Can you inlaws work? My FIL was delivering pizza in his late 70's and MIL worked retail in her 70's.

There is big demand for homecare if MIL can do unskilled homecare. I have two caregivers in their 70's working for Mom.

OP, I have not read the entire thread but it is amazing to have run through several million dollars.

I'd get them moved into a mobile home community.

In Florida you can move into a community of the half a mobile home for around $50,000.

Another option would be to get them moved into an efficiency apartment in your area. Between property taxes and upkeep owning a house is expensive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Yes, you are right. I guess I feel cast in the sense that there is no way to get that money back and now we have to face this when we have other pressing demands.

So here's where I'm in a quandary: the CW I heard with my parents is that the least expensive option is to remain in the family home as long as possible. Is that still the case? Or have others heard to the contrary? From what I can tell, I think my MIL will be able to get along for awhile at home, including driving (always has been a good driver and continues to be so). IDK, however, how long my FIL will be able to manage or my MIL manage w/him.

I guess there are no real right answers here. My parents' situations were dictated by money, then finding the best place within that budget. Just wish I had a better sense if there a preferred way to proceed.

Thanks for breaking out the options - very helpful.

I think that is the right answer. It certainly is the right answer for your inlaws. They just need to accept that, and it's going to be a real shift for them.

Yeah, you're right. I'm just dreading the possible conflict. Never wanted to be in the situation when having to explain something like this to my ILs. Or sit by while DH does.

Why do you feel like you have to be there for this? Can’t your husband have these conversations with them himself? Are you worried he will promise them a bunch of things if you are not there? The conflict should be your husband’s problem to solve.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Yes, you are right. I guess I feel cast in the sense that there is no way to get that money back and now we have to face this when we have other pressing demands.

So here's where I'm in a quandary: the CW I heard with my parents is that the least expensive option is to remain in the family home as long as possible. Is that still the case? Or have others heard to the contrary? From what I can tell, I think my MIL will be able to get along for awhile at home, including driving (always has been a good driver and continues to be so). IDK, however, how long my FIL will be able to manage or my MIL manage w/him.

I guess there are no real right answers here. My parents' situations were dictated by money, then finding the best place within that budget. Just wish I had a better sense if there a preferred way to proceed.

Thanks for breaking out the options - very helpful.

I have encouraged my non financially responsible mother to do the opposite. I begged her to sell during the last few years as the prices went up. She is unable to afford to maintain the house, so lives with broken appliances, etc. unless we pay for them. If she sold, she could spend down the equity over the next 15 years, live in a new apartment with elevator and have everything maintained by someone else. We are not trying to preserve anything for an inheritance, just hoping to afford large outlays ourselves (and a somewhat dignified end of life for my mom.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Yes, you are right. I guess I feel cast in the sense that there is no way to get that money back and now we have to face this when we have other pressing demands.

So here's where I'm in a quandary: the CW I heard with my parents is that the least expensive option is to remain in the family home as long as possible. Is that still the case? Or have others heard to the contrary? From what I can tell, I think my MIL will be able to get along for awhile at home, including driving (always has been a good driver and continues to be so). IDK, however, how long my FIL will be able to manage or my MIL manage w/him.

I guess there are no real right answers here. My parents' situations were dictated by money, then finding the best place within that budget. Just wish I had a better sense if there a preferred way to proceed.

Thanks for breaking out the options - very helpful.

I think that is the right answer. It certainly is the right answer for your inlaws. They just need to accept that, and it's going to be a real shift for them.

Yeah, you're right. I'm just dreading the possible conflict. Never wanted to be in the situation when having to explain something like this to my ILs. Or sit by while DH does.

OP: One more thing. Your ILs are boomers and they will take everything from you. Your money. Your marriage. Your happiness. Good luck.

Oh, and get old people meals delivered to them.

OP: I can't read this thread b/c it's pissing me off so much but just as a reminder, medicare, medicaid, SSI and they need to live off that, not you. Good luck and get them on foodstamps now just to show them that you are helping .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Yes, you are right. I guess I feel cast in the sense that there is no way to get that money back and now we have to face this when we have other pressing demands.

So here's where I'm in a quandary: the CW I heard with my parents is that the least expensive option is to remain in the family home as long as possible. Is that still the case? Or have others heard to the contrary? From what I can tell, I think my MIL will be able to get along for awhile at home, including driving (always has been a good driver and continues to be so). IDK, however, how long my FIL will be able to manage or my MIL manage w/him.

I guess there are no real right answers here. My parents' situations were dictated by money, then finding the best place within that budget. Just wish I had a better sense if there a preferred way to proceed.

Thanks for breaking out the options - very helpful.

I think that is the right answer. It certainly is the right answer for your inlaws. They just need to accept that, and it's going to be a real shift for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you’re not poor and they’re not young. None of this is gonna kill you. They sound like good people. Suck it up. They’re family.

Um, no. Spoken like a true Boomer.

Such a weird response.

+1 This is more likely one of our DCUM trolls that always tell people to suck it up, regardless of the situation.

I'll be reading a thread with lots of thoughtful comments, then all of sudden it is troll time!

Anonymous wrote:The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Yes, you are right. I guess I feel cast in the sense that there is no way to get that money back and now we have to face this when we have other pressing demands.

So here's where I'm in a quandary: the CW I heard with my parents is that the least expensive option is to remain in the family home as long as possible. Is that still the case? Or have others heard to the contrary? From what I can tell, I think my MIL will be able to get along for awhile at home, including driving (always has been a good driver and continues to be so). IDK, however, how long my FIL will be able to manage or my MIL manage w/him.

I guess there are no real right answers here. My parents' situations were dictated by money, then finding the best place within that budget. Just wish I had a better sense if there a preferred way to proceed.

Thanks for breaking out the options - very helpful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you’re not poor and they’re not young. None of this is gonna kill you. They sound like good people. Suck it up. They’re family.

Um, no. Spoken like a true Boomer.

Such a weird response.

+1 This is more likely one of our DCUM trolls that always tell people to suck it up, regardless of the situation.

The die isn’t cast here, OP. Your in laws have already spent recklessly but there are options from here on out — “helping” them budget their remaining funds and make lifestyle changes now in exchange for helping them some when the money does run out versus fully supporting them when the money runs out versus letting the government take care of them versus finding a retirement community NOW that they can afford either on their own (proceeds from house) or with minimal help from you. The die isn’t cast.

Anonymous wrote:I get wanting to vent, so I hear you on that end. But it doesn't sound like it's as dire as you first mentioned it was. It also sounds like you have some resentment because they're different than your parents and have handled their finances differently. I would try not to hold onto that. Your MIL is right - you can't take it with you. It sounds like they're lucky that they've been healthy enough to travel and do those things, don't begrudge them that. If you do need to help them out financially, make sure that you don't compromise your own retirement goals. By like they say - don't cry over spilt milk (or spent money, in this case).

OP here. Agree that it has gone from dire to maybe we have a few years here if EVERYTHING breaks in the right way over the last few weeks. But the luck, health (and money) to be able to travel shouldn't preclude good planning. This isn't a "let it ride on a high reach ED, but I'm okay with my list of targets and safeties." They bet that they could have it all, spent accordingly, and now they are entering the unknown but with the largely the same expectations they've always had. To be fair, my MIL seems to be grappling more with this, but DH says it is a mix of reality and anxiety. Of course, understandable but the anxiety seems directed more at third parties than any responsibility for themselves.

My ILs have never grasped at how much economics have shifted in the country over the last 30-40 years. Housing prices have increased sharply, especially for homes in high/medium performing school districts. Pensions are none existent and money to set aside for retirement has now gone into higher mortgages. The cost of college has escalated nearly vertically, even for instate publics. They were able to live a very comfortable life when they were younger with kids as it was just not as expensive as today. Basically FIL's parents lived fairly frugally, even though the husband was a lawyer, as they were shaped by the Depression. They split their estate with their two sons. ILs grew up in the post war boom and lived an adult life based on endless expansion. In case anyone missed it, we were not thinking of an inheritance, largely because we do not need one, but DH's sibling sure could.

So yeah, I guess I begrudge them for not realizing that the road for their children is not as easy as theirs and that they may have made a set of decisions to make it even more difficult.

I would insist that they hand over full financial control right NOW. They go on a budget and No more spending unless we approve it.

If they reject that, it’s easier to say no to everything when they completely run out of money soon.