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?

Equally or nothing. It will cause too many problems otherwise and life is too short.

My mum wanted to give Me and my brother money last year. I got her to give him 75% of the total. It has benefitted him far more and I know he’s grateful. What would child D say?

What an odd* *question. It should be split evenly between all of the children.

please don't divide between granchildren.

That penalises child D for not having any kids.

And it really isn't fair.

I agree with setting up trust fund for disabled child BUT and this is key, I would talk to kids about my plan to do that and why.

Exactly this.

why steal the pleasure from child D of making his own decision o be generous.

It’s totally vile to disinherit child D

Parents split the money, each have £150k and do what they like with it.

@JonahAndTheMinnow I'm in the option 1 camp because I would expect D would be compassionate and understanding that the other siblings need it more, but you know your children and how D would react.

I would speak to them about it and see what they think, and if it will cause issues then go with option 2.

One thing I implore you is to please please please let your kids know what your decide. I don't like when parents take the cowardly way out, make their will and don't inform the kids so it causes issues later after parent has left. I would rather you faced up to it now, explain your reasoning rather than let them deal with it later.

Parent 2, anything else will cause deep resentment

C'mon cut it out, how is D being disinherited????

This is a mature conversation which if D was a compassionate person who loves her siblings will understand. Stop taking it to the extreme.

If I was D, have an expensive house that I will pay off in 5 years, houses abroad, houses being rented etc I would be happy to help my siblings who are not doing as I am. My love for my parents is not tied to inheritance. If there are other issues that's different.

Equal split between all DC, however if one child has already been given an amount, that should be removed from that child and split between the other 3

Why do posters keep saying D who still has a mortgage and hasn't been helped by parents is better off than B and C who've been bought property and have no mortgage they haven't had to do anything to earn?

Agree parent 2 is right.
the different scenarios of life are irrelevant and if you don’t split it equally you’re being very unfair and going to cause huge friction between the siblings. It’s not nice. Strongly advise you to split equally.
you don’t know what life will hold. The one you give less to might find themselves terminally ill, another divorced, etc etc. It has to be the same amount for each.
im a bit shocked you’re considering otherwise!!!

parent 2 is right

Give each child £75k. They seem to have all done very well from you in one way or another & you’ll tie yourselves in knots trying to resolve this any other way.
They can hardly complain . Id be thrilled if my parents had this dilemma !

Indeed you have insights, and having kids given the same childhood/ background and opportunity, it's awful to neglect one because they've "done well".

The equity vs equality really does not apply between siblings.

Giving more to one child is literally favoring that child. You can't blame children to notice their siblings gets more help, one even got a house no less, will keep having more help.

Parents playing favourite that way are awful.

Split it equally.

I think this is the nastiest and most unfair suggestion of all.
what if d doesn't have kids because they are infertile? or the others wanted more but couldn't for the same or any other reason? their siblings get extra money to add salt to the wound.
what if one of them has another kid after the money has been paid out? all the other grandkids get 33k each but the last one gets nothing because they were born six months too late?
ridiculous!

Parent 1 is an idiot.

why does it have to be D who must be the only compassionate person who loves their siblings in this story?

You'd expect A, B and C to be just as compassionate and loving, and be indignant about getting more than their sibling and refusing not to share the money equally.

You could even argue that normal older siblings tend to be protective of the youngest one, and more generous towards them.

To keep things clear, simple and fair, divide equally, house included. Don't let the older ones spoil the youngest, and don't let the youngest sacrifice his share.

£75k each

Parent 2 is right. Always treat DC equally. If a parent leaves them out they will feel deep hurt and feel unloved.

This. I'd like to think my kids woukd want most venefit to go to the sibling that needed it most.

Parent 2 is correct. I don't agree with punishing your children for being successful. If child D doesn't want or need it, they can decide that for themselves.

Because D has a more expensive house which he or she will pay off in 5 years due to higher income, plus a holiday house abroad plus rental property. Yes D is way way way better off than the others.