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?

How amenable is child D? I would have a frank conversation with them. But I also agree that the disabled child should be a 5th factor in this and have a trust set-up for their future care.

2

Parent 2 is right, all the way. An equal split. Anything else is a recipe for a family rift.

Am I reading correctly that child B had a house bought for then by the parents already? Meaning that they have already received a considerable sum?

What do all the other children think about that?

However, to answer the actual question, I think you talk to child D, say you have £300k and you want to talk to them about how to split it. You are happy to split it between all 4 but given their personal circumstances how would they feel about it just going to the other 3 (or even just A and C if B has had a house bought for then already)?

You must absolutely express that you will happily follow whatever D chooses and never tell the others.

To cut out D without consultation would be terrible, and you can't guilt them into giving up their share, they may happily tell you to give it to their siblings, they may not. But you can't cut them out.

I'm obviously in the minority here but I really disagree. I always dislike actions done on broad sweep "fairly" when the outcome is not. It's the difference between equality and equity. I can't link it but there's an image of three people trying to see over a fence. They all get one box. The shortest still can't see over, the tallest already could and the middle one now can. In the "equity" image, the tallest gives his box to the shortest and they can all see over. I think adults with healthy family relationships ought to be able to appreciate different needs and not equate it with love, preference or affection.

Parent 2 is right. Child D potentially could say no, it's OK, we don't need it - but I'd bet they won't. Nonetheless it should be divided evenly to avoid ill feeling between the siblings.

Yes, that's a good point - have the other siblings had similar help? Because otherwise, B has had far more out of the bank of Mum & Dad than their siblings, which may cause resentment.

The only option is an equal split, unless you want to create war in your family and divide your children against one another. It's honestly not worth the risk. They then can individually decide how to use the money to their best benefit.

Equally.
75k each is a lot of money for child A, B, and C. And that same amount for child D will stop any hard feeling. Everyone is able to be happy with parent 2s choice.

You have no idea what will happen in the future so split evenly between all 4. There will only be resentment otherwise that will damage relationships.

B is in a house their partner’s parents bought - that’s how I read it.

Split equally is the only fair way to do it.

Split it equally.

Parent 2 is right. It’s not worth creating tension between the children. People do see money as an expression of love.

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.

Thats in reply to Almostautumn2023

Parent 2 is right. Unless of course you want child D to resent you forever. When it comes to finances and children everything must be shared equally.

I'd say parent 1.

To me equity means more than equality in this instance. Talk with child D and explain your plans.

This was me too! Don’t care what their situations are. Split it equal.

Split it 4 ways if you value your relationship with all your children rather than just 3 of them

Parent 2, equal split.

it would be unfair to do it any other way and you do not know what lies ahead for any of them.

In our family the children have always been given equal shares despite family/ earning capacity/ partner earning capacity/ number of children or none. It's up to each how they use it. They are currently still fairly close. Money can split families if care isn't taken.

Just to highlight- the dc who is claiming benefits might lose out - savings are taken into account for some benefits

Equal spilt. Don’t penalise child D because she made better degree/employment decisions.

We had this situ in our family - in that case D refused the money & split between siblings.

I'd go for 1, but the correct answer is 2. Could there be a proviso for D that they leave an equivalent amount to C's disabled child in trust in their wills?

Equal split!

I can’t imagine ever leaving one child out.