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!

I think the replies are what they are because of the tone of your posts.

If you had said, "MIL got this huge amount of money, I'm really disappointed and hurt that she hasn't wanted to help us a bit more as it would make such a difference, but I understand she is already being very generous giving us 50K," I think the responses would have been very different.

Instead, it comes across as, "MIL has all this money and I'm angry that she hasn't given us more. She's failing morally for not giving us more, the stingy old woman. She's given us 50k but that's not enough! I want more!"

Rightly or wrongly, that's how I see it comes across. The tone and sentiment is very different.

It’s personality, not generational.

Is it moral to break a relationship with your Mum because she doesn’t give you more money? That you will inherit in due course anyway?

Did the person she inherited this amount from help her in her younger years? Was that moral?

Financially She would do better to give the money by Deed of Variation - I.e divert the money from the Will direct to her keen eyed DIL…

She will pay tax on the interest on this money… and it would be better if she did divert more by Deed of Variation so that less disappears in IHT on her own demise.

But she doesn’t sound financially literate or as if she makes great plans.

If she has the kind of offspring who would cut her off, she is well advised to keep a good sum for Care. 10 years in a home is more than £1m, many people (including childcare age MNers) view anything less than £1m in a pension as dicey. And she has no provision at all.

If I were her (ancient selfish boomer blah blah that I am) I would pass a lot more down to my Dc (by Deed, not as gift) as it reassures me to think of my Dc secure and thriving. And I DO know what it is like to live hand to mouth

But my Dc would never have expectations, and I would be very surprised if they thought to distance themselves out of resentment/ envy / entitlement.

So it's not about the money, but this thread wouldn't exist if she'd inherited £100k.

OK.

Thank you. This thread has been yet more evidence of precisely the anomalous (and deeply unpleasant) attitudes that are sadly prevalent in that specific cohort. I did observe that despite multiple posters having demanded evidence for my statement that this is an anomaly in UK culture historically and across the world, when I wrote a detailed post providing links to multiple large scale data surveys from reputable researchers (IFS, Natcen etc) and multiple statistically validated academic studies on the topic, tumbleweed was the reponse!

The insistence that this kind of worldview is “normal” for human society now or in the past despite all evidence to the contrary and certainty that they are right and everyone else is wrong is emblematic of the damage this particular cohort has done so our society, economy and social fabric. The defensiveness and pattern of responding to alternative viewpoints with rage, to twist the problem around and insult anybody who mentions it and to pretend they are the problem (despite the opposing view having been held by the vast majority of humans in recorded history across almost all cultures) is fascinating.

Sadly, people like this won’t change, @Threebear. They don’t seem capable of overcoming their selfishness and myopic view of things. One does wonder whether, when it comes to the end, they will look back on their life with any joy or whether their perspective is so viewed that they genuinely won’t feel any regret about their behaviour to their children, grandchildren, etc.

no one has actually presented me with a full cover story as to why 50k is the correct amount.

It's not a case of being correct or incorrect. it's the amount she wants to give your DP.

My father died last year, as per the laws in the country me, my sister and my mother have 'inherited' everything, allegedly split in three. Have i gone begging for MY MONEY? no, the money is in my mother's account to which i have full access and I use it to pay for a 24 hour 7 days a week carer agency as she has a great carer which helps her with doctors, exercise, food etc as she is over 80 years old and not so mobile. My sister and I got €15k each, which I keep in an account for potential emergencies.

So in YOUR mind £350k is the correct amount to split between the two children, in your MIL's mind £100k is the correct amount.

or is there a formula somewhere?

I think you may be missing the point that the amount the MIL is proposing to provide for her two children is less than 25% of the profit she’d have made by having her capital invested in a simple global index tracker for the last year (in real-terms, so keeping her capital amount static in terms of real post-inflation value, with the money invested in a sensible manner she could have provided both children with £50k AND had a further £300k this year to provide for herself).

When you actually take into account the capital growth that will arise from any remotely sensible investment of the money, which would be more than sufficient to cover an incredibly luxurious lifestyle for the MIL in perpetuity including any top-of-the-range care home fees even in a worst case scenario without even touching her capital in real terms AND also provide a sensible amount as the OP has suggested to transform the lives of her children, it’s difficult to comprehend how anybody can argue that her NOT doing so is morally excusable.

Exactly my point.

Incorrect conclusions of today:

The actual question is this: : Do the DMs out there who would genuinely choose this course of action regarding wealth distribution after suddenly becoming a millionaire - choosing not to meaningfully help or share with their children, but instead giving them a “nice” gift - understand the potential repercussions of that decision?

My choice is to have little to no contact going forward because she’s not my DM and I don’t like her anyway. Someone else’s might be to internally resent or hate their DM. Another might decide they no longer intend to take care of them in the future. Another might become passive-aggressive or emotionally distant. And so on and so forth…

Do you actually understand the pain, hurt and sense of betrayal your children may feel as a result of this decision? No, not every child would react that way. But to the 80% of you disagreeing with me: I genuinely think some of you need to take a hard look in the mirror. I suspect that a substantial proportion of your children 50-75% would tell you that discovering their parent had suddenly become a millionaire but deliberately chose not to actually materially help them (or house them) could hurt them and damage the relationship, even if you currently believe your children are the most selfless, loving and wonderful people on earth (very unlikely).

And particularly if you previously expressed the view that “I would always share every penny with my children” back when you had nothing, how do you think they are supposed to interpret the sudden reversal once you actually have substantial wealth? As a lying 2 faced b* no doubt.

Incorrect conclusions people have drawn today:

• “It’s her money, her decision” - yes already stated in my first few lines of writing. Does not answer my question.

• “You’re a vile/evil DIL.” - lovely jubbly but neither answers the question.

• I don’t share with my child or partner - extremely incorrect conclusion but importantly neither answers my question.

• “She’s doing it to test or trick you.”scarily quite a few people have suggested this. Which raises an entirely different and rather disturbing possibility: that some of you genuinely consider deliberately testing your children financially to be a plausible course of action. Extremely questionable morals in that, but, again, it does not answer my question rather another one (how many DM’s of this generation are abusive 🤐).

• “She knows you hate her, and that’s why she’s doing it.” - incorrect, she genuinely does not understand how I feel about her. I have never hidden my lack of affection: I am cold and unaffectionate towards her, and I have never responded to her declarations of love by pretending that I love or even like her. However she seems to believe that repeatedly throwing superficial compliments at someone will make them love her. It doesn't. Whether someone is loved is ultimately determined by the relationships they have built through their actions over 70 years. She is unloved because of this. But even if she did understand I disliked her and wasn’t such blatant idiot, that still wouldn't answer the underlying question.

• “She’s worried about her future healthcare needs.” This is probably the closest to a plausible explanation. But it still doesn't answer what I am actually asking.

If you have €900k in cash and a fully paid-off house, and your anxiety about potentially needing more money in the future becomes so overwhelming that you are unwilling to materially help your own children, can you genuinely comprehend what that may feel like / how much they will hate you from their side?

Can you comprehend what it is like for your child to watch you sit on enormous financial security while knowing that you could substantially improve their life - and choose not to - because your fear of needing more money one day outweighs your willingness to help them now?

And more importantly: can you comprehend that this isn't simply a financial decision?
You may be completely entitled to make that decision. But your children are also entitled to have an emotional reaction to it. You cannot control whether they feel hurt, betrayed, disappointed, resentful or fundamentally changed towards you as a result which they all would .

That is the question I was and have continued asking.

Not whether the money is legally yours. Not whether you are technically entitled to keep it. Not whether your DIL is evil. Not whether your children are entitled to your money.
I am asking whether a parent who makes this choice can genuinely understand the relational and emotional consequences of making it, particularly when the parent has previously communicated that they would share their wealth with their children if they ever had it.

I suspect in writing like this, you will either be in total denial because you birthed angels, or you do understand but are too selfish and bitter to care, or possibly hopefully and innocently you didn’t understand and now maybe will.

Have fun with your socks, OP. You are clearly superior to the rest of us in every way.

No, she’s just quite normal and having what is a normal reaction to callous behaviour which would be considered to be a source of shame in most countries and in this country throughout most of history, per all the research data I posted on page 19.

I am thoroughly delighted that you, and many others, have enjoyed my (and @LifeOnEnceladus 's) TED Talk!

I sincerely hope that the scientifically sound (in reference to @LifeOnEnceladus 's essay), logical and pragmatic arguments we have put forward will have a genuinely beneficial effect on all your DCs and GCs, both now and in the future. At the very least, if this question ever arises, you may now be better able to understand their reactions and, hopefully, have some empathy.

I do not believe I am superior to any human being. I do not live according to a monkey-tribe hierarchy, nor do I believe that elders automatically deserve respect purely by virtue of being older.

What I can say, however, is that when someone responds to a well-justified argument in a debate with nothing more than a basic insult (and oh how many have there been), it is reasonable to suggest that they clearly demonstrate inferior IQ and emotional intelligence.

I am looking to rile up the boomers

Why? I've been 90% on your side during this thread. I'm a boomer with a fraction of your MILs money, and I've been giving each of my kids as much of my savings as I can sensibly spare for the last five years. The total for each is probably double what your MIL plans to give your partner. They need it, I don't. I explained that, way near the beginning of the thread.

So can you spare the boomer generalisations? We're not here to be your playthings to wind up.

Everyone is entitled to their feelings OP. But can you comprehend hers? Because your posts still imply that what the children need now may trump her fears and worries for the future.

Yes plenty of mothers would do as she has done

especially if the DIL was a greedy person who didn’t like her

I think you may be missing the point that the amount the MIL is proposing to provide for her two children is less than 25% of the profit she’d have made by having her capital invested in a simple global index tracker for the last year (in real-terms, so keeping her capital amount static in terms of real post-inflation value, with the money invested in a sensible manner she could have provided both children with £50k AND had a further £300k this year to provide for herself).

Indeed. But it sounds as if MIL has lived her life making uninformed decisions about money, and she might not realise this either.

Or that she could drop this profit on her Dc as a regular contribution without it counting as a gift under IHT rules as giving from Excess Income.

In your shoes, OP, I would bite my tongue and keep it sweet, encourage your DH to encourage her to talk to a financial advisor, hope that she chooses to give more gifts in the future, and try not to get written out of her eventual substantial Will.

Is that a moral / ethical approach? Not really but a pragmatic response to what you see as HER immoral behaviour.

You lecturing anyone on "emotional intelligence" 😂😂.

Yep. She could give them each a significant five figure sum annually in a very tax efficient manner AND have a six figure sum to live on herself without ever touching her capital at all (and uprating it with inflation).

It really is morally reprehensible for anybody NOT to help their children to be more comfortable and financially secure in such circumstances.

And none of that requires any complex investing or financial knowledge at all. If she genuinely somehow doesn’t even understand such basics then you’re right, for her own sake aside from her awful treatment of her children, somebody needs to get her to see a financial advisor because one would hope any competent IFA would talk some sense into her if she’s so incapable of managing money she can’t figure out this basic stuff and has it all sitting in cash savings or something equally ridiculous!

I still don't understand your POV but wanted to put this alternative view to you, as someone whose parents have not planned for their older age, are getting there now, and don't have much in the way of resources

One of the best things you can do for your children it make sure you are set up well for your older age. If you have plenty of resources, you can pay for help and care. You avoid putting your children in the position of pressure to help pay for things they can't afford or provide help they can't provide without causing massive stress of exhaustion on their part. It's a real gift to your children to not put them in this position. This is one reason I won't be over-extending myself financially to help my parents - because that then passes the burden onto my children, and I don't want that for them.

Is it not better for your MIL to have excess wealth that you will get later, than put that pressure on you? I don't think her giving you money now will make you able to give her help in return later. There's always something, Uni fees, your own looming retirement, health needs, and on and on.

If your MIL lives a long time and has high care needs later, 900K isn't as much as you think.

I wish my parents were in your MIL's position. Instead they've put me in the uncomfortable position of having to address their expectations of me in their older age and set boundaries which seem harsh but necessary to protect my own children in future.

OP if she has always been a rubbish parent, she'll just continue to be a rubbish parent. You can't really expect her not to. I would think most people on here, even those that vehemently argued with you, would not ignore it if their children were in difficulties and they were in a position to help, not just financially but in any sense. By the sounds of it your MIL has never been there for them in any really sense. At least your BIL has some money now to rent for a while longer.

You have missed one more thing; its widely acknowledged and indeed advised that when you come into signifcant amounts of money you shouldnt rush into making any decisons. In that context, giving you each £50k, itself a meaningful amount of money to many, almost immediately to share some good fortune, while allowing time to think, take proper advice and decide exactly what to do is entirely reasonable. Now if 2 years down the line nothing has changed it'd be natural to wonder what she's doing, but until that point I think, short of a huge backstory, its unreasonable to expect huge financial decisoins to be made quickly :)

I am in a similar position to you, except my parents didn’t inherit the money, and my partner was made redundant and is having difficulty finding a new job after very many months.

My mother was diagnosed with dementia a couple of years ago and my much older father is now her carer, with me chipping in when able around my work. When my father goes, the choice will be between me stopping work (and thus leaving my own family with no income) or paying for a nursing home suitable for Mum’s needs. That will be eye-wateringly expensive. The cost of an EMI nursing home is about £1500 - £2500 per week. £1.8M is a lot of money, but, even if she gave nothing away now and spent not a penny, that would pay for 13 years of care (and if you have the money, why should you have to go into the most basic level of care for what might be the last decade of your life).

I do understand the impulse to do the very best you can for your children - all my spare money goes to mine.

However, I can also understand the fear of the future - if you need nursing care, it is scary how quickly the money goes. My parents haven’t offered money to help us out, and I am not going to ask, as my mum is likely to need it.

Hopefully, she will not have to endure this future, and if that’s the case, the money will go to her son’s in their inheritance. But if she does need care, surely you would want to see her somewhere that is passably comfortable?