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?

If it were me I would leave them all the same but I would help the ones that need it now if you can. They need the help now not when you are gone my dear.

I presume you treated them all equally when they were growing up and gave them all the same opportunities? If so, why would you now punish Andrew for making full use of those opportunities and creating the life he has when the other two when given the same chance to do so? They made different life choices, which is fine, that was up to them but they all made those choices.

It should be equal.

Absolutely. One person's 'abilities and luck' is another person's working like a dog and making sensible long-term choices for themselves and their family.

My MIL at one point intended to leave her house to just one of her children, as he had nothing to his name (he had preferred to drink and party with his money). The other two had worked hard and bought houses. They would have accepted her choices, but how very unfair it would have been.

I would be the Andrew in my family (without quite the disparity you describe) and if asked I think I'd feel very awkward and kind of obliged to say I don't mind otherwise I might appear greedy. When actually I would mind because I'd feel "penalized" maybe for having a bit more get up and go than some siblings.

It's different from the born to a wealthy family v born to a poorer family argument that applies when you're talking about the gap between rich and poor. We're siblings, we had the same upbringing and opportunities.

I wouldn't have any issue with my DPs helping some financially as and when a need arose but with inheritance it's different. Things could change between writing the will and your death or in the years after you've gone. It could be very hurtful and cause huge resentment.

Please do NOT split equally at all.
But leave something to Andrew and children that will be of sentimental value plus something. The idea being that you have thought about them and have done something thoughtful for them.
But leave more to the people who do really need that money, who will be delighted to have a cushion to help them.

I have seen it with my parents. When you are confortable yourself, the £100k will look like a drop in the ocean. If that money is actually not in cash but in house etc..., it will also need to looked after/dealt with and it will likely to be seen as a hassle rather than something absolutely great.

Another way to look at it is to give them some money/help them NOW, as many parents do anyway, according to their needs.

You should split equally. You never know when someone's circumstances might change and suddenly they don't have the income they had previously. It is also grossly unfair to favour another child. £200,000 is a lot for anyone and will make a massive difference to all of them. Your children made their own choices in life and it's unfair to "favour" one over another. They can choose to give money to their children if they want, that's not your responsibility.

Op, is it possible to hand over part of the inheritance now to your kids who aren't doing so well financially?

Equal split for all the reasons given above. But especially the "you don't know what will happen" reason.

However, I do agree with giving some help now, to those struggling now.

I think you could risk causing rifts that will last long after your death if you don't split it equally. Andrew could also be left feeling that you favour the other 2.

Andrew can very easily gift his share to his siblings if he is inclined to do so. You could have that conversation with him and test the water there.

But I think as a parent it has to be equal, sorry!

I presume you treated them all equally when they were growing up and gave them all the same opportunities?

Well actually I woud assume a parent to NOT treat their children/grand children equally when some of them have SEN or health issues.
I know I don’t because I have two dcs with very different NEEDS and the best I can do, as a parent, is to support them in the way they need rather than equally.
Eg a child with SEN will need support (maybe a SALT, tutor etc...) as well as more time dedicated to them (eg a child with autism and regular meltdowns or one that is suffering from very bad anxiety).
Surely treating those children the same than the one who doesn’t have any issue at all and is finding everything easy wouldnt be right??
Unless you are talking about giving them the same opportunities which would mean giving more time and money to one child compare to the other so they can actually have the possibility to access said opportunities....

Split it evenly.
However, you may choose to help the less well off side of the family more on a day to day basis.
Andrew is still your son. You could have a word wit him and tell him of your concerns and ask he keeps an eye out for his siblings when you are gone.

By the way - I hate that trite cartoon which is trotted out as if it is the definitive answer to any question. It is simplistic and insulting as if we are really not able to understand ideas without having them presented as little pictures. It regularly appears on MN threads about education, benefits, wills and whatever else.

I could also be the Andrew in this situation (although both my siblings are very comfortable and at this point no one needs an inheritance). I would absolutely be happy for my parents to say they are leaving more to one sibling or their children. I love my siblings and their children and would want the best for them. I’m pretty sure my children will have everything they could need (support for uni, help for a deposit etc) without inheritance so if my parents were needed to help on these items for my nieces and nephews I would absolutely be ok with that. I actually can’t believe people are saying otherwise.
You should speak to Andrew and get his views on it. I’m sure he will want the best for them.

If it were a smaller amount of money, I'd be inclined to say share it out differently, but £200k to each child is enough to make a big difference to both of the less well off families on its own (each parent could give 50k each to their children and keep 100k for themselves - a fantastic windfall!).

When I was splitting my first will of around 30k, I left the bulk to my fiance, a large chunk to my sister, a smaller chunk to two friends, leaving out my other two siblings.

My elder two siblings have established lives of their own whereas my sister was struggling, so I would have happily helped her with a 'proper' amount rather than giving more people a fairly tiddly sum.

Andrew can very easily gift his share to his siblings if he is inclined to do so
Haha, sorry but ime if there is one thing that is unlikely to happen it’s that one.

Is it possible to help your children that need it just now then leave the will equal?

That's what my dm has done; bought a house for db & sil but will is equal.

Help the ones who are struggling now if you can.

The will itself should be an equal split.

'Equal' is not always the same as 'fair'.

OP, if your instincts are to divide according to need, then do it. But I would write a very clear letter explaining that you love them and value them equally, and why you've chosen to leave your inheritance as you have.

I would also consider that by the time the will matters, everyone's circumstances might have changed. What if the single mum suddenly wins the lottery? Are you going to want to change the will? And if there isn't time to do that, what will happen?

Help the ones that are struggling now. House deposits/driving tests/cars. Take them on holiday, build brilliant memories. Then leave a much smaller estate split three ways.

I would split it equally. I have more children and less money than my brother so if split the way you suggest between families/grandchildren it would be more for me. But I don't think it's fair.

Depends on the individuals, NOT.

You may well be right, but I'll cling to my illusion nonetheless!!

I would do a trust fund for the SEN grandchild now and then and equal split between your three DCs in the will.

Life choices should not be punished/rewarded but the GC can't help having SEN and it will affect his quality of life, ability to earn etc forever. A trust fund could give him some security (and his parents peace of mind).

I'd split it between grandchildren and great grandchildren. We can't see the future, we don't know what curve-balls life might send them and their fortunes.

But do whatever I could to help, now, so far as IHT and rules about deprivation of assets allows.

It’s hard really hard. If you can’t have a rational conversation with Andrew now it has to be a three way split.

As the not well off family, a potential inheritance would change our lives beyond recognition. Whilst siblings it would make very very little difference. There’s a slim chance we may inherit from a distant relative whilst siblings miss out, the siblings have already said we will have to split it between them. Regardless of ‘need’ and actually what that person may or may not have wanted. Whichever side your on you’ll feel resentment. Which is why a conversation is ideal but if you can’t youll have to split it

Either equal split between children, or discuss it with Andrew & do unequal split.

I'd possibly also help the ones that need it now, but also discuss this with Andrew, on the basis of the following:

I am the Andrew, through hard work and desperation. I held myself to high standards and restricted my own life to make sure I met those standards. I have had depression since i was about 12, probably some of it down to overwork. I live within my means and have never been in debt. My son has met his grandparents 3 times, they are basically totally uninterested in him and me.

My sister did none of the hard work and has had endless bailouts and handouts from my parents - clothes shopping trips once a week, large house deposits, cars, bills, credit card blowouts paid for, child's expensive prep school fees, child's expensive hobbies and tastes paid for... all on the grounds that my sister "needs the help". Likes the lifestyle being paid for, more like it...

This situation is happening to my Dad, he was the first person in his family to bother with his education. He went to University and got a good job, not as much as your son earns but he's comfortable and has a modest house.

His brother didn't bother, had a baby with his girlfriend at 16 and has been in prison a couple of times. He now lives with my Grandma rent free whilst she struggles to pay the bills for herself and his family.

My Dad has spent a lot of his time helping his Mum with her finances and helping her when she got into debt. If he didn't do that she would have lost her house.

She's wrote my Dad out of her will completely, because she believes my uncle, his wife and children need the money more. For my Dad he doesn't care about the money it's just a total snub after all he's done for her.

I'd talk to each of your children first, just to ensure they know it isn't a snub or favoritism.