a bit immature and irresponsible!

Most parents, who are able to do so, would probably pass on at least some of an inheritance they received to their children. I think leaving it to the grandchild sort of seems to doubt that.

But if the children are small and the inheritance comes to the parents then, even if it is not passed on to the children directly, they will benefit from it.

It just seems to me the simplest way of doing it. And as others have said circumstances change.
I think in your position OP it must be particularly hurtful to your sibling to have their lack of children highlighted in their parents will.

But everyone does things differently. Personally all my children will receive the same and I will trust them to pass it on to their children when and as they see fit.

YANBU.

Most parents, who are able to do so, would probably pass on at least some of an inheritance they received to their children.
If that worked well there would not be several courts in the UK devoted to sorting out shit with wills

being disinherited is the most viscerally nasty feeling I've yet experienced
especially as it was the exact opposite of what I'd been told to expect only a week before

I will never trust people in the same way again
nor will my children who feel they were partly to blame

This is actually something I feel strongly about, as my personal situation has brought it to a head recently.

PIL have told DH repeatedly, without him ever showing any interest in the topic, not to expect any inheritance because they will be leaving it all to the grandchildren. In this case, his two siblings have 2 children each with their spouses. We have none, by choice, but I am now pregnant with our first. MIL phoned me up when she heard the good news and started talking about wills and how she was thinking about rewriting their will "towards a more even split" "although obviously DSiblings will still get more because they have more children than you". This was preceeded with some comments about how she was glad DH and I had "got over" our anti-child stance and were being a "normal married couple".

I am really discomforted at being "rewarded" for being a suitably conformist breeding machine, and told her so, plus that any money left in the will would be unwelcome and we didn't want it. She has constantly rewarded the DH's other two siblings for having children, with attention, round the clock babysitting and childminding, basically they do most things together socially. DH and I are not part of that, nor would we want to be - we have our own lives and friends. But she and DFIL have missed so many of DH's important milestones, such as graduation, while sneaking Dsiblings large deposits and handouts for house purchases, furniture, redecoration, etc..

To me, its pretty obvious she has been quietly punishing us for being childless, and is now rewarding us. I find this controlling behaviour and I absolutely disagree with a grandparent trying to exert control over successive generations in this manner. I suspect a lot of it is to do with PIL being wealthy and bored (they both retired very early) and using the grandchildren as a way of keeping themselves amused. Neither DH nor I will allow our child to be part of this.

Oh yes, clearly I intend to be immortal
It was poorly phrased since I was on my break at work and in a rush.

There are some seriously entitled people on this thread. Quite disgusting really to be talking about parents money and belongings as if you have some sort of right to them. Honestly, for some of you, if I was your parent I'd donate everything to charity just to prove a point that grabbiness doesn't get rewarded

This is an interesting debate, and a tricky one - I can see both points of view. It probably depends on the circumstances. I do think it would be unfair for GC born after their GP's death to miss out, especially if the sums are significant. Personally I think the following would be fair (but this is purely theoretical):

• All money to be split equally between DCs, with a small/modest sum for each GC (including GC born after the will is written but before GPs death). I think this is the fairest way, especially if one of more DC doesn't have children (through choice or not).

• All money to be split equally between DCs plus another equal portion to be shared between GC. For example if there are 3 DCs and 5 GC, the 3 DCs get 25% each and the 5 GC get 25/5 = 5% each. But I would only do this if I was fairly sure that there would be no more GC after my death (otherwise it's not fair that they miss out when the others get 5% and they get nothing).

Pretty complicated and that's before you even consider step-children or step-grandchildren!

All money should be shared between the DCs, not GDCs, the DPs reared their DCs if they, the DCs, then blow all the money on a ferrari the DGPs bad childrearing can be blamed.

I think the opportunity to wield the power goes to their head a bit and rather than keep it simple these daft arrangements are made.

My DM left all to DGC conveniently forgetting that DD1 had had her share when in financial difficulties, - DD1 is a pain so it helps me to keep my distance without guilt and leaves less fond memories of DM than there might have been. Her choice. I didn't need the money but why do stuff that is likely to cause bad feeling between siblings, a nasty legacy imv.