To feel insulted or not?

[Blueberrybrie007]

My parents have talked about their will recently. I would rather they didn't, as I don't want to think about that time and hope it's many years down the line.

They have said they plan to leave the majority to the grandchildren. I have one surviving child and my brother has five children. My brother doesn't bother with us and hasn't for a very long time. I see my parents regularly.

Their estate is approx £1.1m and they said they plan to leave me and my brother £30k each out if that, with the rest going to the grandchildren.

I think it's lovely as some of the grandchildren are getting older, so it will help them get their first property or definitely give them a good start in life.
I still have a mortgage on my house, but the grandchildren will not necessarily need to have that worry as such.

Their friends are aware of it and so part of me is unsure how they'll perceive it. Was I not good enough in their opinion and so they've decided to skip passing it on to their own children, who in turn would pass it on to our children when we die.

I know friends of mine, their parents have left their inheritance to them, their own children. And so this has left me feeling confused at the moment and questioning if they don't think I'm worthy of it.

I hold down a full time professional job, work hard for what I have and don't go out pissing it up the wall.

IF that's true, then fair enough, because it makes financial sense.

Look at the inheritance of the Duke of Westminster's assets - putting everything into trust meant there wasn't much inheritance tax to pay either, the wealthy don't really pay tax like the rest of us.

I think this is an increasingly popular choice for Boomers. There are articles in Sunday Times Money section about it nearly every week.
Boomers living longer but having had children young, are seeing grandchildren grow up into adulthood. They see how hard it is for them to get on the property ladder etc and they also often have closer relationships with GC than our generation did with GP. If they can also see their DC living reasonably comfortably, they're much more likely to choose to leave most of their estate to GC. It means it's fair as equal amount per GC, and they can imagine them buying a house etc and get pleasure from that.

With life expectancies what they are now, boomers are likely to live until their DC are in their 50s and financially secure, whereas DGC will be 20s and the money can be really significant to their life trajectory. Leaving estate to DC means DGC wouldn't be likely to benefit until they are much older and the money has much less impact on their lives.

I wouldn't worry about their friends forming a judgement etc OP, as they are probably doing similar themselves. It's not a reflection on you in any way IMO.

This, 100%

I don’t understand why you think one grandchild should get more than another because of the size of family they come from. They are equal grandchildren. This makes absolutely zero sense and my guess is they are bypassing their children to some degree because there obviously is a bit of messiness involved.

this is the wrong way to put it!

CHILDREN should get the same thing equally full stop.
So maybe one single child will have more from his parents than his cousins who are 5 or 6 siblings.

At the same time, single child will have to shoulder the burden of his own parents on his own when they are getting old, while the cousins will split the care between 5 or 6 or them.

it's grossly unfair to to treat your own children differently. By giving more to one, you are punishing those who decided (or were forced) to have less or no children, how ridiculous.

I am staggered by this thread. It’s their money to leave to whoever they like. No one is entitled to an inheritance. And you don’t stay in touch with parents to ‘secure’ an inheritance. Dreadful thread.

no, but if your parents tell you they prefer your sibling and leave them more inheritance because they are the favourites, fair enough to start limiting contact! Goes both ways.

I am speaking as the parent, not as the child who might inherit.

No one is entitled to an inheritance.
I can't comprehend not leaving your assets to your own children and in an equal manner, I just can't (unless huge and life-saving medical issues to take care of)

You make it sound like we choose our parents, or ask to be born to them or somehow bring ourselves up (well kids dumped in boarding sch virtually do!).

I've actually told my parents to use all their assets or as much as they possibly can to live their lives and enjoy their retirement they've earned it!
I don't feel entitled to any of it; I see way too many people complaining about how their parents are over spending their inheritance in retirement - when actually it's not their inheritance it's their parents hard earned money!

But they are leaving it to the children in equal manner! They're also leaving it to their GC in equal manner, are you suggesting that because the 5 of the GC are siblings they should be left less than the OP child just because the OPs child is an only child?

I get it’s relative, but £40k is a lot of money/inheritance tax to most people…

My parents have put arrangements in place that leave 50% of the estate for me and my brother, and 50% shared between any grandchildren.
My SIL was a bit pissed off about this when I had 2 DC and they only had a dog, but they have since equalled up.

actually yes, I am saying you give the same thing to your children, If they decide to have more or less children, that's not right to make a judgement and reward or punish.

are you suggesting that because the 5 of the GC are siblings they should be left less than the OP child just because the OPs child is an only child?
yes, I said that.

They will also share the care of their own parents, while the only child will have the burden to deal with solo. So swings and roundabout...

You treat your own CHILDREN equally, you don't give more to one because they have more kids.

Agreed. The money is for their grandchildren and they should obviously all get the same. It doesn't matter who the parent is. The money isn't for the parent.

so they wanted to leave 75% to you (and kids)
and 25% to your brother?

Yeah, sounds fair 😂. Nothing to do with the SIL, she should butt out, but what a slap for your brother.

We're late 60s and lost our last parent in 2024. Our house is owned outright now and so when my DM died, (we're not in need of extra money) I deeded my share to our DC so when ready they have a deposit to buy a home. IHT wasn't an issue because her estate didn't hit the threshold.

I know! Someone actually commented that at least you don't need to worry about caring for them at the end!!! So many awful, entitled people on here!!

If they become unable to live at home, care home fees will rip through that.

When I am put in charge of the government emergency warning system, so I can send a short text message to everyone in the country, it will read "You do not need to risk your entire house going in care home fees if you buy an Immediate Needs Annuity".

But the money you're talking about is for the grandkids no? So they're not giving more money to one child are they? They are giving all their grandchildren an equal amount.

Just say thank you to them for thinking of you and their grandchildren. 30k is a lovely lump sum.

what's awful is parents punishing or rewarding their kids for having or not having children, or not treating children equally full stop. It's disgusting.

at least you don't need to worry about caring for them at the end!
absolutely fair.

If parents decide to only help one child (often seen with only babysitting for one, not the other), and give most of their inheritance to one child, it's healthy for the other one(s) to walk away and move on.

No one is "entitled" but as a parent, I can't imagine disliking my own children so much I'd cut them out from my will, or would give most of my assets to someone else.

What kind of attitude is that? No wonder some people are messed up with such unhealthy parents raising them.

It seems quite a divisive decision by your parents. A step so far away from the norm that it bound to cause hurt feelings and some lasting damage - not a great legacy. They could’ve moved towards giving more to the GC without going this extreme - especially given the 1:5 split of GC.

DH has already decided that if he inherits from his parents he will do a deed of variation so that our son inherits rather than him - I know he will be hurt though if his parents bypass him (also uneven split with GC), as he has always felt like the least favoured child (and crucially his sister’s DC will be much wealthier already than ours for their dad’s side).He would feel like it was just a way to give him 25% and his sister 75% effectively. He has already braced himself for this - it does fit with their MO.

Very strange to skip a generation unless they hate each other.

of course they are giving money to one child, or one child's side. Literally what giving to grand-children mean.

Spiteful. I know on MN people are not close to siblings (funny that) let alone cousins, but in real life, what awful family dynamics.

I would be so embarrassed if my siblings and I had most of my grand-parents inheritance, and my cousin had next to nothing! It's spiteful.

Usually means the grand-parents are expressing their judgement on the partner, so the DIL or the SIL!

The money is for the grandkids. What are you not understanding about that?
Lots of people leave their money to grandkids.

The idea is if your kids are in their 40's/50's they should have sorted themselves out by then, and should not need their parents money.

Regardless, this is what OP's parents have decided to do.