Reply to SIL plotted to inherit estates from childless aunts

Forum Index » Family Relationships

Reply to "SIL plotted to inherit estates from childless aunts"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Could be rewritten:

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

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

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

[/quote]

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

[/quote]

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

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

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

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

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

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics