To split will between dc on basis of need, not equally?

[jzjz]

More of wwyd in this situation

Dh and I have had the same will since our 3 dc were children, splitting everything equally between them. They're now all grown up with their own families and very different circumstances, so I'm wondering if splitting equally is the best thing to do.

For context (all names changed)...
We have three adult children

1. Andrew - ultra intelligent & highest earning by far, his wife is also a high earner (both city lawyers). They have two kids - Bethany & Michael -both v. academic & high-achieving - who they've put through private school. Bethany doing law at top uni, Michael doing A-levels and want to do medicine. So I'd imagine they'll both be high earners in the future. If it's relevant, their mother is an only child and has very wealthy parents, so the family will be getting a big inheritance from them.

2. Hannah - not at all academic, didn't go to uni, got married and had a daughter & son quite young. The son (Jake) is in a stable relationship with 2 kids, has a good office job but doesn't earn a huge amount. The daughter (Isabel) is a single parent to 2 small kids whose fathers aren't in the picture, she works a few hours a week (can't do more due to childcare issues), but mostly relies on parents/benefits.

3. Jane went to uni & is a teacher, so earns a reasonable amount. Husband hasn't worked in years due to disability. 2 kids - the older (Lucy) went to uni, though not a top uni, and has just started working in an office in her home town, living at home. The younger (David) has SEN & works in a supermarket.

My question really is, should we leave the will as it is and split it equally, giving 1/3 to each child?

Should we split it equally 9 ways between each child & grandchild? (or include great-granchildren too?)

Or should we allocate it more on basis of need - i.e. not leave anything of financial worth to Andrew's family?

Should we prioritise Isabel, Jake, Lucy, David?

We are the equivalent of Andrew in your scenario (although not as rich by the sounds of it!). Compared to dh siblings we've done better and I will also inherit more from my parents than his siblings spouses.

If my in laws didn't leave an equal amount in their will and gave dh less it would cause resentment, it is basically being penalised for being successful.

Remember Andrew's wife's inheritance is not his inheritance and should not be considered this way, I'd be irritated if dh or his parents saw what my parents were giving me as dh's as well because morally it isn't, even if we are married.

If you give the less well off children more help whilst you're alive that's one thing, but the will should be equal in my opinion.

I do think that 200K is a really fantastic sum to inherit, so I think you should split it equally and not worry about how much better 300K would be.

My mum has recently redrawn her will to make it less equal, because two of my sibs are in receipt of disability benefits, and she doesn't want their benefits affected. She's right to do what she's doing, but in all honesty, I don't expect to inherit anything at all from her, because I assume that her house will be sold to pay for her care.

To all the posters saying talk to Andrew, he's not necessarily going to say how he really feels about it. My parents talked to me about their will, which is technically equal but with a quirk that means my sibling will basically get all of it. It hurts and makes me feel like they don't love me, even though rationally I can see why they're doing it. I didn't say any of that though, because it's their money, and who wants to be the greedy money grabbing arsehole stamping their feet about who gets what? But I feel like I'm being punished for being the capable one.

A joint annual income of £200k sounds like a lot but there wouldn't be a lot left over each month once the mortgage on a London property is paid and two lots of private school fees are taken into account.

Andrew and his wife do have a relatively large income but after all their expenses, they are unlikely to have a great deal of disposable income.
I'd split it equally but help the other children more while you are alive....

I would split then equally BUT if I had anything spare before then (and to avoid inheritance tax nasties, at least 7 yrs before death....don’t do it at 95yrs!) I would bung them some money and not tell DC1. X

Marvellous cross post.

But I feel like I'm being punished for being the capable one

This is not unusual in families - I feel your pain ...

I suppose I'm just struggling with the dilemma of having one granddaughter who is a single mother on benefits while another has a £100grand trust fund and is studying law at Oxbridge.

Then you need to find a way to help her now

But, as other posters have said, anything could happen to any of your children. If you want to help, do it now. If your capital is tied up in your house, then try looking at ways to release equity (sensibly) or maybe tighten a belt slightly and give your struggling daughter cash. Or go guarantor for her on a modestly priced property in an area of the country where it's affordable.

There are lots of things you could do ...

@DoAsYouWouldBeMumBy I hope your mum has set up some kind of trust to give your siblings access to their inheritance without affecting their benefits? www.forbessolicitors.co.uk/blog/2017/02/legacies-respect-people-receiving-means-tested-benefit-not-vulnerable/

OP, in our family grandchildren are left a chunk and the rest is divided equally between the children. It doesn’t end up equal as better-off parents pass their inheritance through to children ( www.saga.co.uk/magazine/money/personal-finance/inheritance/can-you-hand-on-inherited-money-to-someone-else ) to avoid tax on their own estates, but the goal of equality is important.

I didn't want to read and run, but did want to say that you would need to consider things like leaving a huge amount pulling them off their benefits. They would have to live off of the money given, and account for all their spending until it dropped below a certain amount. So it might not be able to be spent as intended iykwim.

"A joint annual income of £200k sounds like a lot but there wouldn't be a lot left over each month once the mortgage on a London property is paid and two lots of private school fees are taken into account. "

Couldn't have much sympathy for other people's expensive choices, when a sibling is supporting adult children with SEN.

I would leave the "children" out of it - apart from a small amount that will still make a difference to the less wealthy - and split will equally between all grandchildren and great grandchildren (in trust for under 18s). I'd be tempted to have an additional bequest to ensure a secure future for the grandchild with SEN.

Why don't you just speak to Andrew, explain the situation and get his views. You seem like a genuinely lovely person and if he's like you he may well suggest you don't split evenly.
It's your money and you can do what you want with it but it's important to be open with everyone so there's no resentment.

Split it equally. You never know what the future may hold. I know some of my friends who have good income really struggle financially as they are living to their limit on pay. If one lost their jobs they would lose house, car etc.... Dont penalise for them doing well. I wouldent want to cause rifts between my children. When we do our will my children will be equal. If you feel your other children need somd extra support give them the help now rather than leaving a big mess. It would hurt andrew even if he did not say out loud.

This is incredibly tough and not a completely dissimilar situation from my parents (there are 3 daughters). All with varied income.

We are the recipients of two trust funds which will be split equally.
They helped us each out with a deposit on a house but only gave money for the deposit based on each person circumstance (some got around 5% which some got 100%).
When we had children parents helped out based on need (some got an entire nursery while other got smaller gifts)
All grandchildren have money for private school and university.

My parents have chosen to split the money equally on death but gifting sums while they are alive to try and even things out.

I'm not sure if it's the best thing, sometimes I get a little "eh" (like when they bought my sister a new car) because though we're not struggling we're not rolling in it either.
Saying that I don't begrudge my sisters getting anything. But we're all very close.

Split equally between the three. Presumably they all had the same start in life?

To all the posters saying talk to Andrew, he's not necessarily going to say how he really feels about it. My parents talked to me about their will, which is technically equal but with a quirk that means my sibling will basically get all of it. It hurts and makes me feel like they don't love me, even though rationally I can see why they're doing it. I didn't say any of that though, because it's their money, and who wants to be the greedy money grabbing arsehole stamping their feet about who gets what? But I feel like I'm being punished for being the capable one.

This. Talking to him is a bad idea. Not only for those reasons above but letting him know you’ve even entertained the idea may cause the damage you are trying to avoid.

Pannacott but if the will is discussed in advance, and if Andrew chooses whether an equal split is fairest, or he decides to support parents unequal split, that isn't a final message of love after death is it? It's a loving discussion with present, thoughtful parents.

However, as you have read from other posters in this thread, Andrew may well feel obliged to agree to an uneven split in order to be 'polite' and not seen as greedy but that he may well still feel hurt and not like the decision for various valid reasons.

An equal split is the only way to be truly fair. Both my mother and father have passed away and I have a sister and a brother. I am like Jane, my sister is like Andrew and my brother is a worse version of Hannah. Yes, we all had the same upbringing.

Yes, my brother got extra handouts to bail him out of his many fuck up choices in his adult life, whereas my sister and I had to save save save to get on the property ladder, only had the amount of children we can afford, paid our way through studying for further qualifications, went without etc. etc. etc. That still grates on me as he never learnt by being bailed out every time.

I was therefore, very glad, when in my parents' Will, they bequeathed everything equally. I'm not sure I could have sat back and watch my brother being "rewarded" yet again for his particular life choices.

In addition, when my parents died, I had no children (they didn't know we had been trying for a few years and had miscarriages) and yet my sister had two and my brother had 4. If they had also bequeathed extra money for their 'grandchildren', I would also have been upset - it wasn't my fault mother nature wasn't working at that time! I now have two children and it would have been a shame for them to not only not have known their grandparents but to not have had the leg up that their cousins would have had and this may have caused issues.

I am glad, OP, that you have come back and stated that you hadn't thought of changes that might happen in the future and that this can change things. Splitting equally is the only right thing to do.

You split it 3 ways, no other fair option

I would split it equally, but if you have anything liquid I may gift some to your two children (or the grandchildren) now.
You never know what may happen later down the line or what Andrew may do, but l’d make it his choice. My dad has two brothers, he and B1 are wealthy, B2 is not. He and B1 chose to vary their mothers will and gift their inheritance to B2.

Circumstances may change for any of them, at any time. Personally I would go for an equal split if I had more than one child. I only have one so he will get everything.

There is something a little bit patronising about splitting inheritance on the basis of "need". Granted, many people need financial help at some point in life but if that is the case, wouldn't you try to help them now when they actually need it rather than based on some preconceived idea or how well off they will or won't be in the future?
No one has a crystal ball and can predict exactly how well children will be in the future as things change.

My DF said he would share it between us siblings. IN the end he gave it to the DGCs when in fact my DSis could really have done with the money and once shared 9 ways didn't seem much.

My mum has a similar dilemma in that one of my siblings has a partner with wealthy parents as I have I whilst the other sibling has yet to meet someone. Unless someone has millions I think you have to split it equally. Circumstances change & nothing is guaranteed. I agree with perhaps helping the poorer GC out now if possible

I think it should be split equally on death - between all three children. I can't think of a way to do any other way that wouldn't cause hurt, even if it was hidden.

If you can afford to (money not all tied up in equity etc) quietly help out financially those children/grandchildren who would benefit the most right now - pay for school clothes/books/nursery fees/clubs/money towards a holiday.

Who know what the future holds? Lucy may marry a very wealthy business owner or start up a successful business of her own/Jane might win the lottery/Andrew might get divorced and then lose his job due to ill health etc

Another vote for an equal split, given that you cannot predict how their lives will change, but by all means help out the struggling DC and DGC while you are still around.

DH had an equal split with his DSis, and chose to vary the will to give DSis the lot.

He may have felt v v different, if denied the opportunity to make such a generous gesture.