Nigella Stiffs Her Kids

[expatinscotland]

theyrenotgettingapenny

Nigella states taht she's not leaving her fortune to her children because she feels it's important to earn money.

There are ways to leave it to them that prevent them from coming into a big lump sum.

Oh, well, it's her money to do as she wishes.

If you had £110m, would you leave it to your children?

I think I need to write a cookery book.

Developing a vaccine to malaria is very forward-thinking, it can be argued.

The winters even here have been milder and milder and wetter and wetter.

There's potential that the West will soon be warm and wet enough to host malaria-bearing mosquitos within our childrens' lifetimes.

The Gates Foundation also heavily funds the development of vaccines which do not require refrigeration.

There certainly used to be malaria in this country - low-lying wet places like the Kentish marshes and the Fens were particularly prone.

How very odd. I want to give my children as good a start in life as I possibly can.

I wonder if she just chucked them in the water to teach them to swim, too?

i read that as

nigella sifts her kids

yum

But does giving them a "good start" include setting them up as trust fund brats who have the expectation of inheriting vast sums? If giving my money away stopped my DD having a lifestyle like that of Paris Hilton, say, or a life like that of Christina Onassis, then it would be gone before the bank manager knew what had hit him. If the balance of evidence is that not inheriting £55,000,000 each will result in their being happier and better-adjusted adults, then not leaving money to them is giving them a good start in life.

(Would like the opportunity to have the dilemma, though)

Yes, but it's all a bit pious, really. Teach them how to be responsible with money.

Your character isn't developed by how much money you might or might not inherit. It doesn't matter how rich or poor you are, if you're a feckless twat, you're a feckless twat. Wisdom and financial insecurity do not automatically go together.

£55,000,000 would adjust me very nicely into a happy frame of mind.

I couldn't possibly be worth that much and deliberately leave sod all to my children.

There's a pretty large middle ground between giving them 55 million and giving them 'no financial security' at all which is what Nigella is claiming she's going to do (though I agree with everyone on this thread who thinks she is probably not being totally accurate about this).

Massive trust funds=bad
A house, and family trusts to pay for things like healthcare and education=what I would like to give my children if I could (but can't)

I would guess that Buffett, Gates & co are seeing their children all right as well as giving to charity though....

I think that the idea is admirable, that the children should stand on their own two feet and work for a living. That way they will appreciate what they have.

Saying that, I assume that Nigella did not start her working life penniless and never had to worry how to pay the next months rent.

My uncle is quite well off and he and my aunt managed to strike a good happy medium. My cousins had to work in the family business. Their dad bought them a flat each, but they had to repay him. They got a car, but it was an old banger not a new Mercedes.

All three children are totally down to earth and lovely people. They will inherit loads of money, but all worked hard at Uni and have decent jobs. They never relied on their inheritance.

This really is such a tricky one. Of course, all parents do not ever want to see their children suffer in any way.

But most parents also try their hardest to bring children up to fend for themselves to the best of their (the children's) abilities.

Dh's ex-wife has for years been telling both her children that they do not need to worry about education/qualifications/trying hard as it is dh's duty to provide for them - whatever they want, whenever they want it type stuff.

my step daughter has a few learning difficulties, and she's never going to set the world alight academically, but to me, that isn't the be all and end all. Dsd, on the other ahnd, has translated this into "I don't need to work hard as dad has to look after me" (dh's ex told dsd that there was a trust fund for her "to cover all living costs, so you needn't worry about a job" when dsd was just 13).

We are comfortably off, but not to the tune of seting up trust funds etc to cater for a girl who is perfectly capable of earning her own way.

IMO it's all about the management of expectations. Children do not have a righ to expect vast (or not so vast) fortunes form their parents. what is handed down to you is a bonus - you should have sorted out your own life in the meantime.

It says 'shared fortune' - I took that to mean Nigella's & Saatchi's in which case it's slightly different

I would leave them some in trust, but the bulk would go to charity. I would be worried that having that sort of dosh would make them indolent and spoiled.

Paris isn't getting the bulk of the loot is she, thanks to her behaviour.

Gosh 0.5% of that would suit me just fine

why is it ok for her to have the money & enjoy it & not her kids. She's earned some of it but her kids must have supported & helped her so it's the family money not just hers.

Yes I would have no qualms in leaving my child(ren) the majority of my estate. It would be left in suitable ways to ensure it couldn't all be blown straight away.

I'd leaver HER kids if I were her a sum for immediacy, some for much alter (sort of a pension), and some in gifts to be handed out eg for Uni, weddings, bitryths etc (as I a sure Nigella of all people are aware you cant guarantee beinga round for that)

For MY kids who may not be able to earn a living and may need care (at least 2 of them), I would dearly7 love to be able to gice them some security for the future and their care.

Actually, looking at the paper this evening it said "her share of a family fortune believed to be in the region of £110 million". So (a) total sum is a guess, (b) her share of it is another guess.

I note that the report says her 'shared fortune'. So maybe she can't actually leave them all of it.

I have to say, even though she's becoming a bit of a parody of herself, I've always liked the fact that she seems so grounded. And if you read John Diamond's book she's also quite clearly a saint.