To think the only fair way to leave your money is equally

[Runbunny]

Between your children. Plus any other legacies, but treat the children equally.

I understand people will have reasons for doing it differently, but you just leave behind a world of hurt and possible friction between siblings.

My Dad spends a lot of time thinking about his will and inheritance tax and occasionally floats various ideas past us. ATM as far as I know, it is to be split equally between SDsis and I . I often tell him I don't care, I wish he'd just spend it all, and I mean it.

However, his latest idea is that he'll leave the lion's share to me and my DC because I'm widowed and neither I or DC are likely to be left anything by DH's parents, whereas DSis's family stand to inherit well from her inlaws.

I'm horrified at the idea. It's probably true that DSis needs the help less than I do, but neither of us are broke and as I understand it there's a decent sum (care home requirements excepted) to split anyway. I think it's about more than the money, and DSis would be entitled to feel very hurt if our parents do anything unequal. Plus no one really knows what ILs will leave or who to.

I agree

my DM has openly said she is leaving more to one of my siblings who isn’t married. It’s her money so I say nothing but I find it odd. Her reasoning is she worries about said sibling but no one knows what’s round the corner for any of us. I think it’s very divisive and sends the wrong message. But I also don’t believe in interfering

Personally I think it should always be equal. The emotional fall out from any other decision is too awful to contemplate. I also think financial situations can change throughout a lifetime so what is considered ‘fair’ at the time of writing the will may not actually stand true at the point of inheritance.

Dh’s dad has said he might leave a large chunk in trust for his disabled grandson which will mean dh’s kids will get substantially less. I’m staying out of it and can kind of see the logic. But it’ll effect the benefits said grandson will get.

anyway …not my problem.

my mum spilt her will equally. .

This is true, when my GPs wrote their will, their youngest daughter, a surprise late baby as still at school, so the will had been written to ensure she had money to finish her education and set her up with a home, although didn't specifically state that, just weighted everything in her favour. She was 38 when her mother died, leaving the unchanged will!

I think perhaps that is the one situation that does seem reasonable?

If all the kids get on with parent and are supportive - I get leaving a fair share to each. If one does nothing and doesn’t even stay in contact, I can understand leaving more to the child that cares for you on a daily basis.
I if you all get a fair share - that should include all the caring and responsibilities when mum and dad get old.

I agree. Anything else causes a shitshow and potentially destroys the children's relationship. And don't get me started on people who leave just as much to random financially secure nieces and nephews as they do to their own children.

I agree, that sounds very reasonable.

I understand why people might think like that, but I still think it leaves behind a lot of potential to ruin the favoured child's realtionship with their siblings and make them miserable, when presumably the intention was to do the opposite.

It's not always simple.
Let's pretend a mother has £100,000 to leave to children.
In a simplistic world, they both get £50k.

But life is complicated..

Child A was given £10,000 for a house deposit at the point of being able to secure a mortgage at 24.
Child B is 17 at this time. So will get their £10k at the point of being able to secure a mortgage.

Mother dies before giving Child B their house deposit.

So now what? Is a 50/50 split still fair? Or should it now be a 40/60 split?

A lot of people equate "equal" with being automatically "fair," in these conversations.

I think that it comes down to the individual and what they feel is best.

For example, if you had two siblings, and one of the siblings is a multimillionaire and the other sibling is just barely making ends meet-would it be fair to split it evenly between them just to save on "ill-feeling," despite one sibling not needing the money and the other clearly needing it?

Obviously-that's an extreme example and many are not in that situation, and in most circumstances, it is best to do an equal split between siblings to prevent any divisiveness. I would probably say if they're going to make an uneven split in their will-this should be discussed and explained as the will is drawn up so that each party understands the reasons behind it and knows what's what. Rather than getting the will and finding out on the hop and being left with questions that'll never be answered.

But leaving an equal share to the child that did fuck all, went NC, didn't even ring etc.. will leave behind a lot of potential to ruin the "commited" child's relationship with their siblings and make them miserable, when presumably the intention was to do the opposite.

I'd do £10k to the younger child and the rest 50/50. Changing the % split could mean either they get a lot more, or less, than the £10k "owed" because of changing finances between writing the will and the death.

My Grandad did something similar. The house proceeds were to be split equally between 4 DC and his savings account to go to the DS who he lived with for the last few years. No one objected to that, but by the time he died the savings account was 4 x the value of the house, which I don't think is what he intended.

My BIL is a multi millionaire without kids (and will never have them), we are not poor but have a mortgage and kids and MIL split 50/50. The inheritance meant nothing to BIL, it was basically 2 months salary for him. I would have thought MIL would leave something for our kids (her only grandkids) but she didn’t. So yes it was all equal and didn’t cause issues but I she could have left a small amout for the grandkids (for uni etc) and BIL would still be a millionaire living in a mansion! But hey ho…

I agree, anything else causes issues.

My parents have always said that this is the way. That you split everything equally between you kids.

Now however, they are changing their tune. They want to split it between kids and grand kids, I have one my DS has 3. Their choice obviously but they have already given DS huge amounts of money because she kept getting into unmanageable debt, and paid for holidays and cars for her kids because she couldn't afford it so I do feel it's unfair.

Hopefully they have many years left, will give me time to work on my zen.

Other than in very exceptional circumstances I think assets should be split equally between children. That's certainly what we have decided to do in our family.

I have seen the devastation when the division is unequal and it's a very bitter legacy to leave to your children. Circumstances can change: the child who doesn't 'need' the money so much could find themselves very much in need in the future, for all sorts of reasons.

If adult children want to redistribute between themselves afterwards that of course is their right, but ours will all receive the same amount of whatever is left when my OH and I die.

I don't think it's all about the money though. If you don't split equally, you risk setting up a situation where dc feel they weren't cared for equally.They money represents much more than its financial value.

But she left it to you (DH), you can help dc with it, if that's what you want.

She left it to DH, we put it towards the mortgage, we don’t have anything left now.

My father cut me out of his will completely without telling me. When I asked why, he said I was irrelevant to the family because I don’t have children.

That was you choice though.

In most circumstances equally is the best option. Otherwise as you say @Runbunny rifts and friction develop. One of my relatives has a very rich dc, the money was still left equally but the rich child gave the majority of his share back to his siblings.

Equal is easier because circumstances change. I can see the logic in your case re why your father might be thinking of it (sorry for your loss) but from your sister’s perspective you could have had significant life insurance payments or in-laws may change their mind and include something for children or you could meet someone new who came from a wealthy family. By trying to even out one inequality, there is always a risk that life changes and the person in a worse position isn’t necessarily in that space years later.

Yes it was thanks. You might have noticed interest rates have risen and most
people try to pay off their mortgages these days. And it was her choice to exclude her only grandchildren.

Sorry, I disagree. For various reasons my will does not split my money equally. One DC has had a massive amount of financial help from us over the years while their sibling has had nothing. My will reflects this and also explains, for the record, why I have divided my estate the way I have.

I should add both DCs know about this.