Large early inheritance to only 1 of 3 siblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

[Anonymous]

It's not nice, but it is their money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

But sibling did work—and seemingly in a career that the parents particularly wanted to subsidize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

Yes, it smacks of favoritism, but you don't know any of the "behind the scenes" going ons. What if that sibling has helped the parent with various items? What if that sibling calls the parent every week or comes over to run errands/fix things around the house/etc and the others only call when they want something? We really don't know why the parent wants to help one kid more than the others.

Also, where did you grow up with "a keen sense of fairness"? I grew up LMC. Was it fair that kids in HS drove brand new fancy cars when I was just lucky to drive the car with no heat (we lived in a cold climate) or that just for kicks I would need friends to push so I could pop the clutch and start the damn car at times. Was it fair in college when people would go to the movies and out to dinner all in the same weekend, yet I could only afford one and sometime neither that weekend and/or I might be doing HW or working 10 hours at my job to pay tuition?

So yes, our goal as parents should be to be as "fair as possible" to our kids, but ultimately once they are adults, they need to earn that "fair treatment"---if one kid treats you1000x better than the other, you might be more inclined to help them. Heck as a kid I learned that if you wrote thank you notes quickly to grandparents/aunts/uncles/etc for gifts, you were much more likely to receive more gifts (and when you live at a distance, the gifts back then normally meant cash or a check). Took my siblings a bit longer to learn that a simple thank you note for xmas gift meant you might get a V-day or St Patty day card with some cash.

[Anonymous]

It's 💯 about the church.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's 💯 about the church.

Right or wrong in your opinion, it's the parent's choice of how to distribute their money.
if the money means that much to you, you too can take that path in your life. Like most adults, I would not cater to anyone or change my beliefs just to get some money. Thankfully as an adult we also get to choose what is important to us and spend/donate our money as we choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

Yes, it smacks of favoritism, but you don't know any of the "behind the scenes" going ons. What if that sibling has helped the parent with various items? What if that sibling calls the parent every week or comes over to run errands/fix things around the house/etc and the others only call when they want something? We really don't know why the parent wants to help one kid more than the others.

Also, where did you grow up with "a keen sense of fairness"? I grew up LMC. Was it fair that kids in HS drove brand new fancy cars when I was just lucky to drive the car with no heat (we lived in a cold climate) or that just for kicks I would need friends to push so I could pop the clutch and start the damn car at times. Was it fair in college when people would go to the movies and out to dinner all in the same weekend, yet I could only afford one and sometime neither that weekend and/or I might be doing HW or working 10 hours at my job to pay tuition?

So yes, our goal as parents should be to be as "fair as possible" to our kids, but ultimately once they are adults, they need to earn that "fair treatment"---if one kid treats you1000x better than the other, you might be more inclined to help them. Heck as a kid I learned that if you wrote thank you notes quickly to grandparents/aunts/uncles/etc for gifts, you were much more likely to receive more gifts (and when you live at a distance, the gifts back then normally meant cash or a check). Took my siblings a bit longer to learn that a simple thank you note for xmas gift meant you might get a V-day or St Patty day card with some cash.

Gross. They taught you about how strings are attached to money for lots of people.

[Anonymous]

Children have a reasonable expectation to be treated equally by their parents. Favoritism causes terrible dynamics between siblings.

Life is long. Relationships have ebbs and flows. The idea of leaving vastly different sums to children when disabilities are not a factor offends a lot of posters sense of fairness.

Leaving more to someone who "needs it more" is a point in time evaluation. A kid who looks rich goes through a lawsuit or a divorce and gets completely cleaned out. Or the kid who made good choices throughout their life to live below their means and save adequately is effectively punished while a freewheeling sibling gets bailed out.

It sucks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

Yes, it smacks of favoritism, but you don't know any of the "behind the scenes" going ons. What if that sibling has helped the parent with various items? What if that sibling calls the parent every week or comes over to run errands/fix things around the house/etc and the others only call when they want something? We really don't know why the parent wants to help one kid more than the others.

Also, where did you grow up with "a keen sense of fairness"? I grew up LMC. Was it fair that kids in HS drove brand new fancy cars when I was just lucky to drive the car with no heat (we lived in a cold climate) or that just for kicks I would need friends to push so I could pop the clutch and start the damn car at times. Was it fair in college when people would go to the movies and out to dinner all in the same weekend, yet I could only afford one and sometime neither that weekend and/or I might be doing HW or working 10 hours at my job to pay tuition?

So yes, our goal as parents should be to be as "fair as possible" to our kids, but ultimately once they are adults, they need to earn that "fair treatment"---if one kid treats you1000x better than the other, you might be more inclined to help them. Heck as a kid I learned that if you wrote thank you notes quickly to grandparents/aunts/uncles/etc for gifts, you were much more likely to receive more gifts (and when you live at a distance, the gifts back then normally meant cash or a check). Took my siblings a bit longer to learn that a simple thank you note for xmas gift meant you might get a V-day or St Patty day card with some cash.

Gross. They taught you about how strings are attached to money for lots of people.

No, they taught me that they value people who are appreciative and take the simple time of 4-5 mins to write and mail a thank you note. Did you not teach your children to say "please" and "thank you"? They liked to get thank you cards and little notes from their grandkids--I would always include a paragraph about what I was up to and Grandparents love that when they live 2K miles away. In return, when they get a thank you in the mail, they usually wrote said grandkid back and loved to include a $5-10 bill. If you didn't send a thank-you note, you would have to wait until the next "real holiday" like your b-day or xmas to get something. Quite simple. I

In real life, sending a thank you email after an interview could mean the difference in who gets the job---it's shows appreciation and interest and is just common courtesy.

And in real life, do you keep friends who never plan activities with you, who never respond to your texts/emails/messages about "how's life treating you"? Who only contact you when they need something?
If I'm always the one making an effort to communicate with someone, after awhile it becomes a one sided relationship and I would rather invest my time and energy with friends who want to be around me and other friends. Does not happen often but when it does I realize it's time to move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

Yes, it smacks of favoritism, but you don't know any of the "behind the scenes" going ons. What if that sibling has helped the parent with various items? What if that sibling calls the parent every week or comes over to run errands/fix things around the house/etc and the others only call when they want something? We really don't know why the parent wants to help one kid more than the others.

Also, where did you grow up with "a keen sense of fairness"? I grew up LMC. Was it fair that kids in HS drove brand new fancy cars when I was just lucky to drive the car with no heat (we lived in a cold climate) or that just for kicks I would need friends to push so I could pop the clutch and start the damn car at times. Was it fair in college when people would go to the movies and out to dinner all in the same weekend, yet I could only afford one and sometime neither that weekend and/or I might be doing HW or working 10 hours at my job to pay tuition?

So yes, our goal as parents should be to be as "fair as possible" to our kids, but ultimately once they are adults, they need to earn that "fair treatment"---if one kid treats you1000x better than the other, you might be more inclined to help them. Heck as a kid I learned that if you wrote thank you notes quickly to grandparents/aunts/uncles/etc for gifts, you were much more likely to receive more gifts (and when you live at a distance, the gifts back then normally meant cash or a check). Took my siblings a bit longer to learn that a simple thank you note for xmas gift meant you might get a V-day or St Patty day card with some cash.

Gross. They taught you about how strings are attached to money for lots of people.

No, it’s gross. I love all three of my kids equally and would never give a larger inheritance to a kid who called me more. Your kids probably hate you - even the kid that checks in on you. They’ve just learned you’re transactional and that’s what they need to do in order to get $, love, approval, etc. from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in what others think of this scenario. Parents are in their 80s and have 3 adult kids, all professionals, married, and doing well. Two of the children, with their spouses, are doing very well financially. The third has a job in the church and their spouse has a well-paying professional job - they are doing fine financially but clearly not as well as the other children. When that child (who also has some health problems) moved to take a new job in the church, they wanted to live in a large house in the most desirable neighborhood of a large city, have their kids attend the best private schools, etc. but couldn't afford to do so (this would be a living standard above that of the other two siblings). As a result, the parents decided to gift $1 million of their estate early to that child. They told one of the other children about it at the time but did not tell the other (presumably to avoid the difficult conversation). Several years later, this has all come to light and it is awkward. The parents' position is that nothing will be done to even things out (now or later) as this gift was for "need". Thoughts? Advice?

They've a right to use their money as and when they see fit.

It’s not a question if their right-obviously it’s their right! I don’t think there is any suggestion op is going to try to strong arm the money out of them. People are allowed to have opinions, though, and I think 99% of people would in this situation.

+10000. Why is it impossible for some people to move beyond the “it’s their $$” argument. Yes, it is their money. But most of us grow up with a keen sense of fairness. Many companies disclose pay equity data because as a society the idea of two people doing roughly the same job and one getting person getting paid more than the other to do that job is intrinsically upsetting. Yes, one person may have spent more time in the workforce, or be a man, or have a family, etc. but to many that doesn’t justify a pay gap. For me, the same logic applies to inheritances outside of a sibling having a disability that would curtail their earnings or necessitate care - in which case I believe special provisions should be made. Anything that deviates from that just smacks of favoritism. If you can afford to give one kid $1M, why can’t you afford to give each kid $300K? Why can’t you ask all your kids what they would prefer instead of offering a life changing option to only one child? And getting an inheritance early can be meaningful. Sure, millions of dollars at 60 or 65 is amazing, but what it you die of cancer at 57? What if you would have worked less and spent more time with your family but didn’t have the option because you needed to pay bills- bills your sibling didn’t need to worry about?

Yes, it smacks of favoritism, but you don't know any of the "behind the scenes" going ons. What if that sibling has helped the parent with various items? What if that sibling calls the parent every week or comes over to run errands/fix things around the house/etc and the others only call when they want something? We really don't know why the parent wants to help one kid more than the others.

Also, where did you grow up with "a keen sense of fairness"? I grew up LMC. Was it fair that kids in HS drove brand new fancy cars when I was just lucky to drive the car with no heat (we lived in a cold climate) or that just for kicks I would need friends to push so I could pop the clutch and start the damn car at times. Was it fair in college when people would go to the movies and out to dinner all in the same weekend, yet I could only afford one and sometime neither that weekend and/or I might be doing HW or working 10 hours at my job to pay tuition?

So yes, our goal as parents should be to be as "fair as possible" to our kids, but ultimately once they are adults, they need to earn that "fair treatment"---if one kid treats you1000x better than the other, you might be more inclined to help them. Heck as a kid I learned that if you wrote thank you notes quickly to grandparents/aunts/uncles/etc for gifts, you were much more likely to receive more gifts (and when you live at a distance, the gifts back then normally meant cash or a check). Took my siblings a bit longer to learn that a simple thank you note for xmas gift meant you might get a V-day or St Patty day card with some cash.

Gross. They taught you about how strings are attached to money for lots of people.

No, it’s gross. I love all three of my kids equally and would never give a larger inheritance to a kid who called me more. Your kids probably hate you - even the kid that checks in on you. They’ve just learned you’re transactional and that’s what they need to do in order to get $, love, approval, etc. from you.

Bingo. Completely agree.

[Anonymous]

My parents gave an early (and very large) inheritance to one of my siblings who needed it for a business. The sibling did not ask, but when offered the money, the sibling accepted. The business still failed. Absolutely no hard feelings from the other two siblings at all. Another sibling had been estranged from the family for a long, long time. As a result, there was certainly a different distribution upon our parents' deaths. How has it worked out? The estranged one came back only after our parents were almost gone and yes, expected a large inheritance but accepted it when one wasn't given. I don't think the failed business one is upset at all, but rather grateful for the chance previously given and still got a small (relatively speaking) distribution. I gift to both siblings and their kids very generously.

[Anonymous]

My parents paid for all of my brother’s law school and a couple years later I got a full scholarship for my grad school, they didn’t ever give me a similar amount because I didn’t need it. This has never caused any problems between us, we both have more than we need.