What does fairness look like to you in this scenario?

[JonahAndTheMinnow]

Parent 1 and parent 2 have been married for a long time and have four adult children. They’ve recently sold an asset and want to share £300k amongst their children.

All children are aged between 35 and 48.

Child A - Eldest child. Married with grown-up children who live independently. Mortgage cleared recently. Household income isn’t very high and they don’t have much of a pension pot so will likely rely on state pension and likely work to full retirement age.

Child B - Was a very young single parent. Their child is now grown up and B has a partner. They live together in B’s house (bought by B’s parents) and B has no mortgage. B is a very low earner with no personal pension and will rely on state pension and work until full retirement age. Their job is tough and very physically demanding and working to 65+ will be a challenge.

Child C - Has two children (teens) in full time education, one with severe physical disabilities who will never live independently. C can’t work due to caring needs. Her husband works and he has a pension which should see them both live a modest but comfortable retirement. Child is in receipt of disability benefits. C and her husband have about 4 years left on their mortgage. Monthly payment is low on a house worth over £500k, thanks to generous gifts from parents, but they’ll never be able to downsize as it’s custom built to meet needs of disabled child. They have a lot of additional costs linked to their child- physio, need for a vehicle that can meet their needs rather than a cheap run-around etc.

Child D - Youngest child. Vey high earner married to a very high earner. No children. High mortgage costs on a large home but will clear in next five years. Own several investment properties and an holiday home outright. D and spouse will retire early with significant pensions. Current unmortgaged assets valued in the millions and had an inheritance from spouse’s parents of £600k in 2020.

Parent 1 wants to split the money between children A, B, and C so they’ll each have £100k. 1 thinks they need the money more than D and it’s a life changing opportunity for them whereas it’s not for D. 1 thinks that treating people fairly doesn’t always mean treating people equally and circumstances have to be taken into account.

Parent 2 wants to split the money equally between all 4 giving them £75k each. 2 believes that all children in the family should be treated equally, regardless of their current position.

What do you think?

Share it equally. Don’t let money be the cause of division and upset in the family. It is a lovely kind generous thing to share so much money around rather than spend on yourself OP they are very fortunate. In general (don’t know of relevant here maybe not) I really don’t agree with siblings who have studied/worked hard and maybe even had to go without short term for wise long term gains missing out and siblings who made poorer choices eg getting into debt, not taking care of their own finances, not planning ahead, etc being rewarded financially at the cost of other siblings. So equality every time.

Tbh, in our family we would split it equally but D would reject it and say to give it to the others.

Split it equally. Is the only fair way.

Equal shares for all, and on any event be aware of the tax implications of gifting such large amounts And don’t ask child D if they mind an unequal division; they’ll feel pressured to say no but will feel like they’re less valued than their siblings.

Split equally otherwise you have to consider that one child was given a big handout in the form of a roof over their head which is a biggie if they’ve not had a mortgage to pay for their entire adult life. So Parent 2 otherwise you have to keep bringing up all sorts .

Parent 2.
An equal split is the only fair thing to do.

Splitting it equally is the only option because the children will see the money as a proxy variable for how much their parents love them compared to their siblings. It's not about the money or who needs it at all

You've already bought B a house and given generous gifts to C! Agree with PPs that everything should ideally be equal, but I suppose sometimes you feel the need to step in. Are you sure there isn't already bad feeling between the siblings?

i agree with parent 2, unless 1 child has already had more inheritance than the others in which case I’d give that child less now to ensure that overall each child gets equal.

Technically P2 - split equally.
You don't know if D may want children/has insecure job etc but if they have no children they may leave their wealth to the nieces and nephews anyway

I did need the money as much as my sibling and the sum would have been life changing for me as it has been for him . Maybe she doesn't love me as much as him...as I said he can look after her when the time comes.

You def can not penalise D because they have done well for themselves and have no children.

Two of my sinking bummed around at school and have made lots of really stupid decisions and my parents have bailed them out a lot. I'm well off but it's because I worked extremely hard.
I do find it annoying that my siblings laziness is rewarded. I don't say anything but it really annoys me.

We all had the same opportunities.

It's really shitty to give less money to family units if they have less kids or don't have any kids.

I have more than one child, and I have siblings. I only skim read the four scenarios, because the details make no difference to me as I'm firmly with Parent 2.

Then only exception I could think of would be if one adult child were an addict of some sort - and then I'd probably keep 'their' share aside and invest it on their behalf, to keep an option open on them becoming a reformed character.

Child D has no children, but is the youngest, so aged 35. The children situation could for children D change. Because no one can predict what happens in life. Which means that since no one can see into the future the money should be split equally

You've given lots of information but in some ways it's still not enough. Anything could happen to change or upend their lives. I've known people in Child D's position but then their sector slumped, their marriage broke up, their home was repossessed, their holiday home sold. They had a tough decade. None of it could have been predicted from the point when they were successful.

A lot of MNers equate money with love so they throw their toys out the pram when anyone suggests money isn't divided equally. In RL, I know families that gave every DC the same and others that gave more to those they thought needed it most. Family dynamics are important too. In the families where there was a difference in what the DCs received, no-one begrudged it. They all agreed on who needed it most.

Equally

Maybe ask the kids? DH’s brother has gotten hundreds of thousands of pounds from parents basically because he can’t hold down a regular job. No neuro divergence or disability, he’s just not that regular of a person. DH has gotten some money, other sob somewhere in between. DH and I are both high earners but live well within our means and I will likely inherit £1-2mil from my parents, possibly more. Maybe it should feel unfair BIL has been given all this money but I don’t really feel like it is and neither does DH 🤷‍♀️. If my parents did similar, I would feel it was unfair because my DB is also a high earner with good job prospects and same number of DC as us.

I would split equally but only after taking account of the already given amounts to B & C and the effects of inflation. It’s easy enough to find out how much £80k in 2003 is worth nowadays for example.

None should go to grandchildren, they are the parents responsibility. One child should not get less because their siblings bred like rabbits imho.

If B has already received from the same fund in preference to the others then that must be equalled out some time.
If not now then in the final will after the parents have passed.
At the end they should be treated equally.
The family together should be invited to contribute to a fund for the severely disabled child.
Those negotiations should be finalised by an outsider.

I'm sorry but as a parent you have insight into your children's lives and from what OP has stated D has or a lot better than the others so not sure what you mean by "who are you decide they don't need it" I'm sure everyone who reads their situation can see that the others need it more, its not rocket science.

Working their arse off doesn't matter, what matters is D is financially well off and doesn't need while it would go a long way to help the others simple. I worked my arse off to get to where I am today, that doesn't give me the right to begrudge my siblings when I know they really need it. Frankly it's a very selfish and grabby attitude to get upset and conclude your parents don't love you because they have your sibling who needs it a lot more than you money. Again if it's a case of parents favoring one child that's different but that's not the case from what OP has written.

How the hell is it punishment? I guess it will be punishment if your love and acceptance of your parent is tied to inheritance.

Maybe this will help you understand what I am saying. Equity v Equality

We claim we should be practicing this in society but somehow not in the family is when it comes to inheritance.

my parents were recently trying to work out what to do with some money.
3 adult kids, all have houses.
I have low income household and 3 kids
One brother has literally millions and 2 kids
other sibling decent job and 3 kids.

My parents wanted to bypass us and give it to grandchildren, split equally.
Wealthy brother was really hurt. Because his kids then get less than if it is divided by 3 kids and then passed down. He didn't care about the amount, he cared about the fairness. he felt that his life choices to earn money was no leaving his kids with less inheritance.

We were surprised because his kids can retire without earning aged 25. But to him it mattered because it was the fairness and the principle.

Other sibling and I quickly told my parents to split it equally between the three families.

in your scenario child D is getting the message that they are worth less. If you divide by grandkids then they get penalised for not having kids.

I think you have 2 options.

1. make the decision that disabled child needs provision and tell familty that it is in trust for that child. If that chidl dies it is divided between 4 kids
2. divide it equally between 4 kids.

But you could talk to them and see what they think. Ask what THEY think is fair, and see what happens.

In this family as an adult kid I would happily see the money go into trust for disabled kid, but then I have seen how valuable that is.
If I was child D I'd happily pass it to siblings. But it is very different to do that as a choice, than to find it has been taken from you

In all honesty if I were the parents I’d speak to child 4 and their partner. If the disparity is that high and child 4 is a decent person they’d probably forgo the money.
But if they want it then yeah split equally, to avoid ill feeling between the siblings.

Split equally, Child D has the short straw every which way as they also don't have children. My late ex did something similar and it truly hurt the hardworking solvent child, it was never about the money it was about being recognised.

Should be split equally. Its not a siblings fault if they earn more than another sibling. You'll cause friction if it isn't shared equally.