Large early inheritance to only 1 of 3 siblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s their money but it’s also natural that this will stir resentment among the siblings. It’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Everyone is responsible for their own feelings. Resentment isn’t some special exception.

OP’s vagueness about the religious aspect makes me think the child who got the gift is the only one who continued in the faith.

OP should thank their lucky stars if their parents don’t gift the whole estate to the church. It happens every day.

The parents shouldn’t be surprised then at their kids reactions.

And the kids shouldn’t be surprised that their parents value church participation. I doubt they converted when OP turned 30.

At least the kids know that their parents love was always conditional.

If you think money is how love is expressed your parents failed you. If you think your parents and siblings are responsible for your feelings and reactions, they profoundly failed you.

In any case I think you should refrain from giving parenting advice and work on yourself.

What are you blathering about? It looks like the OP’s parents expressed their love with money preferentially to one sibling.
Work on your reading comprehension before posting tirades.

Where does OP say money = love? That’s just you.

So the parents gave one sibling a million dollars because they really hated them. Got it!

You just can’t stop proving my point huh?

And you just can’t keep digging in.
Why is this striking such a nerve with you? Are you the parent who favors one child over the other or are you the beneficiary of unequal largesse?

Nope. I’m the child of penniless people so I can see this all with clear, neutral eyes. And you just look… pathetic. If I ever have anything to leave in a will I think I’ll give it all to charity to avoid any of them turning out like you.

So you have no idea what OP was talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s their money but it’s also natural that this will stir resentment among the siblings. It’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Everyone is responsible for their own feelings. Resentment isn’t some special exception.

OP’s vagueness about the religious aspect makes me think the child who got the gift is the only one who continued in the faith.

OP should thank their lucky stars if their parents don’t gift the whole estate to the church. It happens every day.

The parents shouldn’t be surprised then at their kids reactions.

And the kids shouldn’t be surprised that their parents value church participation. I doubt they converted when OP turned 30.

At least the kids know that their parents love was always conditional.

If you think money is how love is expressed your parents failed you. If you think your parents and siblings are responsible for your feelings and reactions, they profoundly failed you.

In any case I think you should refrain from giving parenting advice and work on yourself.

What are you blathering about? It looks like the OP’s parents expressed their love with money preferentially to one sibling.
Work on your reading comprehension before posting tirades.

Where does OP say money = love? That’s just you.

So the parents gave one sibling a million dollars because they really hated them. Got it!

You just can’t stop proving my point huh?

And you just can’t keep digging in.
Why is this striking such a nerve with you? Are you the parent who favors one child over the other or are you the beneficiary of unequal largesse?

Nope. I’m the child of penniless people so I can see this all with clear, neutral eyes. And you just look… pathetic. If I ever have anything to leave in a will I think I’ll give it all to charity to avoid any of them turning out like you.

And that would make more sense than giving it to one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s their money but it’s also natural that this will stir resentment among the siblings. It’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Everyone is responsible for their own feelings. Resentment isn’t some special exception.

OP’s vagueness about the religious aspect makes me think the child who got the gift is the only one who continued in the faith.

OP should thank their lucky stars if their parents don’t gift the whole estate to the church. It happens every day.

The parents shouldn’t be surprised then at their kids reactions.

And the kids shouldn’t be surprised that their parents value church participation. I doubt they converted when OP turned 30.

At least the kids know that their parents love was always conditional.

If you think money is how love is expressed your parents failed you. If you think your parents and siblings are responsible for your feelings and reactions, they profoundly failed you.

In any case I think you should refrain from giving parenting advice and work on yourself.

What are you blathering about? It looks like the OP’s parents expressed their love with money preferentially to one sibling.
Work on your reading comprehension before posting tirades.

Where does OP say money = love? That’s just you.

So the parents gave one sibling a million dollars because they really hated them. Got it!

You just can’t stop proving my point huh?

And you just can’t keep digging in.
Why is this striking such a nerve with you? Are you the parent who favors one child over the other or are you the beneficiary of unequal largesse?

Nope. I’m the child of penniless people so I can see this all with clear, neutral eyes. And you just look… pathetic. If I ever have anything to leave in a will I think I’ll give it all to charity to avoid any of them turning out like you.

So you have no idea what OP was talking about.

OP has hidden so many balls (total value of the potential estate, the childrens’ involvement in religion, the nature of the private school) none of us really know what’s going on.

[Anonymous]

Last year I was very sick, spent months in the hospital and out of work. My parents paid my kids’ private school tuition for one semester and some of my medical bills, which infuriated my brother who doesn’t have kids in private school or medical bills. I understand why he thinks they need to keep things even but I’m also grateful they were there in my time of need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Last year I was very sick, spent months in the hospital and out of work. My parents paid my kids’ private school tuition for one semester and some of my medical bills, which infuriated my brother who doesn’t have kids in private school or medical bills. I understand why he thinks they need to keep things even but I’m also grateful they were there in my time of need.

Your brother acts like a miserable loser.

[Anonymous]

It's completely unreasonable to give different amounts to all adult children, assuming they all had the same benefits while they were growing up. This is a way to divide siblings, for sure. Bad idea.

[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?

This is so similar to my family. My parents are toying with the idea of giving my sister their $2.5M house (and moving to an apartment) instead of selling the house. The $2.5M value of the house would come out of her trust, which would probably be reduced to about $500K. The rest of us would retain our $3M trusts. We would have bigger principles than her that would grow larger than her principle, so we will likely have considerably more than her in our trusts when my parents die...but she will have a mortgage free house at 35 and will be able to put the proceeds of selling her old home and money she is saving on not paying a mortgage into her kids' education, investments, etc. My parents haven't asked any of us if we agree with this scheme. Although I don't feel like they are explicitly favoring my sister, it is annoying to me that they didn't ask me and my other siblings about how we felt.

[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?

This is so similar to my family. My parents are toying with the idea of giving my sister their $2.5M house (and moving to an apartment) instead of selling the house. The $2.5M value of the house would come out of her trust, which would probably be reduced to about $500K. The rest of us would retain our $3M trusts. We would have bigger principles than her that would grow larger than her principle, so we will likely have considerably more than her in our trusts when my parents die...but she will have a mortgage free house at 35 and will be able to put the proceeds of selling her old home and money she is saving on not paying a mortgage into her kids' education, investments, etc. My parents haven't asked any of us if we agree with this scheme. Although I don't feel like they are explicitly favoring my sister, it is annoying to me that they didn't ask me and my other siblings about how we felt.

Forgot to note, I find it annoying that they haven't asked us how we felt but also it's hard knowing that we'll be living within our means for the next 30 odd years and she'll have a lot more financial freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s their money and there’s no obligation to give everyone the same.

Of course there’s no obligation and they’re free to do what they please with their money. But that doesn’t make them immune from the natural feelings of children who are treated disparately. I’ve seen first hand the fall out of my grandparents estate when siblings were treated differently. The baby of the family was coddled their whole life, didn’t marry as well as the others, and was given more money for them and their kids (while grandparents were alive). So the disparate treatment flowed down to grandkids even.

The funny thing is my parents did well enough on their own with no family money, but not well enough to be immune from the usual financial stress of trying to put kids through college, home repairs, etc. So I know it chafed my dad to see his little brother blow money on nicer vacations than we could take while he had to keep working hard to support himself. Anyone looking to treat their kids differently is kidding themselves if they think their kids will have zero feelings about one kid being favored over the others.

I have 3 and DH and I plan to split everything evenly the same as our parents planned for us. The only reason I could see treating kids differently is if one has profound special needs and the parents are funding care for them once the parents are gone (which helps the siblings not have to provide family care). Hopefully there would be some understanding in that case. But if one kid marries someone who makes less or chooses a lower paying job, then that is their life choice to make. They will get 1/3 of our estate someday and that’s it.

Also a mom of 3 and 1000x agree. I love my daughters and I will support all of them but I also don't think it's *fair* to subsidize one person's decisions to do *morally better* work. I will encourage all of my children to understand the financial implications of their choices - when it comes to marriage and when it comes to what they are studying in college and what they choose as a career. If they want to be downwardly mobile that's fine, but I'm not going to help them pretend that they're not.

[Anonymous]

My in laws set up a trust that upon the death of both of them the balance would be divided equally among their four children. Long before their deaths they began giving maximum annual gifts to their children and their grandchildren and even to their one great grandchild. Over time this reduced the size of the estate by a couple million dollars. The thing was: we had more kids than all the other siblings combined AND the great grandchild AND we made much more money than the others AND the in laws knew all of this and did it anyway.

No one cared because everyone view the money as belonging to the parents to do with it as they saw fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My in laws set up a trust that upon the death of both of them the balance would be divided equally among their four children. Long before their deaths they began giving maximum annual gifts to their children and their grandchildren and even to their one great grandchild. Over time this reduced the size of the estate by a couple million dollars. The thing was: we had more kids than all the other siblings combined AND the great grandchild AND we made much more money than the others AND the in laws knew all of this and did it anyway.

No one cared because everyone view the money as belonging to the parents to do with it as they saw fit.

If you had more kids then you had more expenses too. I don’t see anything unfair in what your parents did, unless you’re talking of astronomical amounts of wealth.

[Anonymous]

It's not an early inheritance. It's a gift. You are counting your parents money while they are still alive, which is gross, and calling it an inheritance indicates that you feel entitled to it. It's not your money. Did your parents pay for your education? Wedding? Did you need their money? Ask for it? Did your kids attend Jewish day school? Maybe your parents were wrong to spend money on one sibling's family, but there are a lot of factors and life is long. Try not to begrudge your neices and nephews their education, try not to count other people's money, and try to value relationships rather than material goods.

- signed, someone expecting an uneven inheritance because my sibling is disabled, assuming there even is an inheritance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year I was very sick, spent months in the hospital and out of work. My parents paid my kids’ private school tuition for one semester and some of my medical bills, which infuriated my brother who doesn’t have kids in private school or medical bills. I understand why he thinks they need to keep things even but I’m also grateful they were there in my time of need.

Your brother acts like a miserable loser.

+1

It's up to the parents how to help their kids.

If one kid needs more help (especially if it's not due to their own doing---ie being lazy) how could a parent not help them. Just like when growing up, we don't keep tabs on how much we spend on our kids. If one needs medical care/tutoring/therapy/etc. we provide it. It does NOT mean we give the other kid $5K in cash just because we spent more on the other kid(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My in laws set up a trust that upon the death of both of them the balance would be divided equally among their four children. Long before their deaths they began giving maximum annual gifts to their children and their grandchildren and even to their one great grandchild. Over time this reduced the size of the estate by a couple million dollars. The thing was: we had more kids than all the other siblings combined AND the great grandchild AND we made much more money than the others AND the in laws knew all of this and did it anyway.

No one cared because everyone view the money as belonging to the parents to do with it as they saw fit.

Because ultimately it is pretty sad if you get mad at your parents for how they distribute their money. Sure you try not to play favorites, but if one kid/grandkids need the help more than others, it's in their prerogative to distribute money just like that. Or also their choice to give 1/(number of their own kids) amount to "each family" or to give 1/(number of kids + GK+GGK) to each person. A parent's money is not yours to worry about.

Who knows, maybe the kid/gK they give more to is one who visits them weekly, or calls weekly or helps whenever asked(and others do not)

[Anonymous]

It’s their money. Sucks but it is what it is.