To think SIL should have checked with us before putting us down as carers for her son in her will?

[BillHadersNewWife]

Is it usual to ask before putting someone down as preferred guardian for your child??

DH informed me that sil told him she had asked her son who he wanted to take care of him if she died and he chose us...I mean...that's a huge ask isnt it?

Am I a complete bitch for thinking oh hell no! Honestly I didn't say much to DH but in my heart, I really don't want that responsibility. But I know dh would. So ...I suppose I'm just meant to accept it?

Genuine question - why is it ok to ask the same thing of your brother then?

Yes you should have been asked. But if you don't mind I wouldn't say a lot.

Honestly, it matters not. She’ll be dead so when you put them into the care system, she won’t know 🙄

I guess it's not. But tbf when I asked them originally it wasn't clear how extensive ds needs were

It would change my opinion of her too. Thankfully, the family we have asked have both said yes to providing a home for our daughter if the worst came to the worst and we have friends who will act as trustees of the finances. As I said we have been asked by friends and we would take their children in and provide a loving home -as that’s what friends and family do for each other. I love my friends and would do the best to provide the best I could for their children in very difficult circumstance. I am also flattered they would trust us to do the best by their kids if they couldn’t.

I love my nephew to bits but i wouldn’t be able to look after him. He’s 9 snd his behaviour is off the charts. Spending Half an hour with him has me wanting to rip my hair out.

I hope this doesn't come across as rude but why would you expect them to?

And yet everyone would want their kid looked after if something happened but no one wants to look after the kids if it does.

I’d be annoyed but without the backstory could be six of one and half a dozen of the other.

I’d question the motivations. Are they lonely, or worried they’re losing the you?

Next year, give them a bit of time. A couple of hours or a day around Christmas depending on how tolerable they are. 😂 Then do you.

Yes, I couldn't stay married to someone who would rather see an orphaned niece/nephew in care.

Doesn’t the will just express her wishes though? It isn’t saying this is what has to happen, because it isn’t legally binding, but it’s her wishes.

I think unless there are bigger issues to consider, such as disabilities which would mean a carer couldn’t work, or would have to move home, then I couldn’t get too worked up about it.

So yes she should have asked, saying no IMO is rough, the children in question should be protected and prioritised if it unfolded like this.

As an aside I remember having to do the ‘what ifs’ when writing a will and thinking back up parents (ie what if both we and nominated carers both died) was daft and far fetched. Very sadly I was subsequently closely involved when my friends will did not have such provision when it was needed (nominated carers reneged). Awful, messy and tragic. So just a recommend not to gaff it off as we nearly did.

It isn't legally binding so if it does happen you can just put him in care, don't worry.

Who son would want to look after them is not really the main factor in the decision. They might say their friends mum. SIl obviously agrees with nephews choice and telling your dh this preference is likely how she was sussing out any objection.

You are right you cant say no if dh would want to so best say nothing at all.

I think it depends why you are thinking hell no as to whether you're a bitch or not. If you are childfree and thinking nah I don't want the responsibility then I think it's pretty cold - you should be at least thinking it through and really in such dire circumstances you should be saying yes no matter how it affects you. However if you are thinking hell no for specific reasons - child has serious health conditions that you and DH wouldn't be able ro manage on top of your 5 other children, child has severe emotional dysregulation and you wouldn't be able to cope etc - then I think that's more reasonable.

In any case I think you need to speak to your DH and talk it through - if ultimately between you you feel like you'd end up saying no then you should tell them now so they can get another option in place (and tell them to discuss it with their plan B choice this time!).

Yes she should have asked first. But even if it's in the will, it's an expression of wishes, you don't "inherit" a child and the Court can't enforce it. (I'm a solicitor and various people have appointed me executor in their wills and told me afterwards - i think they assume I'll do it for free and save their families/ beneficiaries some money. But I've been quite clear and said if it comes to it, I will only be able to do it if I have the time available as I work FT and have my own kids. Otherwise I will need to renounce. Some people are really put out by that but this is why they should ask first!)

The practical issue for you if it comes to it, is that your H may want to fulfil the wishes and you don't. Hopefully the situation won't arise. My sister and BIL are appointed guardians of our kids in our wills and vice versa. All four of us discussed and agreed this before drafting; we each had our eldest child around the same time. However my youngest is much younger than the other kids and I doubt my sister would want to take her on once her own kids have flown the nest, and I've made that clear to her that I would expect her to renounce. Daughter's godmother has very kindly volunteered to step up if we kick the bucket.

Sorry, far too long but essentially she should have asked first.

There's nothing wrong with the words the poster wrote. Most of understood it the way it was intended. The husband of course has the chance to say no for himself. What the poster meant is that he does not have the choice to veto HER choice. He can choose to leave if he wants. It doesn't need to be spelled out like explaining to a child.

if you have the means is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Not everyone does have the means, for a whole host of reasons. It’s not something that should be assumed without a discussion. And people do need to know that there is no legal obligation, if this is something they can’t manage.

People shouldn’t be expected to take on children regardless of whether they don’t want to, or can’t.

The problem with the ‘you SHOULD take them, and you’re horrible if you don’t’, is that people will and do say ‘yes’ for appearances sake, but when faced with the reality of the worst coming to pass, won’t actually do it. And yes, that does happen.

In some ways I think it is better not to ask - the will effectively is doing the asking - some people seem to think it is legally binding which of course it is not, second preferences can be stated if the first choice are not able or willing.

Circumstances change and not asking allows parents to update their will according to the current preferences and circumstances without causing offense - and allows the potential new carers to make a decision based on the circumstances when and if the need actually arises, without feeling obligated due to a theoretical promise made years before.

The reality is whether you're asked in advance or after the parents are deceased you either are or are not willing to do it, being asked in person rather than via the will won't change that, and people don't know what may change or how they'll feel if the event actually occurs so someone having said they will is no guarantee anyway. And for the vast majority of people it will only ever be a theoretical consideration anyway.

I think if someone is making this request they should get very good life assurance cover, as it would be so expensive for the person taking on their children.

But what if they don’t want children? Very weird to suggest someone should now be a parent for up to 18 years just because it’s their niece or nephew. You should only have children if you really want them, that includes adoption.

Because you don’t always get to choose your ideal life at the expense of everyone one else. Because sometimes you have to do things for someone else. Because the best thing for a child is very rarely the care system.

This is batshit i’m sorry. So you think a couple who don’t want children should suck it up and bring up children for up to 18 years just because “sometimes you have to do things for someone else”. No, the care system isn’t the best for a child but why should I fuck up 18 years of my life for a child I didn’t want?

As you’ll see, I said earlier that I don’t think that is the case in every situation, but I think that ‘I didn’t want a child’ is a pretty poor excuse, frankly.