Reply to Inheritance when one child has kids, the other does not

Forum Index » Adult Children

Reply to "Inheritance when one child has kids, the other does not "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If one kid refused to have kids but could have had them if they chose to then I would provide more inheritance to the one with kids. [b]Reason: kids are expensive. Single or dink isn’t expensive. [/b]

Nothing has to be 50/50. It’s your money and you allocate based on your priorities. [/quote]

Being single carries a lot of financial penalties. 
[/quote]

Np- no way. Sure being a DINK is better financially than being single but I’m sure a single person has much better finances than those with kids. I spend 4k a month on daycare. College is $$$. [/quote]

Yup!  Our friends who choose to be DINKs are in a much better financial position.  College is upwards of $200-400K for one kid.  Daycare is $10-15K/year for 5 years, then we spent $5-10K on activites/tutoring/etc for each kid.  Have 2 kids and it will cost you a million $$$ easily.  Now imagine being able to spend that on yourself.

[/quote]

Having kids is a CHOICE. [/quote]Not having kids is also a choice. But it's only the inheritance giver's choice that matters. Imo, giving should always be distributed based on need.[/quote]

What if want a choice? If tried 9 times and 9 miscarriages, so the 9 kids the couple wanted get a share? Or reward only living? What if the pets are seriously considered someone’s baby?Just writing this is what has me say any inheritance is divided equally between the direct kids and whatever family set up those kids have, they can do what want. [/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