Anonymous wrote:Traditiaonally the money would be split equally among the adult children who can then trickle it down to their own kids.
There are so many situations where bad feelings can be avoided by just sticking to the standard, traditional way of dividing an estate. It’s not right for every situation, but it works for most.
Anonymous wrote:Traditiaonally the money would be split equally among the adult children who can then trickle it down to their own kids.
There are so many situations where bad feelings can be avoided by just sticking to the standard, traditional way of dividing an estate. It’s not right for every situation, but it works for most.
Traditiaonally the money would be split equally among the adult children who can then trickle it down to their own kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
No one is going to admit they care who is a decent person but that really isn't fair if there are two of them and 7 of you AND they have far less money than you. Decent would have been for you to split it more equally.
What is this thing about what’s “fair”? It’s not your f’king money!! Get that thru your thick topu brain!
Will you give it a rest? NO ONE is suggesting it’s not the parents’ money to spend as they wish. But almost everyone IS saying that treating kids unequally in a will (the OP’s question) often results in a strained (if not ruined) relationship after the fact. People should consider if this is the legacy they want to leave their children (or grandchildren) with after they’re gone. They OBVIOUSLY can still choose to do what they want.
We only have the information we’re given to go on. Given that no extenuating circumstances have been identified, IN GENERAL it is beat not to treat your children differently, whether they are 5 or 55, if you want them to have a good relationship. Thanks But if you want to make up your own excuses in OP’s case to justify this, then have at it. No point in arguing with someone who is making up their own facts as they go along.
I think this board is 1/2 and 1/2, I think. But what evidence do you have that OP's parents have NOT considered? I mean, how do you really know?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
No one is going to admit they care who is a decent person but that really isn't fair if there are two of them and 7 of you AND they have far less money than you. Decent would have been for you to split it more equally.
What is this thing about what’s “fair”? It’s not your f’king money!! Get that thru your thick topu brain!
Will you give it a rest? NO ONE is suggesting it’s not the parents’ money to spend as they wish. But almost everyone IS saying that treating kids unequally in a will (the OP’s question) often results in a strained (if not ruined) relationship after the fact. People should consider if this is the legacy they want to leave their children (or grandchildren) with after they’re gone. They OBVIOUSLY can still choose to do what they want.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
No one is going to admit they care who is a decent person but that really isn't fair if there are two of them and 7 of you AND they have far less money than you. Decent would have been for you to split it more equally.
What is this thing about what’s “fair”? It’s not your f’king money!! Get that thru your thick topu brain!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
No one is going to admit they care who is a decent person but that really isn't fair if there are two of them and 7 of you AND they have far less money than you. Decent would have been for you to split it more equally.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
No one is going to admit they care who is a decent person but that really isn't fair if there are two of them and 7 of you AND they have far less money than you. Decent would have been for you to split it more equally.
Anonymous wrote:My family gave one sibling, a sibling with a PhD (edu pd. by parents) money all the time. 25k GIFT recently for an issue one sibling had. Trips paid for. We have less education (not paid by parents). We have more children including a disabled child. We asked for a loan once and paid back every penny. They gave another sibling a 40k gift. It just hurts because we are struggling with no end in sight.
Anonymous wrote:I am one of four. We have more money than our siblings and the most kids. We’re also the only ones with grandkids. Our parents were fairly well off, and and essentially divided things among evenly among every living family member, basically meaning our family got seven shares, for example, while my brother and his one kid only got two because there are only two of them and seven of us. And they have far less money than us to begin with.
And guess what? Nobody cares. It’s the parents’ money to give, they thought this made sense, and it was their call.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My parents did a version of this - one sibling of 5 getting their vacation home. Absolutely my parents choice, their money but what this did was create a rift among the kids. This is probably not the legacy they intended (half so pissed not talking and if I mistakenly mention speaking to one side I'm taking sides....) This ended up especially ugly as this sibling didn't help with day to day care in last years but because they expressed intent of resettling at vacation home location which most of us knew wasn't going to happen and didn't-and the house was on market and sold as soon as out of escrow (almost 1million): rest of estate (<$1mil) split 5 ways.
I want anything I leave to add to my kids to add to their life not create strife between them.
There’s a reason that the one son got the vacation home that you’re not sharing. It didn’t just happen.
Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has a sibling knows that things are never "equal." My parents paid different amounts for my sibling's wedding, college education, even their first bicycle. You can't always get everything you want, but you get what you need. In this case OP's sibling, jobless and struggling, has more needs than OP.