Treating adult children equally

getmore4less

As the sibling with no kids I was happy for my parents to enjoy their grandkids and have help out as much as they could with their time an money.

Since our parents died I have take on some(not all) aspect of that role to help out my sibling.

happyandcontented

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

How do people feel about passing on money where grandchildren are involved? If for example you had 2 married children, one with no children and no plans to have any and the other had 2 children of their own, would you still leave your estate 50/50, or make other arrangements so that you GC are provided for?

I personally think the split should be equal as it is down to the parent to provide for their own children. We would leave the estate to our children and then they can disperse it as they wish. That said, we don't have any GC yet.;)

My MIL is doing it differently, leaving money to all her children, then her GC plus GGC.

AubreyMac

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

How do people feel about passing on money where grandchildren are involved? If for example you had 2 married children, one with no children and no plans to have any and the other had 2 children of their own, would you still leave your estate 50/50, or make other arrangements so that you GC are provided for?

I'm the youngest in my family, I don't have kids.


If my parents left anything to their grandchildren then to be honest I would feel that was unjust.


I'm the youngest by a big gap so IF I were to have any kids it is likely my parents will pass away while they are very young (if not before). It is not my fault I'm the youngest.


Being the youngest and one of the closest (geographically) with no kids means I'm called upon for help more than my siblings too.


Also what if one child has more kids than the other, therefore that family gets more etc.

Keep_pedalling

AubreyMac wrote: »

I'm the youngest in my family, I don't have kids.

If my parents left anything to their grandchildren then to be honest I would feel that was unjust.

I'm the youngest by a big gap so IF I were to have any kids it is likely my parents will pass away while they are very young (if not before). It is not my fault I'm the youngest.

Being the youngest and one of the closest (geographically) with no kids means I'm called upon for help more than my siblings too.

Also what if one child has more kids than the other, therefore that family gets more etc.

If you want to leave money to GC and there is a possibility that more would be born before you died then that can be covered by your will creating a trust rather than naming individual GC. These are the sort of discussions to have with the solisitor when drafting your wills.

Not sure why you think it’s unfair why each GC should get the same, they are all going to have similar needs, like uni fees, house deposits etc. Gifts to GC do not go into a family pot.

AubreyMac

I wonder what peoples opinion are on in heritance with step children?


If I were in a blended family then to be honest, I would feel more inclined to put my (hypothetical) biological children first.

Keep_pedalling

AubreyMac wrote: »

I wonder what peoples opinion are on in heritance with step children?

If I were in a blended family then to be honest, I would feel more inclined to put my (hypothetical) biological children first.

I think that would depend on your relationship with them, and also on whether the step child is going to inherit significantly from their birth parents. It is quite possible to have a better relationship with a step child than your own children.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

My parents have always aimed to be scrupulously even with gifts, stating they can't organise it any other way. Once you start arguing that one sibling "needs" more, it becomes very difficult to draw the line, as there can't be many families were all siblings have exactly the same assets, income, stability and prospects.

Pollycat

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

I think that would depend on your relationship with them, and also on whether the step child is going to inherit significantly from their birth parents. It is quite possible to have a better relationship with a step child than your own children.

I agree with this ^^^^.
And I think it's probably impossible to say what you would do in a hypothetical situation anyway.

TBagpuss

I think that being fair is more important than being equal.

When it comes to a will, I think in most cases the fairest thing to do is to treat al the children the same, as you don't know what anyone's situation will be by the time you die.

In terms of lifetimes gifts or other help, I think that it is possible to be fair without necessarily being exactly equal.

And in the moment, it is possible to decide "Child A has an immediate need for help" which may not be matched by Child B, and to help out accordingly.

I think if you are giving gifts just because you have spare and want them to have it now rather than later then equality is likely to be fair, in most cases.

Redacted

I am also of the equal is not always equitable camp

https://goo.gl/images/wjTu5T

I can’t figure out how to link a picture.