Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

My DHs suggestion of legal Guardian for our children is unfair

61 replies

Lillygreen · 29/08/2017 18:30

Sorry if this is a boring one....

We are going to be writing our wills in the near future. DH thinks his parents would be better guardians of our child (and future children). His only reason for this is because they have more money.

My parents are not poor by any means, they own a large house in a good area. My mum works p/t and dad works full time whereas his parents both work f/t and have a lot more disposable income. Both parents absolutely adore their grandchild.

AIBU to think that money should not be the way to decipher who becomes the legal guardians?

Another question- wwyd? We don't have any other suitable family/friends so I don't really have a good alternative suggestion (other than I think his suggestion is unfair on my parents who would be devastated to find out his parents were guardians and not them)

OP posts:

Handsfull13 · 29/08/2017 19:40

We have chosen my sister as our dcs guardian because she will raise them as I would.
She's currently still living with my parents, is single and not got a clear career path yet but none of that makes any difference to me. It was all about who could do what I would do if I wasn't there, maybe that could be the theme of your discussion as to who you chose.

Mummaofboys · 29/08/2017 19:41

I would go with which ever parents live closest to your home now to avoid school changes and upset, taking into account health of each parent and which your children would genuinely be happiest with, my little ones would go to my parents just based on location... they live five minutes from my home now, they are healthier than my husbands parents and my kids adore going to their home, yes my parents are wealthier and have a bigger home but I don't think money trumps live and care.

Ttbb · 29/08/2017 19:42

I would name all four as legal guardians. I certainly think that it essential that there is at least one person from each side of the family.

Matildatoldsuchdreadfullies · 29/08/2017 19:44

We've gone for the ostrich approach, and have no plans.... works for us .

We talked about it, but decided that some family member would come forward - just who, would depend on their personal circumstances at the time, e.g. health of grandparents, relationship status of siblings, needs of cousings, etc. We are well insured, though, so it wouldn't be a financial commitment.

I have said I don't want one relative caring for my dc. He's lovely, and would almost certainly volunteer no matter how difficult it would be for him. But his wife is not.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, don't overthink it. In the final analysis, your wishes will only form one part of the decision as to where the children are placed.

2rebecca · 29/08/2017 19:45

Naming all 4 is a cop out and just means there will be a residency fight if you die

TestTubeTeen · 29/08/2017 19:48

Legal guardian / trustees of the money left to the kids / who the children actually live with can all be different.

And As a PP said, it doesn't work just by bequeathing the children to someone in a will.

Hassled · 29/08/2017 19:51

I absolutely agree that grandparents shouldn't be guardians - if you get hit by a bus tomorrow they might be fit and able to cope with a toddler, but by the time that toddler is a stroppy teen they may well have their own health issues or just not be up to it anymore.

If it does have to be grandparents, you could specify that you want involvement from both sets - in our wills, we've put that the guardian is Friend X, but that we want Y and Z (our siblings) to have an active role in the raising of the children. Obviously Friend X could ignore that, but it does make it very clear that really we want X, Y and Z to collectively make the important decisions.

ivykaty44 · 29/08/2017 19:54

I would seek legal advice as to whether it is unwise to name any grandparents as guardians for your dc

Then when you have had the advice see whether you are having the right argument

Chrisinthemorning · 29/08/2017 19:59

Our solicitor advised that you make your will for if you die tomorrow.
If we die tomorrow with our parents fairly fit in early 70s and DS age 5, we would want him to be looked after by them. I have no siblings and DH has one sister but she isn't an option.
In the future, as things change we will write a codicil changing guardians - we have close friends who live locally, parent similarly and have 1 child and we have already run it by them.

Eeeeek2 · 29/08/2017 20:06

Two words

Life insurance

How easy would it be for either set of your parents to have to parent again and work until your child/ren are through university. The reality is that one might have to give up work/reduce number of hours in order to be able to parent at a more advance age. obviously you could be young parents and grandparents and it's not so applicable

BannedFromNarnia · 29/08/2017 20:19

We've thought about this in great detail and money didn't come into it due to what they'd inherit anyway and the relative financial strengths of everyone involved. In the end, we went with my SIL, who is a single woman a bit younger than us but the kindest and most sensible person - and the most likely to actually think 'what would they have wanted/how would they have reacted' in parenting decisions. I love my family but we have extremely different values.

She's actually the worst off out of all of them, although should the worst happen to us she's the only one who'd inherit my PILs estate, and in their lifetime they'd not let her or grandchildren struggle.

Of course as others have said it may not come out like that if the worst happens, but you can make sure your preferences are recorded and people know about them.

Moomintroll85 · 29/08/2017 20:24

Money isn't everything, while it is definitely a factor, I would also consider things like values and how they'd bring up your DC, their location, age/ability to take on DC, etc. I would also be unimpressed if my DH thought he could dictate this kind of thing to me.

I am in a similar position, me and DH would both prefer our DS to live with my mum and step-dad if something happened to us. MIL is older and disabled, FIL is older and in poor health and I don't have much of a relationship with my dad. Lots of PPs are warning against naming GPs but I'm an only child and while DH has two brothers, neither of us feel comfortable entrusting DS to either of them. Also our closest friends probably wouldn't be suitable for various reasons so I'm not sure what other options we have.

HollyBuckets · 29/08/2017 20:33

He didn't even consider mine. He just told me how it is.

That's the problem, not who actually cares for the children day to day.

Although that is a big consideration obviously! You both need to be sure that if the worst we're to happen whoever does care for the children is thoroughly committed to ensuring the children know all their family, not just one side. My sister went through this discussion- her DH's family were rather cagey about assuring them that their children would be kept in active contact with our "side". Fortunately my sister is still alive and her children grown up!

Original poster

Lillygreen · 29/08/2017 20:39

Wow some great information here. From what you have all suggested, perhaps it's possible to name all grandparents. In the unlikely event the wills would be needed, they could sort it out between them.
DH is very insistent only his parents go on the wills.... I think we need to have another chat!

(Siblings wouldn't be appropriate. Not a suitable time in any of their lives... Also would be accused of favouring one sibling over the other . It's all got rather silly!

OP posts:

SomeDoNot · 29/08/2017 20:47

Have you got to the fun bit of where the money goes if you all die together? Probably the only argument we have had in the past 10 years!

2rebecca · 29/08/2017 21:11

Is it really favouring 1 sib over another? Not everyone has the sort of job/ house/ lifestyle to accomodate a couple of kids who may be teenagers by the time they're needed. It's not exactly winning the lottery!

2rebecca · 29/08/2017 21:14

Plus you don't tell the people who aren't guardians. You just ask your chosen guardian/s if they're OK with it and then forget about it until hopefully the kids are too old for it to matter any more.

sonjadog · 29/08/2017 21:16

It might not a suitable time right now in any of your siblings lives, but remember that it will be years until your children are fully grown and your siblings´ lives will change. I´d consider personality more than finances in this decision, tbh.

Also, have you asked any of these people about it, both siblings and grandparents? I get the impression that you are assuming that everyone will be really keen to be named. You might find that that is not actually the case. Taking on the responsibility for someone else´s children after they have been traumatized from losing both parents is a big thing. It isn´t something that somebody should say yes to without serious consideration, and it isn´t a reflection on how loved the children are.

Original poster

Lillygreen · 29/08/2017 21:21

I'm too nervous to bring it up with the potential legal guardians (our parents). Because if I do, then they will await a final decision and if either side find out it's not them, I worry it will spark a row.

(Already walking on eggshells for other somewhat similar situations. E.g. jealousy over who gets to see their grandchild more...)

OP posts:

opinionatedfreak · 29/08/2017 21:22

Ask the people you are going to name.

I had to really think about it - the thought of taking on my friends extended family to get what she would want for her boys is pretty daunting....

RB68 · 29/08/2017 21:25

You need to make the right decision for your kids - I would go for your parents as Mum is PT. BUT remember your estate would be held in trust for the kids and available to fund them so money isn't really the issue here - you need to think about schools and hobbies etc so their lives can continue. Also I would also say that parents are not ideal as Legal Guardians because they are older and again you need to think of the children living with aging parents - will they end up being carers??? I would look at siblings or close friends first

JigglyTuff · 29/08/2017 21:39

As for the money, my will states that my estate is held in trust and that whoever has the joy of looking after the DC will not be out of pocket. Whatever is left over, they get at 18 if their guardian thinks they're sensible or, at the very latest, at 25.

Scholes34 · 29/08/2017 22:03

You have to think about where your proposed guardians live the impact on your children's lives at what would be a traumatic time anyway before they have to consider the possibility of moving and leaving their friends. We had wanted to put down my DBro and DSiL, but our solicitor said it should just be my DBro just in case their marriage was in turmoil as our DC shouldn't become part of their disagreements or become a bargaining tool. Seemed brutal just to put my DBro, as I adore my DSIL, but it was the sensible decision.

TestTubeTeen · 29/08/2017 22:14

We named my best friend as preferred person to parent the Dc.

Pantryboy · 29/08/2017 22:17

I think I would decide by who the children were closest too and wanted to be with the most. If they were able to chose for themselves which gps would they choose ?

Flip

1 2 3