Large early inheritance to only 1 of 3 siblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

OP’s sibling wanted a fancy house and private schools. Not medical bills or tutoring.

This is a great way to turn the siblings against one another and I would never do it. I guess I’m glad my in-laws are fair to a fault, like to the penny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

+1000

It is your parent's money. Life is not always fair. You should not be living life and expecting anything from them as a grown ass adult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

That's your view, and others are entitled to theirs. If some of my children went into professions with no meaningful social value and one becomes a teacher, firefighter, police officer etc. I view that as a noble choice and might be inclined to subsidize it. Because I believe it should be value equal to those other pursuits, and it's my damn money to do with as I please.

[Anonymous]

My very wealthy father always maintained he would stick to equal treatment of his children. Well, life happened and he changed his mind pretty quickly. My brothers are almost entirely supported, and have been for nearly two decades now. It was annoying at first, as DH and I work our @sses off while they live a life of leisure (no jobs), but I wouldn't want to change places with them. We're comfortable enough and feel fortunate to live a good life with no health or psych disabilities. It's just money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Or to give it at the same time.

One set of former in laws got $30k a year from my then MiL to pay for Jewish day school for their eldest (wife was SAH). They considered it differently than disbursements from the parents to the other kids for down payments for cars/mortgages or other expenses. Cue a lot of anxiety over how the estate will be divided. In the end, though, it was the parents’ money to give as they pleased.

NP, I see that differently. Grandparents giving tuition money to grandchildren shouldn't count against the money that kids get. As long as MIL would have paid for Jewish school for all grandchildren.

My grandma had 4 kids. 3 had only one child and my parent had 2 children. Should my sibling and I get half of the inheritance that all my cousins are getting? My grandma would have liked as many grandchildren as possible and wanted to celebrate them all.

In most cases, the children receive the inheritance and sometimes the grandchildren get a small amount. I would expect each child of your grandmother would receive 25%. Then when your parents pass, I would expect you and your sibling to each receive 50% of your parent’s estate - unless one of your parents marries after the death of the other. Then, the new spouse could inherit everything. Never count on inheritances.

If your grandmother decides to leave a token something to each of her grandchildren, then I would expect each grandchild to retire same amount.

[Anonymous]

Such a great lesson for all pps to keep in mind when they're deciding how to divide up their $ millions.

[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?

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.

And you a greedy and pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My very wealthy father always maintained he would stick to equal treatment of his children. Well, life happened and he changed his mind pretty quickly. My brothers are almost entirely supported, and have been for nearly two decades now. It was annoying at first, as DH and I work our @sses off while they live a life of leisure (no jobs), but I wouldn't want to change places with them. We're comfortable enough and feel fortunate to live a good life with no health or psych disabilities. It's just money.

Sorry. I don’t believe neither of your brothers has a job.

[Anonymous]

OP it’s theirs to divide however they want. Some siblings might have more need or might help the parents more, etc. There are all kinds of factors and it’s really none of your business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My very wealthy father always maintained he would stick to equal treatment of his children. Well, life happened and he changed his mind pretty quickly. My brothers are almost entirely supported, and have been for nearly two decades now. It was annoying at first, as DH and I work our @sses off while they live a life of leisure (no jobs), but I wouldn't want to change places with them. We're comfortable enough and feel fortunate to live a good life with no health or psych disabilities. It's just money.

Sorry. I don’t believe neither of your brothers has a job.

One has a health disability, the other a psych disability. One lives with my parents, the other lives nearby in a condo for which they pay the mortgage and other expenses. Neither has worked in 20+ years. One worked long enough to get modest disability payments (not enough to cover the mortgage in their affluent town), the other never worked long enough to be eligible. Fine if you don't believe it, but it's absolutely true. I used to be angry about it, but what's the point? They played a role in enabling the boys, who were always vastly spoiled, and this is the result. I would hate to be middle aged and dependent on my parents.

[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?

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.

And you a greedy and pathetic.

I mean, complaint about WHEN she gets her millions wtaf?!

[Anonymous]

Also I suspect a lot of people replying have kids that are fairly young and not married yet. When in-laws come into the picture family dynamics and other things can change drastically and you might not feel the same about all of your children. Harsh reality but ask any estate lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Your first two posts are contradictory. You say you are self made but come from old money. Beyond the face breaking cringiness to even write these words, they’re also inconsistent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your first two posts are contradictory. You say you are self made but come from old money. Beyond the face breaking cringiness to even write these words, they’re also inconsistent.

The op didn’t say any of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My very wealthy father always maintained he would stick to equal treatment of his children. Well, life happened and he changed his mind pretty quickly. My brothers are almost entirely supported, and have been for nearly two decades now. It was annoying at first, as DH and I work our @sses off while they live a life of leisure (no jobs), but I wouldn't want to change places with them. We're comfortable enough and feel fortunate to live a good life with no health or psych disabilities. It's just money.

Sorry. I don’t believe neither of your brothers has a job.

One has a health disability, the other a psych disability. One lives with my parents, the other lives nearby in a condo for which they pay the mortgage and other expenses. Neither has worked in 20+ years. One worked long enough to get modest disability payments (not enough to cover the mortgage in their affluent town), the other never worked long enough to be eligible. Fine if you don't believe it, but it's absolutely true. I used to be angry about it, but what's the point? They played a role in enabling the boys, who were always vastly spoiled, and this is the result. I would hate to be middle aged and dependent on my parents.

Here’s the thing. By explaining that all you’ve done is make your parents’ decision sound perfectly reasonable and make yourself sound even more petty.