Toxic families, wills and inheritance

[WTAFuckery]

I have NC for this. I'd appreciate some insights into our situation - it's kind of a AIBU, but don't want to post in AIBU, cos it's not that kind of issue. And anyway I know IANBU, but it's still a weird one. Anyhoo...

So, my dh of 22 years is a lovely bloke, with parents who were impressively horrible in all sorts of ways. FIL died about 10 years ago, MIL is still alive. The relationship has always been tricky, MIL's stock-in-trade is the blistering, vicious personal attack in response to any behaviour that does not meet her particular, highly idiosyncratic, expectations, plus variations on the silent treatment. Horrid, but we somehow muddled through from a (probably misplaced) sense of obligation, and for the sake of the children. Since FIL's death things have deteriorated further, and after many rounds of the kind of hideous scenarios familiar to Stately Homes regulars, we are now no contact with MIL and BIL/SIL.

So apropos of an article in last week's paper, DH decided that he'd quite like to see a copy of FIL's will, and ordered it up from the probate registry. Turns out that FIL's will, dating from several years before he died and well before any kind of NC falling out, essentially leaves all of FIL's share of the house, the land and everything else to dh's younger brother. We might have assumed that this was a 'mirror will' kind of scenario in which the other half came to dh on MIL's death, were it not for the inclusion of a paragraph which specifically states that they do not want dh to inherit the family home or the land (quite a lot of land - it's not exactly a landed gentry scenario, but it's a big house with generous grounds, woodland, etc).

It's hard to know how to feel about it, tbh - dh and I were both torn between "WTAF"? and "well tbh it doesn't really surprise me". DH has actually been really poleaxed by it, not because he was expecting to inherit anything (particularly since NC) but because the will predates any major family falling out, and covers a period where we were all in regular contact with the ILs, the children staying, dh helping them with legal and tax paperwork, work on the land etc. Deliberately stating in your will that one of your dc is not to inherit just seems like such a spectacularly shitty and divisive thing to do - ironic given that one of MIL's main gripes with us has been that we are splitting up the family and destroying the relationship between our dc and their cousins. Hmm, because obviously disinheriting one set of grandchildren in favour of another a good ten years before any actual falling out is a really good way of promoting family harmony...

Dh has been coming to terms for years with the fact that his younger brother was the favoured golden child, but even so, this is a corker for him (and us) to get our heads round. And at some point our dc will realise that their grandparents home which they used to visit and stay at has been given to their cousins but not to them - ironically, dh's brother's family are really very well-off indeed, while we work in the public sector so are on rather more modest incomes (not that that makes any difference to the dynamics of the situation, but it does add an extra twist).

I know we're well shot of the lot of them, but it's still a bit of a head-fuck. And makes it less likely that dh will be able to reconcile with his brother after MIL's death, since BIL gains financially from the fact that dh has basically been screwed over. It's the emotional repercussions rather than the financial ones that are the hardest, I think, but obviously the two are intertwined.

Anybody want to help us digest this latest plot twist in the unlovely family saga?

This is interesting. I wonder whether they were unable to foresee the future? My dad (who is "difficult") had intended to leave my younger brother a lot more than me on the grounds that I am more established in my career etc. the fact that my brother would probably become more established in the next five or so years and be more or less in a similar position to me hadn't occurred to him.

for OP and your DH, you've suffered real nastiness from FIL.

My Dad's will wasn't a lot better but at least my Mum was shocked and wrote another will after he died. At the time of writing my Dad's thinking was twattish.

I'm an only child. Dad had a very much older and still living sister who never married and she inherited my Granddad's house. Dad made 2 bad assumptions; firstly that he would out live her and secondly that I would inherit her house. He thought by the time of his death I would be very wealthy from my aunt's inheritance (wrong)

Dad's will read that should he die first everything would go to my Mum which it did. However if they both died at the same time their house would be held in trust until my youngest child was 25 and at that time the property could be sold and divided between myself and 2 children. In the meantime I was to be caretaker and maintain the property out of my own pocket.

Reading this really upset me. I'm disabled and can't work. We struggle on my DH wages. My youngest was only 5 when my Dad died. I could never have afforded to look after their house.

Mum was shocked and had no idea the will was written like that. She's since drawn up a new will.

As for my aunt, I'm pretty sure she has signed her house over to my much older cousin who is the son of Dad's eldest sister who died 30 years ago.

Selfish flawed parents - tick
Unbalanced and unexplained will - tick
Broken relationship with siblings - tick

I was on the down end of the imbalance and was utterly determined it would not be responsible for breaking my sibling relationships. Some years later, after bending over backwards to never ever make ever so much as a peep about it being unreasonable, I'm rejected by my siblings.

Go figure. It never occurred to me that it could still be broken if I, as the loser in the will, was able to rise above it.

It seems incomprehensible to me. I will never know why the will was done that way, and I doubt I will ever know why I am now being rejected.

I've accepted that I can't force them to like me, but the rift is mystifying, and difficult to explain to wider family when I've no idea what went wrong. I'm actually a bit comforted to think maybe those on the up end of the will are damaged by it emotionally.

Oh, and my parent made us joint executors of the wretched will. Nice touch!

I'm actually a bit comforted to think maybe those on the up end of the will are damaged by it emotionally.

I do think this is true, actually. The ones who have 'won' in purely financial terms have effectively been forced to corrupt themselves by being complicit in their siblings being screwed over. And in lots of situations where there is bullying or unfairness, the people dishing it out somehow persuade themselves that what they are doing is right, that the person they are victimising has somehow deserved it or brought it on themselves. So yes, they also are not unscathed or untainted by it, though on the surface they come out looking like the winners.

So much damage and upset.

Fuckery So horrible. No matter what my sons did I would never disinherit them and your DH has done nothing wrong.

I think the 'winners' have two choices - to rectify the imbalance themselves, or to justify the unfairness in their own minds. They can do this by pretending they deserve or need more, but if they know they don't deserve or need more, then the only remaining option is to use the unfairness as proof that the one losing out deserves it.

So if you do your best to rise above it, etc etc, you are failing in your duty to stop them feeling guilty about it.

i've read on mn about people who work to make sure they inherit at the expense of others. So the question 'who benefits?' is a pointer to the answer to the Q 'why did this happen?' Which would indicate that the person who benefited from the will had a hand in this happening and since people tend not to think what they do is wrong , the other option is the loser deserves it.

Imbroglio, that's very astute, and I think captures the dilemma exactly.

If dh gets angry about the unfairness, then he looks grabby and unreasonable in not accepting his parents' right to dispose of their assets as they see fit.

If he is calm and reasonable, then BIL/MIL will be angry at him as well, because at some level he and MIL know they're doing a shitty thing, and want an excuse not to feel guilty, which can only be achieved by blaming dh for whatever spurious reason they can dream up.

No-one really wins in this scenario, sadly.

Sadly I'm living through something similar myself. It took me a long time to work it out but I eventually realised that the more I did the 'right thing' the worse it was for me.

I try to disengage as much as possible but there are time when its unavoidable.

...The fact that he is in such turmoil about the will is telling about the stage he's at in dealing with his feelings about them, I think.

How do you mean? Intrigued now...

I meant only that it doesn't seem as if the wounds caused by his family have actually been healed? It's as if the NC and therapy so far has only allowed them to superficially crust over and he's still scratching at the itch.

But surely going NC means that you accept that you are not longer a part of their lives and - by default - their wills? I don't see how you could expect to be included when you have no contact.
I understand that when FIL's will was made you may have had different expectations, but it sounds like things were already very difficult even then.
I have been NC with my dad for many years and he has kindly gone to the time and trouble of making sure I know I am excluded from his will by sending messages through relatives. Not sure why he did that - maybe he was hoping for a response?
All I would advise is that I would not let it affect any chances of a reconciliation with BIL. It's not his choice and he is entitled to the money if they leave it to him. Don't let them interfere with your relationship from beyond the grave.

Gnomic - so sorry to hear your story.

I'm NC with a toxic parent and don't expect to inherit. I won't let this stand in the way of my relationship with my siblings, my DC and their cousins. However, we don't actually need the money and are probably more wealthy (property and savings) than parent anyway! I find the whole petty mess laughable and I will not allow parents toxicity spoil future generations. Some people should not be allowed to become parents! Sorry your husband is going through this! He isn't alone!

Thank you so much backforthis, imbroglio, OP and others. A lightbulb has gone on for me in understanding the fallout.

I still don't like it one little bit, and I loathe having to disengage from my siblings out of sheer self preservation, but maybe it will be easier to live with now.

Someone up thread really hit the nail in the head with the dilemma of the will winner - either even it up or believe that it was fair.

I know one person who was a substantial will winner. She evened it up immediately and they are all doing ok still. The relationships are still slightly strained by it though, because the message left by the will remains even when the financial unfairness is erased, and the losers are left feeling beholden to the winner for the bounty.

...The relationships are still slightly strained by it though, because the message left by the will remains even when the financial unfairness is erased, and the losers are left feeling beholden to the winner for the bounty...

Yes - that happens.

So you can't dodge the fallout really, even if everyone plays nicely and never a word of reproach is uttered.

What pisses me off also is that it must surely have been meant to be devisive, and I would love to have thwarted that, but it turns out I can't. Parental sabotage from the grave. Nice work!

Wills are the last exercise of power - and the damage they can cause is quite awful, mainly because there's no comeback from them. The people concerned can only deal with matters themselves and they may or may not have the resources to do that. (And some may not even care!)