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?

Difficult. I lean towards equal shares, but I would actually have a family meeting and talk about it. I would hope and expect Child D to think equal shares aren't fair.

Yep. Circumstances can, and do, change too.

Parent 2 - each child gets same amount.

Just to clarify on B as I can see what I wrote caused more questions than answers!

B became a single mum at 16 and lived with her baby in her parents’ home until she was 22, while working full time in a low-paid job. Baby’s father wasn’t involved at all. Her parents then bought her an inexpensive house (for well under £100k in today’s money) outright so that she could live independently with her child.

When her child started university and moved out, B met her partner who moved into B’s house several years later. They split bills household bills (utilities, groceries) but do not share finances at all, and B has legal cohabitation agreement in place so partner has no claim on her house.

Financially, the help given to child C to ensure their disabled child could be supported and adequately housed for their needs was far in excess of what was provided for B (and more than A, B, or D will get this time, regardless of how it’s split).

Divide it equally

Equal split.

The hand life has dealt them, or how hard each respectively works should not be a factor in how you treat them as a parent.

The only possible exception, which even now I think is dubious, but is if you approach child D independently, first, and be quite frank: you have already made the decision to split the money 4 ways, but are also aware of their own very high personal assets, so if they would like their £75k it's theirs, but if they would rather let the 3 less fortunate siblings receive £100k instead, then that's their decision, and categorically no one will know you've had this chat to give them the choice if they decide they would like to keep their £75k.

Parent 2 - child D shouldn’t be penalised because they have done well for themselves.

however, if child B has had a house bought for them by their parents already then I actually think it should be split between A, C and D

Definitely parent 2.

Are D of child baring age / likely to have kids. If not I would split equally between all your family members. Ie children and grandchildren alike so everyone gets one ninth (if I’ve added grandchildren up correctly).

Share between all grand children, in trust until they're 25.

Or for disabled grandchild, until parents have died, if sooner.

The only fair way is to split it equally 4 ways, so £75k each, irrespective of circumstances.

Anything else will breed resentment amongst the recipients.

Equal split.

Equal. Circumstances change.

I think this is a good example of Equally or Equitably. Equal is the same amount to all. Equitable would exclude D as they have a lot, perhaps B getting less, of the one who has a disabled child getting more than the one who has a non disabled child. If one had a spouse from a minority, then they might get proportionally more as minorities might suffer adverse bias.
Right? Wrong?

In that case, both B & C have already had help in line with their extra need - I don't think it's justified to effectively penalise D for having better luck in life.

Now's the time to treat all equally - otherwise the disparity is just so striking.

Skip a generation and split equally between the 5 grandchildren.

I would add the cost of B's house to the 300K and then divide by 4. B should get their share minus the cost of the house that B's parents bought for them.

That's obviously assuming similar gifts weren't give to the other children too. If all 4 received similar financial gifts, then divide by 4.

Just because some have good jobs and lives now surely that can't be assumed to be forever? 4 way equal split or reap the consequences op..

Child B has already had a house bought for her by the parents.
Child C has had their mortgage paid off with large gifts from the parents
On that basis the money should be divided between Child A and Child D.

But D doesn't have children, so not sure how that makes it fair.

OP you're really confusing.

Stop talking about people in the third person.

You've got 4 kids. Ignore all the "hard work, single parent at one point" stuff because it's irrelevant.

Kid A. Has had no property financial help from you this far?

Kid B. You bought a house for £100k, and now she's moved in with her partner?

Kid C. You bought a house for? Paid for some of the adaptations to the house?

Kid D. Has had no property financial help from you this far?

Parent 2 is right equal split

In that case, both B & C have already had help in line with their extra need - I don't think it's justified to effectively penalise D for having better luck in life.

Agree with this - split it equally.

Equal split and let child D make their own choice if they want to keep the money or not.

No question- split it equally.

Child D presumably worked hard for their money, it’s not for you to try to even things up by penalising them.