AIBU to resent FIL expecting DH to provide for his sister?

[Porterpoets]

DH and I have been writing our wills and something has come up that I’d really like to hear opinions on.

We have DC and I am the higher earner. This is relevant because it’s the principle of this that I take issue with, rather than the actual effect it will have. We have two good incomes, we’re comfortable- not rolling in money, but we manage well and our only debt is the mortgage on our family home.

DH’s elderly father, my FIL, is quietly well-off, but relatively thrifty and can be quite controlling, belligerent and often uses emotional blackmail to get his way. He also can’t see the irony in much of what he does vs what he says.

DH has an older sister, my SIL, who is single, works hard for not much financial reward and rents a modest flat. Her dream is to buy her own home but on a single, mediocre income that’s way off. She’s also only ten years off retirement herself so it may never happen at all. She has no dependents and is fiercely proud.

So here’s the issue. FIL has told DH that when FIL dies, DH becomes ‘the man of the family’ (wtf does that even mean?!?!) and must take care of his sister financially. Being a 21st Century feminist, she would baulk at this idea, but that is what he has said.

The irony here is that FIL is still with us and hence he is currently “the man of the family” and yet he refuses to put anything in place to help SIL out financially with her dream of buying a property today. He refuses to look into gifting her any money nor anything that would benefit her financial situation whilst he is still alive. And yet he has laid this moral obligation squarely at the feet of DH, once FIL has gone.

DH is an incredibly moral man and has sworn to this, taking it to mean that in his own will, he will leave a not insubstantial sum to his sister before anything goes to me and our children in the event of his death. He knows his sister well enough to recognise that if he offered or gifted her any sum whilst DH is still alive, she would refuse it, as he has DCs to provide for and he is the younger sibling (her pride is at stake if she were to accept).

Now, I’m not concerned about this part of DH’s will from a financial point of view because I earn a good enough salary that if the worst were to happen, I would not be reliant on any inheritance from DH’s estate. Similarly if I went first, I have plans in place that would ensure DH and DCs would live comfortably.

However, I can’t help but resent FIL’s actions. Of course it’s his own money and he can do what he likes with it but he is emotionally blackmailing DH (and will continue to do so beyond the grave) into redirecting DC’s inheritance. Whilst writing our wills, the solicitor asked DH several times to repeat his request and clarified to him what that might mean for our DC if my financial circumstances changed and he died, with this bequest still in place. I don’t know if I read too much into it, but she appeared quite surprised by it.

FIL is not a poor man. If he were really concerned about SIL being “provided for” he could see to that now, whilst he’s still alive. Why put the moral and financial obligation on DH?

AIBU?

I hate wills and inheritances, it’s a pity your fil doesn’t think to help her own now! (I don’t usually think like this, I usually think ‘it’s their money etc’ but given his actions that’s horrendous!!

Depending on where you live there will be inheritance tax etc to consider - why isn’t FIL helping his daughter out while he’s still alive?

Surely if FIL is wanting his own daughter ‘looked after financially’, why can’t FIL understand that another father would want to do the same for his offspring??

I haven’t read the thread because the opening post made me too mad. If dh is indeed a man of strong morals, then he has to say to his dad you’re the man of the family now and you do nothing for your daughter who struggles financially. I assume you mean for me to let her starve when you say be the man of the family.
and if he’s a weak man who just follows his dads orders, you say as the man of the family I think you should be paying at least half the bills and I’ve cut my contribution to the joint account, I know your dad would approve.
I cannot stand hypocrites, worst of all being married to one. I’d tell dh if he doesn’t stand up to his dad then I won’t support our family finances going to his sister; that’s not ethical, it’s just using your resources to benefit his family because having a backbone is harder.

That's better in a way because as you've said it will reduce in real terms as inflation rises, however if your financial circumstances change it is more risky and could leave you in a situation where you had to sell your home to release the cash to make the payment. You are a high earner now, but circumstances can change and if you have health issues in the future you may not be able to maintain your earning power. I think your DH is being ridiculous - he needs to speak to his DF about what provisions he will make for his daughter and get that will revised asap.

but why if the FIL believed in being the man of the family, he just left his own daughter now to live her humble life....and so she is proud. Of course she is proud and feminist because she sees that how mysoginistically her father is treating her, insisting he is some kind of man sustainer of the family when he really is not

If neither of the men have discussed this with her, perhaps you could? I doubt she would like to think of herself as needing charity of this nature, given that she is an independent woman.

How also his son being the future man of the family cannot even outearn his wife? This whole patriarchy thing is so weird and only leave women more vulnerable than they were even before. So now the man of the family wants to merge his inheritance with his son and his wife family pot and de facto rob his DIL and the grandkids. What on earth

So what if your DH dies before his Dad?

I agree I hate the "man of the family" phrase, when I've heard it used by women around my age divorcing their husbands, and telling their primary age sons they must be the man of the house, so it's not just your FIL's age-I have slightly less hatred for a man of his age using it to a grown man than a youngish woman using it for a child.
But I would just say exactly what you've said here, clearly, to the FIL when your husband is there-if he wants to help SIL, he should, rather than take money from your children.

Your h needs a moral upright verbal slap for agreeing to help his sister before his wife and kids, even if you could manage without his money.
OP needs to consider that things change and they may not always have a good income due to life changes.
Fil and his being 'man of the family' needs to jog off too, your h is in effect still a boy or immature young man who will only become an adult when fil dies.
Great dynamic for your kids to learn there.

On the one hand, it is up to FIL and your DH what they do with their own money. On the other, I would lose all respect for a man who would put his own children's future at risk for his sister, who hasn't asked for help, on the basis that his dad thinks he should be 'the man of the family' and without proper discussion with me. It would make me question my whole marriage actually. I think I would speak to him again very clearly about what this says about his commitment to the family he chose to build, and ask that you revisit what this looks like as a family unit.

So here’s the issue. FIL has told DH that when FIL dies, DH becomes ‘the man of the family’ (wtf does that even mean?!?!) and must take care of his sister financially. Being a 21st Century feminist, she would baulk at this idea, but that is what he has said.

How on earth has that been translated to leave your sister money in your will??.. what if your DH dies first, then FIL dies and leaves everything to her anyway? What a load of nonsense.

I suspect he means he is either leaving everything to your DH, and your FIL is wanting him to look after the sister with it, or it will be split upon his death but he still wants your DH to look after her if she needs it for his own peace of mind. Either way a simple 'okay dad' would have sufficed.

I'd be furious with this on behalf of your children, and would not have supported it at all, he needs to change his will back pronto, OR change the part about leaving something to his sister to be purely dependent on his father already having passed at the time DH's will is exectued.

You can even leave a bank account nominated to a person upon your death, open a bank account now with a nominal sum, and stipulate that the proceeds of that account go to only her (or you/children if she is deceased), obviously if his dad is deceased and DH has the money he can put it into that account in case anything happens to him.

So many options yet the one he is picked is the most stupid.

Your DH is silly to do this now because presumably SIL will inherit from her father and then not need to be left anything from your DH. I would worry that if he tells FIL he has put her in his will then your FIL will feel happy to leave all his money to the donkey sanctuary.

This.
To be honest I would be rethinking my marriage.

Your husband has his loyalties dictated to by his father.

Not moral, just a weak little man still answering to his father.

Total ick.

This isn’t about the fil from my perspective it’s about your spineless husband

But even in that ridiculous scenario, DH just does a deed of variation to leave his sister whatever proportion of his inheritance from his father as he sees fit (even 100%) and stops swearing deathbed oaths and prancing around with his will like some Victorian paterfamilias.

I think FIL's cryptic message means he is leaving his estate to his son but wants him to "look after" his sister. If that is the case your husband should just vary his will to give his sister 50% of the estate and as such discharge that duty and treat his sister like an adult.

If my husband was leaving his money to his sister (not sure what % of the estate this represents) my money would be going straight to the kids and not to him to be passed on to his sister one day.

DH is an incredibly moral man and has sworn to this, taking it to mean that in his own will, he will leave a not insubstantial sum to his sister before anything goes to me and our children in the event of his death.

Don’t you mean an incredibly immoral man. All his money should go to his children, not his older sister!

I'd just like to pull you up about this part of your post:
"I’m not concerned about this part of DH’s will from a financial point of view because I earn a good enough salary that if the worst were to happen, I would not be reliant on any inheritance from DH’s estate."

Your DH should provide enough for you in the event of his death, that you are covered should you not be able to work for a time. You don't know what is around the corner with your health, or your children's health, so your income isn't a guarantee any money from your DH's will won't be handy for you and your children.

You can't control FIL's worldview, and there is very little to gain by getting hung up on it or dwelling on resentment, unless it's affecting your day-to-day life. Your aim is to align with your DH financially – so you need to start there.

So FIL refuses to discuss his will, and DH is immune to your perfectly reasonable objections. Here’s what you do:

Go to your fiercely proud, independent, feminist SIL and explain what FIL has bullied DH into. Tell her that it would be possible for her, should she wish, to decline the inheritance from your DH.

If, as one would expect, FIL dies first, you will all then see how things have been left. If FIL has left it all to charity, you might feel differently about DH making some provision for his DSis. Ditto if he has left it all to DH. But if he has done the USUAL thing and split it equally between the two of them and SiL is then able to buy her own place, DH might then see there is no need for him to look after her financially, and FIL won’t be around to bully him into it any more.

If, God forbid, your DH dies before his father, then SIL could talk to her father and tell him what an arsehole he is for having pressured her brother in that way when he has a wife and children to think. That if he wants her to be provided for, then he should bloody well do it himself, and not seek to deprive you and your kids of all that your DH has worked for.

If he leaves it to the cats’ home after that, you will then all be in no doubt that he’s an absolute arsehole. And if your circumstances then permit, you might want to gift your SIL what your DH had left to her in his will. But if your circumstances don’t permit, that will show up that it should never have been done in the first place.

FIL is silly but your DH is even worse for going along with it! It all sounds very 16th century. Sounds as though SIL wouldn’t accept the money even if your idiot DH left it to her anyway so I wouldn’t fret.

Your will needs changing too. My and dh wills leave it all to each other. You might die. If your dh is leaving it to his sister you need to put your assets all in trust for the dc, you dont
want them going to his sister.

but the key action is to tell your dh not to be a wet wipe and that the lowest conflict action is not going to be the one where he has no spine because he thinks you won’t make his home life uncomfortable and his dad might be annoyed with him if he said anything. He’s a ‘Very moral man’ my ass. I’d make his home life very uncomfortable. You can think of it as helping him to be the very moral man he wants to think of himself as.

You and H need to think again - your financial circumstances could change rapidly for a number of reasons.
FIL needs to fork out to help his daughter especially as he’s the big strong man of the family and females are weak and their heads are full of clouds and kittens.