To feel sad I'm going to end up 'managing' another man

[twentyoneteacups]

Aware I might be setting myself up for attack by posting in AIBU for this, but here goes...

My dad's been sorting out his will recently, and adding a Letter of Wishes - things that don't go in the will itself but offer guidelines for how he'd like some other things to be handled.

One of the items in the Letter of Wishes is about his younger brother.

They come from a pretty well-off family, and this brother, my uncle, has lived his life accordingly. He recently got his first job (at 62 years old) after spending his life gambling, being funded by his mother (my grandmother), and chasing 'big deals with the Saudis' that never come to fruition.

A few years ago his 'luck' with the Bank of Mum ran out, and he's since sold his fancy Central London flat (bought for him by their parents), moved into his sister (my aunt)'s house for 2 years rent-free and then when she ran out of patience (she's a saint and takes beautiful care of everyone around her), a granny-flat in a neighbour's garden. He's got a job as a van driver and is earning now, which is good, but he's going to be in trouble when it comes to his later life.

He didn't like my mother, and so cut any meaningful contact with my dad when they got married. He's never sought any kind of relationship with me at all – contrasted with his relationship with my cousins (my aunt married 'well', so he was in their lives quite enthusiastically).

Which brings us to my dad's Letter of Wishes.

Dad has said that if I need money from his estate, I should put that need first. But if I don't, and his brother outlives him, he wants me to use the money to take care of his brother – not leaving him a lump sum (because he'll gamble it away), but to pay him a monthly stipend and cover his care.

Essentially, to make sure his brother is OK.

It's very 'my dad', wanting to take care of family no matter what, and I love that about him, AND there's a part of me that's pretty... miffed.

I've found myself repeatedly in relationships with men where I've ended up leaving because they started relying on my finances, borrowing and not paying back, expecting me to cough up for big purchases, doing the 'financial management' of our relationship for them, and this feels like a repeat version of this – but for a family member who has never taken an interest in me nor done much to take care of himself.

It's not that I want whatever money my dad leaves behind all for myself – I've worked damn hard to get to a place where I'm financially stable on my own and should be fine in the future without anything that my dad leaves me – it's more the mental and emotional load of being my uncle's financial 'carer'.

Yet again, it feels like, men get to do whatever they want, and in swoop the women (my grandmother, my aunt, and now potentially me) to do the work of rescuing and 'making it all ok'.

I feel guilty for being frustrated by this, because of course I don't want my uncle to suffer later in life - I don't want that for anyone. He's not been 'family' to me, but he is my dad's family, and I'll respect my dad's wishes, and honour his values. Heck - it may never even come to that point, but it is niggling at me.

So I guess I'm looking for either some validation for my feelings, or a good Mumsnet-style head-wobble... how does it all land with you? AIBU, or is it OK to be torn about this?

Your father's "wish" is completely untenable. How does you define your uncle's (or anyone's) need? Can he turn up and ask for £200, £2,000 or £200,000? He could say he needs to buy a house or a new car. By the same token what defines your need? This is a bonkers idea and I've never heard anything like it. Your father either leaves him a set amount in his will or sets up a trust. Otherwise the whole thing is a nonesense and will leave you in a ridiculous position.

Are your cousins in a position to manage a set amount of cash for this Uncle? Seeing as they have a relationship with him and since it sounds like they are good people, would a set sum of money that could be set aside - be used by them to be in charge of?

On the premise of course that there is no more money to be given.

This (what @Carrelli posted) is what leapt out at me too: you are faced with determining whether your need is greater than your Uncle’s need, potentially for life. That is not a reasonable situation for your Dad to offload onto you. The emotional burden is potentially intolerable and the dynamic could go on for decades.

As things stand, the “women taking care of men” dynamic is not playing out between you and your Uncle. It is playing out between you and your Dad. I would tell your dad to do the emotional and money math himself and write it into his will, and otherwise you will ignore his letter of wishes and just split up the money when your Dad dies and give you and your Uncle each a lump sum in the usual way.

You may risk your Dad leaving you less that you would have allocated yourself but to me that is amply worth not having to think about your Uncle’s wellbeing after your Dad dies.

I think this sounds fine. I get if you've had issues with having to manage money for/bail out men in the past, it will be affecting how you view this. But what your dad's suggesting doesn't sound like it would be any different if you were a son and being asked to make sure your aunt had a roof over her head.
Your dad wants to feel settled that his brother won't end up destitute, and you can reassure him on this which will be a comfort to him and his sense of duty. However, he hasn't chosen to set up a trust and actually allocate those funds to his brother, because then that would take away from your inheritance, and you might need the money more than your uncle. Your dad's giving you first dibs.

There's no point thinking/worrying about what decisions you'd make when/if the time comes, because that depends on lots of different circumstances. Your dad trusts your judgement, that's lovely.

The state might be providing for your uncle perfectly well by then, and as he would have no legal claim on your inheritance from your dad, the money can't be used for his living or care. If you do choose to pay him e.g. the interest you're getting on invested lump sum, you can do this at arm's length with a firm boundary and minimal communication as PPs have said. But you don't have to pay him anything at all and that's absolutely fine - if your dad wanted to ensure he had something, he'd be setting up a trust.

A letter of wishes is just that and is not legally binding. Your uncle could possibly take you to court but given the will (presumably) doesn’t mention him, he is very unlikely to gain anything from doing so unless he can prove he has been financially supported by your dad. A friend who worked in the industry used to tell me how relatives would try this all the time and that it never worked, in her experience.

I agree that your Dad is trying to find a way to assuage his guilt, without realising that it firmly dumps guilt onto you. I would ask him to remove that clause, and either he leaves him something or he doesn't, but you don't want that burden or even to consider it.

OP you will never know when you will need the money, how would you feel if you bail out your uncle time and time again only later on to find that you really did need that money?

My thoughts are that can write your own will to his benefit if you die before him providing that doesn’t leave any of your loved ones without.

A wish is just that, something that can be done but only IF it can be done. If it can’t well, that’s just unfortunate.

It's not legally binding.

To me the letter of wishes reads less like " if possible, set aside some money for feckless uncle, please" and more like "it's all yours, but if you ever feel generous towards feckless uncle you won't be betraying my final wishes if you give some away."

I wouldn't think more deeply than that.

My view is that is pretty deep to be thinking.

Haven’t yet RTFT, but full solidarity with you OP. It sounds like your dad’s diplomatically giving you an ‘out’, a safety net maybe. As he expects your uncle to come after your money when his other sources all run out.
You’re very much NBU. Your description of ‘management’ of a man is spot on. Your dad sounds lovely. Good luck 💐

This sort of brain ache is a burden. You know what you can and can’t do, practically and legally and morally, but it’s the constant second-guessing and soul-searching.

One way to deal with it is to decide now (or when your father passes and you know what his estate comprises) to ring fence a certain amount for your uncle. Make that decision at the outset. Don’t give it, don’t do anything with it other than sensibly manage it, but have it in your head that x amount is for your uncle if and when he needs it.

Then put it out of your mind.

Try to remove the man-child element. I understand what you’re saying and it’s undeniably shit, but if this were an aunt I suspect you’d feel the same way about the burden of this. In this instance, it being an uncle is just grist to a pre-existing mill.

I think the important thing is to ensure that your dad (and the cousins come to that) do not mention to the uncle the letter of wishes, otherwise you'll get loads of hassle from the feckless uncle.

@twentyoneteacups Tell yourself you are not going to carry this responsibility now and make peace with it. Then decide if your dad can handle the discussion around this - I'm sure you know him well enough. If you do discuss and are 100% sure you will never need your full inheritance a trust fund is the best solution. If it's kinder to not tell your dad then so be it. I could not do everything my dad wanted for a close relative. After dad's death I made a compromise arrangement he never knew about with which I was comfortable. I'm not suggesting you compromise - just that you do what makes life easiest for you.

OP, perhaps this is a red herring, but aren't there potential tax implications of your Dad's suggested way of doing things? You haven't mentioned the sums involved, but there's a limit on how much you cash can give away each year without it having to be accounted for in your estate, should you die. (It's £3,000 pa I think, but don't quote me as I've never been in a position to give away that much 😆). It may not be an issue but something to check out, perhaps?

So when the time comes if there's any money left, you 'need' it so none left for uncle. I hope your Dad hasn't told him about this.

I think there's also a romantic side to my dad that always wants to be a 'rescuer' who does 'the right thing', and that's where this part of his thinking about what happens after he passes is coming from.

Key word here being after he passes. He won't be doing any rescuing, you will! He hasn't the right to force someone else into the role of rescuer. I would tell your dad that you won't do it. Either the money goes to you, it goes to his brother or is shared. But the last thing you would want is for this spoiled little brother, who has already shown that he only cares about the money, to come knocking on your door all the time, because he will.

If you father wants to "rescue" his brother with money, he needs to leave him a lump sum or set up some kind of trust for him, but he should not demand that you become his brother's keeper.

When the time comes, can you decide what you can spare from your Dad's estate and set it up as an annuity for your uncle? Tell him he gets £X per month. Do a Deed of Variation too to give him that much via the will (but as an annuity) if it would impact your Inheritance Tax otherwise. Then that's job done and walk away.

@twentyoneteacups

Firstly, if you predecease the other executors you won't be around to worry about what they do with any money for your uncle, so try to let that bit go.

You know, your dad saying 'Take care of yourself first' is very broad. At the time of his death you may be doing very well and only need 'a bit or so'. But that is not to say that in a year or 10 you may not need extra money very badly. So IMHO you need to plan and conserve for your future, first. Sorry, but it'd be 'me first' all the way. If that means investing the lot of it in your name, then that's what I'd do.

When it comes to your uncle, I'd probably go on a 'situation by situation' basis rather than a monthly stipend. Someone who is a spendthrift usually, well, spends. If you were to increase his monthly income by a stipend, he'll only increase his 'unwise' spending by that amount, rather than putting some by for a rainy day. That ends up with them 'needing' more and more. So I'd probably wait for him to come to me for any money he 'wants' and make a case by case decision. Money for a car repair or even a holiday? Sure. To invest in a hare-brained scheme? NO. I know, that's 'managing' him, but it's also using your dad's money wisely for both your and Uncle's benefit.

If you wanted to do something monthly then I'd pay some of his bills directly, like utilities, car/home insurance or other necessary living expenses, rather than handing him cash.

This. The uncle got into this mess in the first place by everyone treating him like a child. Except he isn't a child, he's older than you! He made his own choices in life and chose not to work the majority of his life and presumably not to save. You are not responsible for his life choices and neither is your father.

It's just not your problem and your father is unreasonable trying to stick that burden on your shoulders. Get some boundaries and assert yourself,say no!

When people say that tired old phrase "a woman is a daughter all her life, a man is a son till he takes a wife" THIS is what it means.

You, a grown woman, in the role of dutiful daughter/niece, asked to "do the right thing". Your uncle, a feckless grown man not even responsible for himself. The above phrase keeps women subservient to her birth family in a way men are permitted not to be.

I suppose it depends on how much money you'll want from what's bequeathed to you. If you do decide to offer any funds to your uncle, set up a DD, and have very little to do with him from then on.

It's a bit galling though, isn't it?

Right. Firstly as I understand it, her concern is that the other executors know NOW what is in the letter of wishes and will therefore know what the deceased wants and have "views" about the OP if she doesn't comply with their concept of the deceased's wishes. They may also tell the spendthrift uncle which could cause the OP problems. Secondly your suggestions, again as I understand it, are exactly wht the OP does NOT want. She doesn't want to get involved in his situations and she doesn't want him coming to her for money and being involved and making decisions for him. Does nobody read posts properly?

I agree.

Can he be put in a nursing home or assisted piv8ng accommodation so you don't have to directly involve yourself in his care.