SIL plotted to inherit estates from childless aunts

[Anonymous]

Funny how the SIL knew that everything was up for grabs at the recent divorce and no spousal beneficiary. Excellent timing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, ah, how often do you visit these childless aunts, OP? I'm thinking pretty much never?

Op here. No one lives near them. We have a couple kids, bro/SIL have more.

I saw the hometown couple each year 1-5x a year for 25 years and holidays.

As a married adult with kids I saw one set 1-2x a year when in hometown and the other 1-2x a year when in their town during work trips.

My brother never saw the out of town one. He works full time in a senior position with lots of travel.

But his wife did some schmoozing behind the scenes the last 5+ years with each aunt. Most of it not in person, we all live 1000-4000 miles from one another.

schmoozed or stayed in touch?

What’s wrong with schmoozing and writing gushy letters, offering up a listening phone call, inviting everyone to fly over to visit, and sending cute care packages to other people’s aunts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, ah, how often do you visit these childless aunts, OP? I'm thinking pretty much never?

Everyone knows to hit up the childless aunts OP!!!!!

This is happening in my family now. My brother died and my sil doesn't realize a niece plans to take advantage of her. She would be stunned if she knew the things the niece has said about her. She despises my sil who is in a vulnerable state. I can not see any good way of letting her know what is going on without sounding horrible myself.

[Anonymous]

What matters is if that was what was pitched to the aunt as a reason to redo the wills and assign the next gen executor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your brother is just as much to blame as his wife. He could have stopped her, but he didn't.

I'm sorry, OP. At least you can refuse to help this family with equanimity now that you know they will inherit a significant sum. Focus on your own life. The best revenge is living well!

PS: You could also inform your parents and explain that it's only fair that they compensate for this unfairness by weighing each of your inheritances accordingly. Depends what kind of parents they are.

This.

You know their game, just be civil and know they aren’t forthright.

They’re was nothing stopping them from calling you up to say Aunt XYZ’s estate is all taken care of, I’ll just make sure it goes to that abc charity she talks about.

Why should they do that? Let OP ask Auntie about it if she cares so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny how the SIL knew that everything was up for grabs at the recent divorce and no spousal beneficiary. Excellent timing.

So crazy and devious for the SIL to reach out to a family member at a time they need support! And for five years. Quite the long con. She could have better spent her time gossiping with the aunt's ex about her estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

No, DP explicitly means not PP. But nevertheless, my post is about that point -- either SIL *did* care more, and that's why she has established a deeper relationship, or SIL's time was assumed to be available for anyone in the extended family and she got stuck with the caretaking *even though she did not care more*. Either way, it's fine that she got remembered in a will. Being upset that someone who was either 1) genuinely closer to this aunt, or 2) assigned the role of "unemployed woman who takes care of everyone" for this aunt is now being named as a beneficiary or executor is petty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

As you can imagine, many SAHM’s greatly care about their image and social relationships within the school, community, friend clique, extended family, and husband’s employer. Its their main trading currency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

No, DP explicitly means not PP. But nevertheless, my post is about that point -- either SIL *did* care more, and that's why she has established a deeper relationship, or SIL's time was assumed to be available for anyone in the extended family and she got stuck with the caretaking *even though she did not care more*. Either way, it's fine that she got remembered in a will. Being upset that someone who was either 1) genuinely closer to this aunt, or 2) assigned the role of "unemployed woman who takes care of everyone" for this aunt is now being named as a beneficiary or executor is petty.

I take your points. My point was that the PP assumes SAHPs care more than WOHPs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

As you can imagine, many SAHM’s greatly care about their image and social relationships within the school, community, friend clique, extended family, and husband’s employer. Its their main trading currency.

And here we have the other side of the mommy wars.

So ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could be rewritten:

I don't talk to my aunts very much, but my brother and his wife do. His wife has been helping them out in dealing with end of life care. I'm very greedy and better get their money when they die.

yeah, this. the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships. So now, she is actually getting some financial reward as karma for that. I find it entirely believable that the aunts actually grew fond of her, because she reached out and was supportive.


OP sounds confused because she sees every action in terms of the monetary reward and doesn't understand caretaking.

You were doing so well and then you fell into the trap of thinking SAHPs care more and by extension, WOHPs don’t.

DP but often SAHPs are expected to have more free time and to willingly spend it on other people's problems because they're not doing something as important as "working." In this instance, that's evidently what SIL did. She kept in touch with these more distant relatives, for 5 years. She is in their confidence because of that effort. Either she did it because she cares enough about elderly family members to do it (very nice, why be upset that one of the aunts remembered her in her will after this?) or she did it because her time was considered disposable by OP and she was happy to dump the work of checking in on extended family on the SAHM (not nice, nor is it nice to be upset that her time has been ::gasp:: assigned a value by the aunt who made her executor).

If there was some allegation of elder abuse or manipulation I could see the outrage. But two adults making a choice of their own free will to either name this person in their will or trust her to carry out the disposition of their estate does not an abuse case make.

The PP (you?) said, “the SIL being a SAHM also seems to indicate that she's someone who cares about caretaking and relationships.” They are saying SAHPs care more about relationships. It’s BS.

No, DP explicitly means not PP. But nevertheless, my post is about that point -- either SIL *did* care more, and that's why she has established a deeper relationship, or SIL's time was assumed to be available for anyone in the extended family and she got stuck with the caretaking *even though she did not care more*. Either way, it's fine that she got remembered in a will. Being upset that someone who was either 1) genuinely closer to this aunt, or 2) assigned the role of "unemployed woman who takes care of everyone" for this aunt is now being named as a beneficiary or executor is petty.

I take your points. My point was that the PP assumes SAHPs care more than WOHPs.

I'm the PP. Let me clarify that I mean "time spent caretaking." That's it -- I don't know what is in people's hearts. But it actually doesn't matter -- time spent caretaking is what we are talking about here.

[Anonymous]

What kind of caretaking are we talking about when everyone lives 1000+ miles away?

[Anonymous]

Why harp on the working situation? Is OP implying that but for her job she could have dedicated more time to her aunts? Since she’s working she can just make her own money and not have to worry about schmoozing in hopes of getting someone else’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, ah, how often do you visit these childless aunts, OP? I'm thinking pretty much never?

Op here. No one lives near them. We have a couple kids, bro/SIL have more.

I saw the hometown couple each year 1-5x a year for 25 years and holidays.

As a married adult with kids I saw one set 1-2x a year when in hometown and the other 1-2x a year when in their town during work trips.

My brother never saw the out of town one. He works full time in a senior position with lots of travel.

But his wife did some schmoozing behind the scenes the last 5+ years with each aunt. Most of it not in person, we all live 1000-4000 miles from one another.

schmoozed or stayed in touch?

What’s wrong with schmoozing and writing gushy letters, offering up a listening phone call, inviting everyone to fly over to visit, and sending cute care packages to other people’s aunts?

This.
This is likely what happened.
Seeing your aunt and uncle for a couple meals a year during travels is not as effective as love bombing letters and phone calls from busy SAHMs. It's all about CONNECTION, TRUST, SIMILARITIES, ATTENTION, FEELING GOOD, LIKEMINDEDNESS.