Am I being unreasonable?

jungle_jane

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

As the earth wires had miraculously all become disconnected and were flapping around against the back plates.)

:eek:

How old are the children, OP?

peachyprice

No, I don't think you're being unreasonable, whe have a similar set up on my insurance.

OH gets the main insurance which pays off the mortgage, the children get the work insurance which is X x my salary between the three of them, one being out DD, the other DS's are from my first marriage. Although I think I'm the only nominated person on OH's work insurance, but I would give that to the children anyway..

euronorris

Newly_retired wrote: »

Surely her husband won't be struggling for money as two insurances are already going to him and this one is an extra, work-related?
I do see what is meant though about lack of trust so that is why he is cross.
But don't forget he could in the future remarry and potentially the whole estate could go to his wife and the by-then-grown-up children get nothing. So I can understand why the OP wants to do something specific for the children whilst she can.

Is it really about trust though? I simply wouldn't want OH to have yet another thing to worry about and sort out after my death. And, if he is only going to give the money to them anyway, why not just cut out the middle man?

I also feel that you simply cannot plan for every eventuality. He's got enough cover in place as it is, and it's not as though this is money he's earnt. It's life insurance!

wifeanddaughter

The children are 14 and 6.

Yes, I did complete the pattern changing course. Last year husband had a psychotic attack after cannabis and other drugs (legal highs like Eric-2). He left (well I threw him out) and we were separated for about five months. We gave it another go, intially for the children but he has worked through a lot of issues and we are getting on very well (just a few remaining gremlins, the main one being his relationship with my parents). We are also going through family therapy which has really helped.

I wonder if my decision to do this with the work insurance is some sub-conscious lack of trust. I don't know. The children are very important to him and if I were to die I know he would look after and care for them. I think we will have to discuss after Christmas and take it from there.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

wifeanddaughter wrote: »

The children are 14 and 6.

Yes, I did complete the pattern changing course. Last year husband had a psychotic attack after cannabis and other drugs (legal highs like Eric-2). He left (well I threw him out) and we were separated for about five months. We gave it another go, intially for the children but he has worked through a lot of issues and we are getting on very well (just a few remaining gremlins, the main one being his relationship with my parents). We are also going through family therapy which has really helped.

I wonder if my decision to do this with the work insurance is some sub-conscious lack of trust. I don't know. The children are very important to him and if I were to die I know he would look after and care for them. I think we will have to discuss after Christmas and take it from there.

How would they get the money if he has a subsequent psychotic episode? They do tend to be worse and last longer if they happen again. And, as you know, there is no guarantee someone will never do something again.

Who would look after them then?

Pupnik

I think leaving it to the children is a sensible decision, although if you wanted you might be able to split it- I know my work insurance policy gave me the option of leaving different percentages to different people, so you could leave 40% to each child and 20% to your husband, for example.