<p>I used to spend a LOT of emotional energy being upset anew every time I perceived that one of H’s sisters was getting special / preferential treatment from the in-laws. I came from a family in which my parents were extremely 50/50 with me and my sister, and I spent countless hours agonizing about the Unfairness of It All, counting the money spent on H compared to the money spent on the sisters, and how come they got an anniversary gift when H and I didn’t, and did they spend more on the birthday gift for the other set of grandkids than my kids, and so on and so forth.</p>
<p>And what did it get me? Nothing.</p>
<p>Once I made the decision to Let Go of all of this and just accept people for what they are - and know that H and I were happy with how we were running our lives - it was though an enormous weight was lifted from my shoulders. </p>
<p>I am begging you - let it go - and if you really can’t, seriously seek out a professional to talk to to help you get to that point.</p>
<p>You know, pizzagirl, the one I believe who is the real victim in my DH’s family is his sister who has been “favored.” I think all the money they gave her made her sort of dysfunctional and I don’t think she’s had a very happy life. My DH and I talk about this sometimes. He agrees. He considers himself lucky to have escaped the dysfunction.</p>
<p>My grandfather died a few years ago. He was very, very wealthy. Didn’t get along with my mother at all and wanted to use his will to snipe at her. So what he did was leave most of his estate to one of her children (my oldest brother and his wife, who both cared for him in his last years with no expectation of reward) and a significant chunk of money to my sister, who had no contact with him. The goal was to drive a wedge between my mother’s two sons and two daughters. Funny how things work out. My mother always swore that her father was evil and that his money was cursed. The kids who got all that money have had nothing but misery of epic proportion. For whatever reason, when they got the money, my siblings never needed anything from mother or siblings again, and the relationships pretty much ended. The two of us who got nothing (and didn’t care) have done very well and remain close with each other and with our mother. Interestingly, the brother who got nothing has been very fortunate and has become more well-off than the brother who interited.</p>
<p>wow - I really come at this from a different place. My parents had discussed with me their intention of leaving a family home to my sister, since they felt she was going to need extra financial help to get by. As executor of the estate, I discussed with the other siblings the possibility of refusing part of our inheritance so that it could go to this sister with the idea she should always have some means of support. We all agreed to do this. It seemed kind of self-serving since the goal was not to have to assume responsibility if she couldn’t get by financially. I assume, if we all live long enough, husband and I will take this sister in. The situation would definitely be complicated if she had children. But refusing part of an inheritance did impact all our children long term. Though I doubt as much as seeing us unconcerned about their aunt.</p>
<p>It is interesting to me that this is how my family has done it for at least three generations. The better off sibs take less out of the “estate”. No one really talks about it afterwards.</p>
<p>This is very interesting of sorts as I just had to deal with helping an older friend with wrapping up his late mother’s estate affairs last summer because he’s overwhelmed as the executor and his older sibling just couldn’t be bothered to help out. </p>
<p>Considering the amount of work involved(hoarder), I didn’t blame the friend for being angry about the older sibling…nor myself for feeling that there should be a law that cuts out anyone from a parental inheritance if they can’t be bothered with assisting the sibling/family member serving as executor in wrapping up estate affairs right after the mother’s death due to frivolous reasons such as going on vacation with BF du jour. </p>
<p>Did I mention this sibling had the nerve to file a lawsuit against him for “not getting a fair share” despite the fact it was already split 50/50?? Only fortunate/laughable bit is that even if the lawsuit wasn’t laughable on its face…after all expenses and executor fees for the substantial work we all put in and estate debts are tabulated…it’ll be a miracle if there’s anything left.</p>
<p>That was likely the cultural norm in many places in past generations, when extended families lived together anyway, there were more children to share the caretaking, and few people lived for very long in a condition that required so much caretaking to be a heavy burden on the next generation.</p>
<p>These days in the US, it has become a societal expectation (Social Security and Medicare).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Remember that book The Millionaire Next Door? One of the situations it describes is how the “favored” children (in terms of monetary gifts, which they call “economic outpatient care”) often fail to become self-sufficient on their own.</p>
<p>Former financial planner here. As a rule, we advised equal split among kids. Executor was always the adult child best able to manage the task (financial experience or proximity). “Thank you compensation” for caregiving could be done during time of assistance. Accomodations could be made to even things out for siblings that would not get a family home or valuable silver etc. by allocation of more of remaining estate. Equal split recommended regardless of situation unless there was a disabled child in which case a trust would be set up and that trust would ensure siblings were not later financially responsible for a sibling. I have seen so many families torn apart by estate issues! I think your family is the generous exception, ALH.
My mother has her will equally split and a list of higher value items with specific names next to them. She wants to spare us all from the greedy, unkind, combative sister in law (who is estranged from all her own siblings largely due to fighting over her own mother’s modest estate). Although I will serve as executor and do all of her caretaking as she ages, I agree that brother should get half. Truly, though, I would prefer that she enjoy her own assets herself (e.g. travel, theater, fine dining). The problem is that most of us have no idea how long those assets need to last and that senior care is so expensive, there may not be enough!</p>
<p>My dad has some sick need to keep his kids under his care well into their 50s. Three of the four kids are being supported by him - those three do not have children. I am not being supported by him and have been ostracized by the rest of them as being an outlier. Fine with me. They can mooch off him all they want and since they live with him I don’t feel any need to do any caretaking. I don’t expect to receive any inheritance either. And 20 years from now when they come crawling to my doorstep destitute because they blew through their inheritance in one year/month, I’m not helping them. Two years ago I would have but not now, not after what they did to me in the past year (long, long, long story).</p>
<p>It’s a different situation with my in-laws. A much healthier one. They don’t let anyone mooch off them - a good thing. I’m sure we’ll end up being the primary helpers with them since they live very close by.</p>
<p>I plan to try to copy my in-laws approach. I need to be self sufficient and raise my children to be self sufficient. No mooching, just loving each other. That is my goal - I’ll let you know in about 30 years how I did :)</p>
<p>I think you do what you know. During my childhood, when one of my childless great aunts died, IOUs were discovered in her safety deposit box from her favored niece who had pretty much spent the whole estate. There were probably about a dozen cousins who had expected to inherit but could get by without the money. One called my Dad to discuss what should be done. They decided their deceased aunt would be happy with favored niece having all the money. No one sued. When my paternal grandfather died, the most valuable property went to the sibling who had the least and used the income to fund retirement. When my widowed mother had her first stroke, she took me aside to show me a whole bunch of savings bonds she had purchased, in various denominations, in both her name and in the name of her sister. The sister was married to a ne’er do well who had run a couple of my grandfather’s businesses into the ground and then essentially lived off whatever his wife could earn or get from her relatives. I was instructed to give the money to my aunt if she was in a desperate situation. My mother didn’t want to leave her anything outright for obvious reasons.</p>
<p>When my MIL’s mother died, she left five children. All were comfortable except my MIL. The youngest wanted to take the inheritance and start a new business. Since all the other siblings were comfortable, they agreed to let him have it all with the agreement that he would pay it back a little at a time. Very little. He ended up with a very successful business and my MIL got nothing. I thought that was awful because my MIL wanted to use her portion to buy a home but she was coerced into agreeing to this.</p>
<p>My former MIL favored my former BIL, and it came close to destroying him. No job was good enough for him. No girl was good enough. He was close to 50 before he realized not everyone viewed him as his mother did, and is settled down now.</p>
<p>Well, kayf, that is a cautionary tale for someone like me. I hope I’ve fostered a sense of gratitude and appreciation in the Precious Baby King, but I’d better make it a priority to be sure.</p>
<p>I agree with the comments by the former financial planner, particularly that parents should give “Thank You Compensation” to the child who is the caregiver. But too often, this is not done. And who can charge their parent for caregiving?</p>
<p>alh, I’m fascinated by your accounts of your family in how they deal with inheritances. How is it that everyone knows everyone’s income and net worth in order to really know who has the greatest need? My MIL demands to know our income and how much money we have and what our house costs all the time but we don’t tell her. It feels intrusive. </p>
<p>In the case of my SIL, she received social security payments for some years since her dad was over a certain age and it triggered a benefit. Those funds were saved for her and given to her when she went to college while living at home. They apparently vanished with a BF who was into rock concerts and apparently they spent a lot of money attending rock concerts of note all over the country for several years. Then her BF was trying to be a writer needed money to do an MFA program. My in-laws paid for that and also bought them a house. He left my SIL soon after. Then there were several other BFs all of whom my in-laws really liked because they were “handy” and did stuff around their own home for them. </p>
<p>We just shake our heads. Please, please don’t let us do this to our own kids. When is giving to them dysfunctional? I think it’s a really worthwhile topic to think about.</p>
<p>There have been several threads on this topic. Moochers are moochers. They will never change. You can’t change them, only how you choose to respond to them. If MIL chooses to emable them, not much you can do. Hopefully you and your spouse are on the same page with your limits.</p>
<p>sewhappy: You seem to know your SIL’s financial circumstances and you know what your in-laws estate will probably be. I think it is up to you whether to share the same information with them. My parents needed to have some sense of their children’s financial circumstances for estate planning purposes. </p>
<p>The situation you describe with your SIL is comparable to my mother and her sister. My aunt married a real loser. As jym says, moochers are moochers. It wasn’t fair that she got more from my grandparents when they had money, or that my parents supported them in their old age, or that my aunt inherited equally with my mother when they were gone. All I ever heard my mother say, very discretely, was how very sorry she was my aunt had married him and that she had had a fiance who, like many others, had come back from the war “changed.” She seemed to see my aunt as a victim of unfortunate circumstances.</p>
<p>I totally agree with this, if a family member requires a caregiver, then remunerate the one who does it if they can afford it. It is easy to determine what a paid stranger would charge within a range.</p>
<p>It does seem like most families with 3+ kids have one who needs help. Some parents think all their resources should go to that kid, to help them, and are not worried about the siblings, others make it financially fair.</p>
<p>A friend’s parents bought his sister a house, then paid to remodel it and are proud they can take care of that helpless DD that way, yet had not done anything for the other 4 kids. SO, $200k to one kid, $0 to the rest. Not that they had $200k for each kid, but if they had kept that house in their name it could have been part of the estate value.</p>
<p>Some of us already have children done with college and out in the work world. What if all the children have had the same educational opportunities and have all become self-supporting, but one becomes financially successful far beyond the others…out of the norm of what might have been anticipated. Or one, although hardworking, never achieves the financial success of the rest of the siblings? Are the parents showing favoritism if they decide not to divide their estate equally? Does it matter if any or all of the “children” have children of their own? Should grandchildren, or potential grandchildren, enter into estate planning? Some of us may just find ourselves in this position?</p>