Large early inheritance to only 1 of 3 siblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

You’re saying a gift of one million dollars to a sibling (who was already umc) wouldn’t register with you? I don’t believe that.

[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.

The parents are certainly very religious and did what a good Christian would do. Give more to those that need it the most. That's what Jesus would do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

You’re saying a gift of one million dollars to a sibling (who was already umc) wouldn’t register with you? I don’t believe that.

+1. And it’s so OP’s sibling can live in a nice house and send her kids to private school. And if your scholarship had fallen through or if you decided to go to law school it sounds like your parents would have picked up the tab. This is not the case in OP’s case. I went to an Ivy and got a lot of financial aid because my parents didn’t make a lot. My sister went to a school with a crappy endowment and my parents’ paid more for her college education. I’m not bitter about it, but I would be bitter if my parents gave my sister a million out of the blue so she could live a lavish lifestyle while I worked my butt off to afford a less affluent lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Why is OP talking about this as an early inheritance? It's a gift, because the parents are still alive, and it's not OP's money yet.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read all this, but if they made changes in the wills to accommodate the early payoff, this is super normal. I honestly don’t know a single wealthy family that doesn’t have some thing like this to account for early gifts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

I think everyone in this story is more than UMC. Much more.

You’re saying a gift of one million dollars to a sibling (who was already umc) wouldn’t register with you? I don’t believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

You’re saying a gift of one million dollars to a sibling (who was already umc) wouldn’t register with you? I don’t believe that.

I think everyone in this story is more than UMC. Much more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is OP talking about this as an early inheritance? It's a gift, because the parents are still alive, and it's not OP's money yet.

Because OP is watching the clock for the parents to finally die and give OP their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The parents are certainly very religious and did what a good Christian would do. Give more to those that need it the most. That's what Jesus would do.

I think you need to re-read the bible if you think Jesus is all about spending $1 million to live in a more expensive neighborhood…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is OP talking about this as an early inheritance? It's a gift, because the parents are still alive, and it's not OP's money yet.

Not necessarily. Many parents with money to burn make it clear to children when something is an early inheritance. I wrote about my sister potentially being gifted a house. If that occurs the value of the house will be deducted from her trust, so it won’t impact my trust or my brothers’ trusts. In this way, it’s an early inheritance. my husband’s grandparents also helped his mother fund years of private school and college and gave her a down payment for a house, so when it came time for her to inherit they gave her sister millions and she got a few hundred thousand.

[Anonymous]

Twice in our family estates (and potential estates) have been handled unequally, and I think it does breed issues. My father's parents principally left their estate and house to one of their three children, and this led to lasting issues.

My DH's mother has largely liquidated in favor of one of his siblings, and sold her house to her in a sweetheart deal. Having recently been going through the assisted living process with my own mother, I am not at all confident after 10K a month payments that there will be much of an estate left.

I think the parents in these situations think there is a particularly good reason why they are favoring one sibling, and in cases like disability, single parenthood, etc. they might be right. In more typical cases though I think equal distribution leads to better family outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twice in our family estates (and potential estates) have been handled unequally, and I think it does breed issues. My father's parents principally left their estate and house to one of their three children, and this led to lasting issues.

My DH's mother has largely liquidated in favor of one of his siblings, and sold her house to her in a sweetheart deal. Having recently been going through the assisted living process with my own mother, I am not at all confident after 10K a month payments that there will be much of an estate left.

I think the parents in these situations think there is a particularly good reason why they are favoring one sibling, and in cases like disability, single parenthood, etc. they might be right. In more typical cases though I think equal distribution leads to better family outcomes.

I mean… sure, for the kids who didn’t do anything to get the benefit of an unequal distribution.

In my family one of the kids gave up a ton to care for my elderly relative and by the end they were living full time with elderly relative. Now, carer kid is being thrown out on the street because the estate is selling the house. I don’t think this is actually a better “family” outcome overall even though I’m sure the siblings waiting for their check think so. Carer kid thinks siblings are showing their heartlessness and greed.

(I’m not carer kid or a sibling in this scenario, it’s my relatively arm’s length take on the situation.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The parents are certainly very religious and did what a good Christian would do. Give more to those that need it the most. That's what Jesus would do.

I think you need to re-read the bible if you think Jesus is all about spending $1 million to live in a more expensive neighborhood…

That’s not really what OP said happened. The money was used to move to a church job and send kids to presumably religious school.

It’s pretty obvious OP is downplaying the religious aspects of what happened because they’re the real rationale for what happened.

I’m guessing OP doesn’t want to admit they wouldn’t send their kids to religious private school even if parents paid for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Because that is what nice normal people do. They don't keep track of "who got what" in their family.

You’re saying a gift of one million dollars to a sibling (who was already umc) wouldn’t register with you? I don’t believe that.

A gift of $1M would. But how much my sibling got for college vs me if mine was fully paid for would not.

But that is not a problem I ever had growing up. It is something my kids will deal with, but we are reasonable people and aim to keep it fair