Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am intrigued by some of the details. Your mother is 15 years older than her husband. They married a few years after your dad died 40 years ago, when you were just 1. I guess your mother could have been in her 40s with a baby and married a man in his 20s. Unusual for sure. And they're still together 40 years later.

I always read these stories thinking of the other perspective. It's possible the mother and husband in this scenario are seeking to protect their estate.

Yes, my mother was in her 40’s and he was in his 20’s. In many ways he co-opted my mother since he had a very absent and dysfunctional mother. I was sent to boarding school at 10 years old (for disruptive kids) because I acted out from the neglect.

I have bitterness from the past, but it’s not about money. I would never challenge what they want to do with their money, and they have actually been very generous with me.

But it is hurtful to imagine they are trying to get me to sign something that is intended to go above and beyond to shut me out when I have never given indication I would be the kind of person to contest a will.

But maybe the PPs are right, and it could be anything. I like the idea to ask to have it sent to me in advance so I review it, potentially with an attorney just so I understand what I am signing.

I'm left with two conclusions based on what you're telling us. One is that where you live or where your mother lives is not in the United States and as such you need to speak to the lawyers of your country as it will have a different legal system and the advice on here are not recognizing a different set of laws surrounding inheritances. The other is that the mother and her husband are taking proactive steps to protect themselves from a disturbed family member.

Ok, Angela Lansbury. I am a VP at a F500 company living in the United States in a different state from my parents. So you are a tad off base.

You are giving us unusual details after unusual details. The latest one is being sent to boarding school for problematic behavior at age 10, which according to your other details, would have occurred sometime in the mid 1990s. Not only are boarding schools for young children extremely few in number, while such schools do exist the kids sent to schools for "behavior" issues are so deeply problematic that these decisions are typically made in conjunction with social workers and often paid for by local educational authorities who realize they don't have the tools and resources in their jurisdiction. But these schools don't just take in a child because the parent thinks they're "disruptive." They're special needs schools. There's a whole set of evaluation metrics and processes involved. And the kids who go to those schools tend to remain special needs type people for the rest of their lives. They're not going to be cured of whatever their problems are. Just managed.

1990s America wasn't a Dickensian novel. Nor is real life a made for TV movie. Which is why the story seems a bit more plausible being set in a different country with different educational systems and ability to send children away at young ages and even different cultural traditions.

Oh my. My ex attended the Hill School in PA at that age in 90s. It's one of the best bearing schools in the country. You wrote a whole lot of nothing.

We played Hill in the 1990s. They started at 9th just like all the other big boarding schools. Pretty confident they never had a middle school boarding division and absolutely no elementary boarding division for 10 year old boys. Hill in the 90s wasn't regarded as among the best in the country. Still all boys and it was losing out to Lawrenceville and St. Andrews, let alone the big New England schools. They've gone coed since and have established themselves in a better place but still not the top tier schools.

Anonymous wrote:I would sign nothing. Also, sure, it is her money. I would still recommend hiring a lawyer to determine what you can get. I would be worried that your mom might give him all the money NOW, and she will be homeless in a few months when he leaves here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

I'm not OP but people like you are truly exhausting. You should really try to spare other humans from interacting with you.

dp. I heartily disagree. This poster laid things out logically and with common sense. Is it the lack of emotion that puts you off? What exactly is wrong with pps take, which actually makes sense?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am intrigued by some of the details. Your mother is 15 years older than her husband. They married a few years after your dad died 40 years ago, when you were just 1. I guess your mother could have been in her 40s with a baby and married a man in his 20s. Unusual for sure. And they're still together 40 years later.

I always read these stories thinking of the other perspective. It's possible the mother and husband in this scenario are seeking to protect their estate.

Yes, my mother was in her 40’s and he was in his 20’s. In many ways he co-opted my mother since he had a very absent and dysfunctional mother. I was sent to boarding school at 10 years old (for disruptive kids) because I acted out from the neglect.

I have bitterness from the past, but it’s not about money. I would never challenge what they want to do with their money, and they have actually been very generous with me.

But it is hurtful to imagine they are trying to get me to sign something that is intended to go above and beyond to shut me out when I have never given indication I would be the kind of person to contest a will.

But maybe the PPs are right, and it could be anything. I like the idea to ask to have it sent to me in advance so I review it, potentially with an attorney just so I understand what I am signing.

I'm left with two conclusions based on what you're telling us. One is that where you live or where your mother lives is not in the United States and as such you need to speak to the lawyers of your country as it will have a different legal system and the advice on here are not recognizing a different set of laws surrounding inheritances. The other is that the mother and her husband are taking proactive steps to protect themselves from a disturbed family member.

Ok, Angela Lansbury. I am a VP at a F500 company living in the United States in a different state from my parents. So you are a tad off base.

You are giving us unusual details after unusual details. The latest one is being sent to boarding school for problematic behavior at age 10, which according to your other details, would have occurred sometime in the mid 1990s. Not only are boarding schools for young children extremely few in number, while such schools do exist the kids sent to schools for "behavior" issues are so deeply problematic that these decisions are typically made in conjunction with social workers and often paid for by local educational authorities who realize they don't have the tools and resources in their jurisdiction. But these schools don't just take in a child because the parent thinks they're "disruptive." They're special needs schools. There's a whole set of evaluation metrics and processes involved. And the kids who go to those schools tend to remain special needs type people for the rest of their lives. They're not going to be cured of whatever their problems are. Just managed.

1990s America wasn't a Dickensian novel. Nor is real life a made for TV movie. Which is why the story seems a bit more plausible being set in a different country with different educational systems and ability to send children away at young ages and even different cultural traditions.

Oh my. My ex attended the Hill School in PA at that age in 90s. It's one of the best bearing schools in the country. You wrote a whole lot of nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am intrigued by some of the details. Your mother is 15 years older than her husband. They married a few years after your dad died 40 years ago, when you were just 1. I guess your mother could have been in her 40s with a baby and married a man in his 20s. Unusual for sure. And they're still together 40 years later.

I always read these stories thinking of the other perspective. It's possible the mother and husband in this scenario are seeking to protect their estate.

Yes, my mother was in her 40’s and he was in his 20’s. In many ways he co-opted my mother since he had a very absent and dysfunctional mother. I was sent to boarding school at 10 years old (for disruptive kids) because I acted out from the neglect.

I have bitterness from the past, but it’s not about money. I would never challenge what they want to do with their money, and they have actually been very generous with me.

But it is hurtful to imagine they are trying to get me to sign something that is intended to go above and beyond to shut me out when I have never given indication I would be the kind of person to contest a will.

But maybe the PPs are right, and it could be anything. I like the idea to ask to have it sent to me in advance so I review it, potentially with an attorney just so I understand what I am signing.

I'm left with two conclusions based on what you're telling us. One is that where you live or where your mother lives is not in the United States and as such you need to speak to the lawyers of your country as it will have a different legal system and the advice on here are not recognizing a different set of laws surrounding inheritances. The other is that the mother and her husband are taking proactive steps to protect themselves from a disturbed family member.

Ok, Angela Lansbury. I am a VP at a F500 company living in the United States in a different state from my parents. So you are a tad off base.

You are giving us unusual details after unusual details. The latest one is being sent to boarding school for problematic behavior at age 10, which according to your other details, would have occurred sometime in the mid 1990s. Not only are boarding schools for young children extremely few in number, while such schools do exist the kids sent to schools for "behavior" issues are so deeply problematic that these decisions are typically made in conjunction with social workers and often paid for by local educational authorities who realize they don't have the tools and resources in their jurisdiction. But these schools don't just take in a child because the parent thinks they're "disruptive." They're special needs schools. There's a whole set of evaluation metrics and processes involved. And the kids who go to those schools tend to remain special needs type people for the rest of their lives. They're not going to be cured of whatever their problems are. Just managed.

1990s America wasn't a Dickensian novel. Nor is real life a made for TV movie. Which is why the story seems a bit more plausible being set in a different country with different educational systems and ability to send children away at young ages and even different cultural traditions.

Oh my. My ex attended the Hill School in PA at that age in 90s. It's one of the best bearing schools in the country. You wrote a whole lot of nothing.

Yes, there's also the Arthur Morgan School for kids that age which is excellent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am intrigued by some of the details. Your mother is 15 years older than her husband. They married a few years after your dad died 40 years ago, when you were just 1. I guess your mother could have been in her 40s with a baby and married a man in his 20s. Unusual for sure. And they're still together 40 years later.

I always read these stories thinking of the other perspective. It's possible the mother and husband in this scenario are seeking to protect their estate.

Yes, my mother was in her 40’s and he was in his 20’s. In many ways he co-opted my mother since he had a very absent and dysfunctional mother. I was sent to boarding school at 10 years old (for disruptive kids) because I acted out from the neglect.

I have bitterness from the past, but it’s not about money. I would never challenge what they want to do with their money, and they have actually been very generous with me.

But it is hurtful to imagine they are trying to get me to sign something that is intended to go above and beyond to shut me out when I have never given indication I would be the kind of person to contest a will.

But maybe the PPs are right, and it could be anything. I like the idea to ask to have it sent to me in advance so I review it, potentially with an attorney just so I understand what I am signing.

I'm left with two conclusions based on what you're telling us. One is that where you live or where your mother lives is not in the United States and as such you need to speak to the lawyers of your country as it will have a different legal system and the advice on here are not recognizing a different set of laws surrounding inheritances. The other is that the mother and her husband are taking proactive steps to protect themselves from a disturbed family member.

Ok, Angela Lansbury. I am a VP at a F500 company living in the United States in a different state from my parents. So you are a tad off base.

You are giving us unusual details after unusual details. The latest one is being sent to boarding school for problematic behavior at age 10, which according to your other details, would have occurred sometime in the mid 1990s. Not only are boarding schools for young children extremely few in number, while such schools do exist the kids sent to schools for "behavior" issues are so deeply problematic that these decisions are typically made in conjunction with social workers and often paid for by local educational authorities who realize they don't have the tools and resources in their jurisdiction. But these schools don't just take in a child because the parent thinks they're "disruptive." They're special needs schools. There's a whole set of evaluation metrics and processes involved. And the kids who go to those schools tend to remain special needs type people for the rest of their lives. They're not going to be cured of whatever their problems are. Just managed.

1990s America wasn't a Dickensian novel. Nor is real life a made for TV movie. Which is why the story seems a bit more plausible being set in a different country with different educational systems and ability to send children away at young ages and even different cultural traditions.

Oh my. My ex attended the Hill School in PA at that age in 90s. It's one of the best bearing schools in the country. You wrote a whole lot of nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

Lady, I didn’t come here for actual advice on what I should or shouldn’t sign and what process I should use to evaluate it once I do receive this document.

Since I don’t have it yet, I came to speculate with internet strangers on an anonymous forum where it’s safe to be emotional about a, well, emotional topic.

And I hustled my ass off to be where I am, not sure why it triggered you so much.

The advantage - and disadvantage of anonymous internet forums is anyone can say anything. Who knows how true it is.

Leaving that aside, I've heard and witnessed enough about family situations to know there is always two sides to a story. If I am skeptical it's because some of the details provided are a bit dubious. And the more dubious details there are, the less likely I am to side with the storyteller. Boarding school at age 10 for disruptive behavior? Oh my! Sob sob. Wait, no. There is an enormous difference between being sent off to boarding school at 14 (and I knew plenty who were) and age 10. There's elements of storytelling in this thread because of how information is doled out to evoke sympathy. If I'm being told that someone was sent to boarding school at age 10 for disruptive behavior and now 30 years later is being asked to sign a notary document affecting an estate, the default assumption is there's a problem with this person, not the parents.

Good luck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

Lady, I didn’t come here for actual advice on what I should or shouldn’t sign and what process I should use to evaluate it once I do receive this document.

Since I don’t have it yet, I came to speculate with internet strangers on an anonymous forum where it’s safe to be emotional about a, well, emotional topic.

And I hustled my ass off to be where I am, not sure why it triggered you so much.

The advantage - and disadvantage of anonymous internet forums is anyone can say anything. Who knows how true it is.

Leaving that aside, I've heard and witnessed enough about family situations to know there is always two sides to a story. If I am skeptical it's because some of the details provided are a bit dubious. And the more dubious details there are, the less likely I am to side with the storyteller. Boarding school at age 10 for disruptive behavior? Oh my! Sob sob. Wait, no. There is an enormous difference between being sent off to boarding school at 14 (and I knew plenty who were) and age 10. There's elements of storytelling in this thread because of how information is doled out to evoke sympathy. If I'm being told that someone was sent to boarding school at age 10 for disruptive behavior and now 30 years later is being asked to sign a notary document affecting an estate, the default assumption is there's a problem with this person, not the parents.

Good luck.

Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am intrigued by some of the details. Your mother is 15 years older than her husband. They married a few years after your dad died 40 years ago, when you were just 1. I guess your mother could have been in her 40s with a baby and married a man in his 20s. Unusual for sure. And they're still together 40 years later.

I always read these stories thinking of the other perspective. It's possible the mother and husband in this scenario are seeking to protect their estate.

Yes, my mother was in her 40’s and he was in his 20’s. In many ways he co-opted my mother since he had a very absent and dysfunctional mother. I was sent to boarding school at 10 years old (for disruptive kids) because I acted out from the neglect.

I have bitterness from the past, but it’s not about money. I would never challenge what they want to do with their money, and they have actually been very generous with me.

But it is hurtful to imagine they are trying to get me to sign something that is intended to go above and beyond to shut me out when I have never given indication I would be the kind of person to contest a will.

But maybe the PPs are right, and it could be anything. I like the idea to ask to have it sent to me in advance so I review it, potentially with an attorney just so I understand what I am signing.

I'm left with two conclusions based on what you're telling us. One is that where you live or where your mother lives is not in the United States and as such you need to speak to the lawyers of your country as it will have a different legal system and the advice on here are not recognizing a different set of laws surrounding inheritances. The other is that the mother and her husband are taking proactive steps to protect themselves from a disturbed family member.

Ok, Angela Lansbury. I am a VP at a F500 company living in the United States in a different state from my parents. So you are a tad off base.

You are giving us unusual details after unusual details. The latest one is being sent to boarding school for problematic behavior at age 10, which according to your other details, would have occurred sometime in the mid 1990s. Not only are boarding schools for young children extremely few in number, while such schools do exist the kids sent to schools for "behavior" issues are so deeply problematic that these decisions are typically made in conjunction with social workers and often paid for by local educational authorities who realize they don't have the tools and resources in their jurisdiction. But these schools don't just take in a child because the parent thinks they're "disruptive." They're special needs schools. There's a whole set of evaluation metrics and processes involved. And the kids who go to those schools tend to remain special needs type people for the rest of their lives. They're not going to be cured of whatever their problems are. Just managed.

1990s America wasn't a Dickensian novel. Nor is real life a made for TV movie. Which is why the story seems a bit more plausible being set in a different country with different educational systems and ability to send children away at young ages and even different cultural traditions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I am a VP at a F500 company ..."

OP, please let me know if your company is hiring. Because I find it hard to believe someone who is a vice president doesn't have an understanding of basic law.

The fact that you automatically assume they are trying to shut you out indicates you are approaching this issue with negativity and a good bit of paranoia. Especially since you have said they have been generous to you.

As others have mentioned, it could well be they are getting a trust set up and you may be trustee. Or executor. You are trip-wired to think the worse and are acting out on emotion not logic.

As a VP, you should know that any legal documents sent to you for signature needs a legal review. Or don't they do that at your Fortune500 company?

I'm not OP but people like you are truly exhausting. You should really try to spare other humans from interacting with you.

dp. I heartily disagree. This poster laid things out logically and with common sense. Is it the lack of emotion that puts you off? What exactly is wrong with pps take, which actually makes sense?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do not under any circumstances sign this document!

She said she doesn’t care. So she should just sign.