Money Moral Dilemma: Should I let my three kids decide when my other son can have his inheritance?

Groom

I don't think you should place the other three children in a position where they have to decide, suppose two decide he's ready and the other doesn't - that could cause conflict between them.  I would leave it equally, after all you won't be there to see what he does with it. Or if you really don't want to do that, bypass him completely and leave it in trust to his child/children for when they are 18 or 21. Please don't involve your other children.

REJP

You won't be around to worry about how your son spends his inheritance, or to witness the potential bad feeling between him and his siblings who will be put in a difficult position just because you can't make a decision.
I suggest you leave equal amounts to your children without conditions. What they do with it is their business.

FiFiFoo

BristolHannah said:

Absolutely not!! Just because he chooses to live his life in a way that isn’t acceptable to you or compared to his siblings why does that make him any less entitled to what the other 3 siblings are getting? I cannot imagine planning on treating children so differently. If you’re giving away your money to your children surely it becomes their choice as to how they spend it. Inheritance shouldn’t come with conditions

To be fair, none of them are ‘entitled’ to anything. It’s up to the OP to decide who they want their money to go to if anyone.

That being said, once you have gone you have no idea how the money will be used - a seemingly sensible son or daughter may well fritter it all away anyway.

I am a big believer in leaving inheritance to grandchildren if you are lucky enough to have them. When you leave money to grown up sons and daughters they most likely have already made their way in life, or if they separate from a partner half the inheritance will leave the family anyway. 

If you have grandchildren you can at least ensure they get the share you intend them to get, regardless of break ups, new partners and blended families complicating matters.

In the meantime, spend your time trying to build bridges with your son rather than worrying about what happens when you are gone.

dirtmother

One issue that has not been mentioned in the replies I've read so far is that if the out of work son is claiming benefits, an inheritance in the normal way could cause him serious difficulties (ie all that would happen is that he would lose benefits until the money has run down to the savings limit, thus benefitting only the state to that point and more importantly he might find himself then having to re-apply for benefits on what are generally speaking more restrictive terms) Setting things up so that his 'share' goes into a trust would be a favour to him. It may be that in the circumstances it is wiser for the trustees not to be his siblings given though if you have to use a professional trustee there will be a cost.

As others have suggested this behaviour of his may not at this point be voluntary. 12 months of estrangement, especially in present circumstances, is not a period of time one can assume will become a permanent state of affairs (thankfully). You may wish to discuss means to make separate provisions for his son in your will.

Pollycat

keithyno.1 said:

I really don’t see there’s any Money Moral Dilemma here. Your assets are YOURS, to do with as you wish - they’re not held in trust until you die, to be passed on automatically to the next generation. Similarly, it’s completely up to you who you leave those assets to when you make a will. If you so wanted, you could leave it all to charities of your choice, or your best friend, or next door neighbour..in fact, anybody or any organisation at all.

This 100% ^^^^.

If I was one of the 3 children I would not want to be put in a position where I was partly responsible for deciding when another adult sibling could have his inheritance.
Apart from the potential for creating much bigger rifts in your family when you are gone, depending how you decide to do it, it could impact on eligibility for benefits for the other 3 children in the future.
And if it's not in a separate fund, if one of your children dies it could form part of their estate if it is in their name.

I would be trying to find out why my child "doesn't work, spends his time playing video games and doing stuff he shouldn't."
And why he stopped speaking to you all "12 months ago saying no one supports him".

He sounds unhappy.
And possibly ill.

scepticalhuman

I agree with Pollycat. It's a difficult situation and the poor guy is clearly unhappy and possibly unwell. And presumably you don't want to cause division between your other 3 children. The benefits situation complicates things otherwise I would say just divide it unconditionally between the four. Do you have 2 or 3 trusted friends/relatives who understand you and your family who might manage a trust for your son so that his siblings are not involved, who love your recalcitrant son enough to do their best for him? I think that's what I would be looking at. A professional would lack the personal relationship which cares for the person rather than simply money-managing. I do recognise the enormous difficulty in the situation. I would also be trying to examine myself to see whether I am unconsciously wanting to punish him. Unconditional love is sometimes complex to put into practice, it certainly isn't rolling over and letting someone walk all over you, neither is it punitive - well that's my opinion! I hope it helps. And I wish you all the very best, it sounds like a no-win in many ways.

EssexHebridean

Absolutely not. It is to be presumed that after your death your other three children, at least, will be pretty upset. don't compound that by leaving them to do your dirty work. If you really want to cut him out of your will entirely, then make a new will leaving his share to your grandson, and make sure there is an explanation of why this is in the will ideally or in a letter of wishes alongside which must then be referred to in the will. It's not failsafe even then, he COULD challenge, but it does at least set out your reasoning. It's your decision to make though, nobody elses. 

mecoprop

As so often, many responses hold forth, at length, without answering the ACTUAL question at all. It's a slippery slope to drifting off topic and grinding any axe other than the one asked for and required.

REFRESHER

• "Should I set up my will so my other three children can decide when the fourth can have his share? "

The answer is simple.
NO.
This is your will - by definition, your wishes for disbursement of your "estate".
This unique power and responsibility should not be meekly surrendered to anyone else and most especially not to people with such glaringly obvious vested interests in keeping it for themselves. 
As direct beneficiaries, there is no avoiding the fact that, to give the three complete discretion and power over the one would be totally unfair in al respects.  Not least in the evasion of your own responsibility by handing over this unique power for others to decide.  
No ifs, buts or maybes - the decision is YOURS, not theirs. 

Jewels44

No, you should either put it in trust for your 4th son or split it between him and your grandson, and ensure that independent trustees are ensuring that he uses it for certain things.  Or give equally to all your sons, you don't have to burden your sons with this responsibility, and it will cause problems between them if they are managing his share.

It is really important to give a signal that treating your children the same is important to you, after all, he is saying he already feels unsupported, have you considered that he may be depressed or have some other issue that is nothing to do with you or his family? 
You could always reconsider after a few years should he get himself together, but you have to make a fair decision based on the now, and his son should also benefit in some way shouldn't he?

Pollycat

mecoprop said:

As so often, many responses hold forth, at length, without answering the ACTUAL question at all. It's a slippery slope to drifting off topic and grinding any axe other than the one asked for and required.

REFRESHER

• "Should I set up my will so my other three children can decide when the fourth can have his share? "

The answer is simple.
NO.
This is your will - by definition, your wishes for disbursement of your "estate".
This unique power and responsibility should not be meekly surrendered to anyone else and most especially not to people with such glaringly obvious vested interests in keeping it for themselves. 
As direct beneficiaries, there is no avoiding the fact that, to give the three complete discretion and power over the one would be totally unfair in al respects.  Not least in the evasion of your own responsibility by handing over this unique power for others to decide.  
No ifs, buts or maybes - the decision is YOURS, not theirs. 

It would be a pretty boring thread if replies to MMDs were limited to 'yes' or 'no'.
You may as well just set a poll up.

As the original post says - MMDs are intended to be a point of debate and discussed at face value.

MSE_Kelvin said: 

Unfortunately the MSE team can't answer Money Moral Dilemma questions as contributions are emailed in or suggested in person. They are intended to be a point of debate and discussed at face value. Remember that behind each dilemma there is a real person so, as the forum rules say, please keep it kind and keep it clean.

You can't have a debate by just answering the ACTUAL question with 'yes' or 'no'.