I hate to add another curve ball to the mix, OP, but it's also usually wise to choose someone OTHER than the guardian to be trustee for any money you leave the kids (life insurance, etc).

You also name back-ups for both those roles.

BTW, the way we handled this was to name close friends the guardians. We named my parents to be the trustees, because in a scenerio where we both kick it, the kids get around $3 million from life insurance and other assets. And they're not allowed to touch it until they obtain a degree from an accredited four-year institution or turn 25, whichever comes first.

I strongly suggest in the future when discussing such an important issue together, you both refrain from drinking any liquor while making such a huge decision.

Choosing a guardian for your child in the event that something should happen to both of you is not a choice you should make while inebriated.

Anonymous wrote:You know, I think it's something you don't need to do. There's no way (for most people) to have this conversation without both parents judging each other's families to some extent. We discussed it years ago (when our kids were under 5) but ended up dropping the subject. We kind of agreed that naming someone might seem a rebuttal to the others (after we'd passed) and also, we felt it really depends who feels they want to take it on - and that is not something worth discussing with other family members. If something happened to you guys, I'm sure you have enough family to work out what's best for your kids and who can manage it. I think people try to micromanage too much something that probably will never happen. That's my 2 cents, anyway.

^this is terrible advice. please make a will so that this does NOT have to go to the court and does not leave 2 families to "duke" it out over the kids - or worse yet, leave 2 families to NOT step up to the plate. deaths tear families apart all of the time re: guardianship and $ issues. i know, it has happened in my family.

clearly, you need to find a compromise. when sober, talk to your DH about whose parenting style you admire. it can be ANYBODY - friends, cousins, etc. if you agree on one couple, that may be your answer. you do need to discuss with whomever you choose before you name them in your will. being surprised by guardianship is NOT the way to start.

as an aside, does your DH have friends? because it sounds like he doesn't like a lot of people in your collective lives?

the other thing i have seen people do is that each spouse, in their own will (and by the way each spouse DOES have their own will) name their own guardian because they just cannot agree. so two guardians are named and those two people will work out with the court the guardianship moving forward. it is NOT perfect but it is much better than naming nobody and giving the court and/or family total power to decide.

signed,

DW to a lawyer who has a will

If your daughter is a minority, a racist grandmother will be very destructive. I'd do what the previous posters suggested and insist that it be someone of your generation. That will move the grandparents, whom you can't agree on anyway, off of the table.

Are there any friends that either of you have that the other wouldn't object to? I think this is an easier sell if you can find some friends who have values that are close to yours, which, again is something more likely if you pick people in the same generation.

You need to have this conversation with the best interests of your child at heart. It's going to be hard. And in my opinion, you should tell your family who you have decided on, having it be a surprise would be horrible when they're dealing with your deaths.

We figured out what we wanted for our child. We wanted her life to be disrupted as little as possible. That meant we could only choose relatives who would move to her, since we have no local relatives. Boom, our decision was made. There are back ups, but they would require more disruption of our child's life. When we told our relatives, we explained that our primary concern was that our child's life not be disrupted any more than it would be from the deaths of her parents, and that one relative fit the bill and didn't have major negatives. The other relatives might think they have more pros or cons in other areas, but they accept they would be less likely to move to our child.

If there were no acceptable choices who would move to our child, we might have made "keep child and pets together" as a requirement, and gone through the list to see who was capable of doing that. Or "raise the child with a love of [whatever]" and so on.

I suspect if you make a list of what you want for your child and rank it, you'll be able to avoid insulting each others relatives. It doesn't matter if SIL is an empty headed jerk, if she can't move to your kid. Or if BIL is a self-involved dork if he's allergic to dogs. Or if MIL is a racist freak if she hates the [whatever] that is important to your family.

I also wouldn't rule out grandparents, like some previous posters have suggested. Our first choice is a grandparent. While she's certainly getting older, so is our child, and even 10 years after we named her, she'd be the best guardian. It's possible that will cease to be true as we get into the teen years, but we'll revisit the issue if need be.

If you pick a family member, most likely it will come out to the rest of the family who it is.

Definitely have this conversation sober.

We chose friends/mentors with children slightly about 6 years older than ours. They are who we want to raise our kids if we can't do it. We haven't told any family. My parents are young (52) and would be crushed, but it just makes things easier for all.

You two seem a little immature, to be honest.

1. No grandparents or people of that generation, because they'll be too old to care for DD and her potential younger siblings.

2. Analyze dispassionately your younger family members: you have to go with proven family values and stable income and lifestyle.

3. Wait until your daughter is school aged: then you will hopefully have made strong friendships with like-minded parents who share your values and whom you might consider.

Finally, it's important to be realistic - hit one or two top priorities on your list and let go of the rest. Above all accept the fact that if you die your children will not be raised as you had intended them to be raised, and they will still end up happy and successful! So nip pettiness in the bud right now.

You can include a list of approved guardians. It does not just have to be a one and done decision.

Anonymous wrote:Go with the younger sister, if you are just picking.

Do not go with the racist grandma, especially if your daughter is a minority.

When you are sober, talk with your husband. Look at all the possible candidates, and figure out which ones A) hold the most similar values on the most important things: religion, family relationships, politics, moral values, etc B) Would parent the most similarly to how you both parent: ie the less important things, from how/what to eat, socializing, interests C) Are the most fiscally stable and/or have the best financial habits and D) who would be least burdened by your child.

IMO, grandparents are out. The child is likely to be a burden to them as they age, and due to their age, they are likely to be a burden to the child, not just health issues but social issues as well: what to wear, how/when to date, music, running around to activities.

You should pick a guardian that is most likely to give your child the kind of life you would have given them. Assigning guardianship to someone based on the feelings and competitiveness/control of the adult is very unfair to your child.

+1000. PP nailed it.

Go with the younger sister, if you are just picking.

Do not go with the racist grandma, especially if your daughter is a minority.

When you are sober, talk with your husband. Look at all the possible candidates, and figure out which ones A) hold the most similar values on the most important things: religion, family relationships, politics, moral values, etc B) Would parent the most similarly to how you both parent: ie the less important things, from how/what to eat, socializing, interests C) Are the most fiscally stable and/or have the best financial habits and D) who would be least burdened by your child.

IMO, grandparents are out. The child is likely to be a burden to them as they age, and due to their age, they are likely to be a burden to the child, not just health issues but social issues as well: what to wear, how/when to date, music, running around to activities.

You should pick a guardian that is most likely to give your child the kind of life you would have given them. Assigning guardianship to someone based on the feelings and competitiveness/control of the adult is very unfair to your child.

You know, I think it's something you don't need to do. There's no way (for most people) to have this conversation without both parents judging each other's families to some extent. We discussed it years ago (when our kids were under 5) but ended up dropping the subject. We kind of agreed that naming someone might seem a rebuttal to the others (after we'd passed) and also, we felt it really depends who feels they want to take it on - and that is not something worth discussing with other family members. If something happened to you guys, I'm sure you have enough family to work out what's best for your kids and who can manage it. I think people try to micromanage too much something that probably will never happen. That's my 2 cents, anyway.

Well first, I think naming grandparents isn't a good idea. While your daughter is only 1 now, what happens if you both passed away when she was a teenager? I can't imagine my parents trying to take care of a teenager during their retirement and whatever potential health issues may arise as they get older.

I think you both have to sit down and discuss the pros and cons of the siblings. What is the problem with his sisters? Other than age I don't see what the issue is. Why does your husband hate your SIL? Would she be a good role model for your daughter? I think you both have to put down what sounds like pettiness (I want my side to be the guardian, no I want my side) and decide personality, values, and stability wise, who is the best option.

Tonight after a few glasses of wine, DH decided we need to name a guardian for our child. He informed me that it should be his parents and that under no circumstances should it be mine. I refused to engage in the discussion bc I know the wine will make me say something stupid but here's the thing: I've been avoiding the topic for years because there's no clear solution. I hate his family, he hates mine. He thinks my younger sister is ok but she's awfully young (mid 20s) and he thinks it will be an insult to his (older) sister if we name my sister...not that anyone would know until we were dead but I guess it bothers him. I think his dad is great but his mom is horrendous (this is not just typical DIL/MIL issues, I've posted about her on other forums here. She is a snob and blatantly racist - told me DD doesn't like Asians because she cried when MIL walked her past the nail salon, and that she keeps just the right distance between herself and "the help" at hotels...DD is one for Chrissakes! She doesn't know about race or "keeping distance from the help". These are just two tiny examples of why I can't name her my child's guardian. Her values are 180 the opposite of mine.

When we discussed the topic pre-kids, we always talked about my brother, but then he went and married a woman who DH can't stand, so now that's off the table.

We are at an impasse. No friends close enough to both of us, no cousins...I've avoided the topic for now but I know it'll come up again and it just turns into a nasty, mud-slinging fight about our families.

If you've been in a situation like this, how did you resolve it?