Inheritance one - what’s morally correct

[Threebear]

My MIL 70 has just inherited 1.85M net. She was given another house when in her twenties which due to where it was in the world ended up having to be abandoned, though means she has never paid rent or mortgage in her life. She did only have 50k to her name previous to this big windfall. She doesn’t have access to a pension (mistakes in her life / living in the wrong places).

She has 2 children, 37M, 43M. The youngest has a 5yr old child (her only GC). Relationship positive with both.

37M owns a property but in reality only owns the mortgage (340k mortgage). He doesn’t struggle but retains 2 jobs at once in order to live a nice life and have a nice property.

43M is mentally ill, has never retained a proper job, cannot access many benefits where he lives and has a wife who comes from a very poor country with no career herself. They live on the breadline if not lower.

MIL has declared that she is going to keep the full inheritance for herself however will gift each child with 50k as a present.

Firstly I’m fully aware there is a huge difference in thinking between the generations. As a millennial I cannot morally understand the decision. I would never in a million years do this to my beautiful child. I’m so aware of the struggles we have had and can only imagine the struggles in his thirties to get on the property ladder. My hope is we can buy him a small property when he’s older so he can be mortgage free from starting point, all of this to be done with our own investments and money.

The moral question has actually nothing to do with money. If she had none no one would care, if she only got 100k and wanted to keep it, it wouldn’t be questionable as she needs it.

However and big however, she’s just been lumped with 1.85M tax free, and it just doesn’t compute that she believes the relationship with her children and GC will continue if she chooses to do this. The decision is hers and hers only but for anyone who believes she’s morally correct, why I ask would you think your children would ever be ok, forgive you or want to spend anytime ever again with you?

It’s hers to make, but it’s selfish without a doubt. Keeping 95% of that money for her to spend Willy nilly seems crazy while thinking she can retain a relationship with the people she has hurt in this equation.

Personally I think she deserves a nice home, a good investment portfolio but that can all be done within 1.5M no problem at all. If she shared just 350k between her 2 children she would change their lives, they would forever be incredibly grateful, and it would promote to showing how much she cares for them and for a very positive relationship until her death.

The question is simply anyone who agrees with her, are you aware of the rupture and consequent lonely rest of life you would live in your million dollar home as your kids will now likely abandon you?

thanks!

Op just stop. It’s her money. Let her enjoy it and come to terms with it. The bitterness is going to eat you up.

You have a wonderful life, you say, while your partner sees his brother struggling and doesnt help him out. MIL had nothing to spare for him up to this point, having no pension. Her mother lived to 102 so she sees 30 years potentially ahead of her.

So very easy to give away someone else's money for them. Why not sell one of your 2 homes and give the money to your partner's brother? Or your partner can give him the 50k you dont need. Do that and you may have some right to moan about MIL - until then you dont.

Well yes, 3.5% is what we allow ( to be on the cautious side as we are on the wrong side of 70). I think there is generally a 4% rule if you want your capital to grow with inflation. This is not like taking an annuity, where by you will die with nothing.

The decision is hers and hers only but for anyone who believes she’s morally correct, why I ask would you think your children would ever be ok, forgive you or want to spend anytime ever again with you?

Maybe she hasn’t thought about it? Maybe she plans to fund a new life in another country? Maybe she doesn’t care much about her family, which isn’t that uncommon. I suspect you’re from a bit of a sheltered background and this has come as a shock. You say, rather pompously, your family are “morally correct”. Well, newsflash - morals are subjective and also you shouldn’t try and claim the moral high ground here because, quite frankly, since she received that inheritance it was HER money to do as she wants to it. Be grateful for that £50k and maybe have some therapy.

You do understand that she’s a person in her own right, right? Entitled to own assets and use them for her own ends? You seem to think of her as an inheritance pipe, only good to funnel wealth to her children.

She isn't doing anything to her children. They could get on the property ladder with £50k, they can certainly change their lives with that, but if their relationship changes because she doesn't give them more, it proves she's right not to give it to them. She's 70, and could live to be 100. Thats potentially a lot of care costs, and I wouldn't trust my future care to someone who was ready to cut me out of their life because I only gave them £50k.

Wow! Dead soon at 70? 🙄

Thats where my moral compass lies. She shouldn’t hold on to 1.85M (total 1.9M in cash assets today), she should pass over a chunk to her children who again will pass a chunk to their children and so on it goes. Everyone who has berated me, fab for you, the only thing is clear to those that have done so is what selfish and morally incorrect parents you are and yet you believe you are right - outstanding.

Wow.
Just... wow.
Who made you moral compass and guardian?
You dont get to decide what other people do with THEIR money, and then judge them for it.

What we, or indeed you, believe is morally ‘correct’ is absolutely irrelevant. MIL is an adult and entitled to make her own decisions…you sound as if you see her as a cash cow. She can blow the lot on whatever she chooses and leave anything that’s left to charity - that’s her choice, and hers alone.

Yes.
That would be the MORALLY CORRECT thing to do, I'm thinking.

Is your partner the father of your child, @Threebear ?

I’m going against the tide here - MIL ought to assist her disabled DS who lives in poverty.

A case of keep your grubby mits off it.

Morally she has more rights to it than you; you are definitely not taking the moral high ground.
Hopefully she'll realise and find a nice charity that will be grateful.

I think you are being overly harsh about your MIL. She is ‘only’ 70 and from the sounds of it doesn’t have a lot of people she can depend on. I think she could just be thinking she wants to make sure she has enough to live on for the rest of her life. Sh might be thinking it’s ok to do this as she knows the remaining money will go to her children once she dies. Elderly people are bombarded with scarey stories about the costs of care and the cost of medical care. We are currently paying nearly £80k pa for my MILs care home. That is in a cheap area in the UK too. She isn’t even in a high care unit.

She’s only got her inheritance at the age of 70 so thinking that her children might get their at a similar or younger age might feel ok to her especially as she is giving the £50k in the mean time.

If I were her I would give more of the inheritance away but I can understand why she isn’t. I also think that she might give more away in time.

The fact that you are reacting the way you are is telling and although you say it isn’t about the money it clearly is.

I couldn't do this to my kids, all our financial planning ensures the kids are taken care of, we've worked to save deposits for houses for them when older and hopefully they won't need a mortgage. Any money we get, a percentage is set aside for them. I know many in their 70s who are sitting on huge piles of cash and don't help their kids. My DH and I are lucky our parents helped us, I don't get this mentality. However it is her money to do with as she wants I guess. I don't think I'd cut contact over it tbh but yes it must hurt 💐

Perhaps she is testing you, and you just failed?

Fair enough, OP, you got me. I believed this was real right up until your last post.

No-one is that obtuse and stupid, surely.

Wow! Entitled much? I hope she leaves it all to the local cats home. She is 70 - she is entitled to have some fun with the money. If you cut her off now because she is only giving you £50 k then you don’t deserve the rest then would I’m sure have come to you in due course.

You seem very invested in all this, for someone who isn't even married to the guy.

And you're doing a poor impression of someone who "doesn't care". If you don't care, cool. Go on not caring for the next twenty years or whatever it is, and let the cards fall where they may. You'll get a nice windfall in time for retirement, or you won't. It doesn't really matter - right?

Bitterness is like drinking poison and waiting for the other person to die.

This woman is about to have financial stability for what sounds like the first time in her life. She doesn't even have a pension. She's 70! That poor woman. You are very grabby and I think you are utterly out of line to criticise her "morality" when you yourself have reported that you are very stable financially. Live until you're 70 with no money or financial security and then maybe you'll have the right to judge her.

I hope she spends every penny and has fun doing it.

Wow! Its shocking enough that you feel this way but posting it .... says a far more about you the MIL.

However and big however, she’s just been lumped with 1.85M tax free, and it just doesn’t compute that she believes the relationship with her children and GC will continue if she chooses to do this. The decision is hers and hers only but for anyone who believes she’s morally correct, why I ask would you think your children would ever be ok, forgive you or want to spend anytime ever again with you?

You sound really greedy, judgemental & transactional.

Why shouldn't she keep money she's inherited? She's only 70 - she could have another 20 years of pretty good life left. It sounds as though she's not always had money - why shouldn't she keep what she's inherited and enjoy it.

If you're bothered, I'm sure you can claw it from her on her death.

But you seem to be planning to cut her off, and never talk to her again. Nice.

If you had these two sons you might realise that in the event you are lucky enough to reach old age the two sons are not going to be calling around to look after you - even if you handed them £350k each, they would not be helping out. She is looking after herself because she is 70 and no one else is going to do it. Older people who don't hold on to their savings are leaving themselves in a very vulnerable position - all those vultures who threaten to walk away if they don't get their hands on an early inheritance wouldn't give me much comfort that they'd be hanging around once they got hold of it.

I didn’t want to add anymore as feel I’ve said enough but despite the berating comment you make a very fair point. Her sons will not take care of her, they’ve made that clear, they’ve made their bed and possibly this is them having to lie in it. In that case I still blame her for being such a dire mother that no one would wish to take her in, in her final days, but the reality is they have not and will not “earn” this inheritance.

I presume therefore that a lot of this morality issues lies in the fact we as children, according to many of you, are obliged to care for you. We need to earn our inheritance rather than presume out of love it will be shared. An interesting point to make and something I’ll definitely talk with my partner as this likely is part of the issue with my MIL (no not married but hey was easier to write MIL than mother of my child’s father in every post).

Why are you addressing 'us' as if we're all elderly mothers like your partner's mother?

My child is at primary school, my poor impression of you is coming from me being the daughter of an elderly mother.