I am in a similar situation. I did all the heavy lifting of caregiving for Dad, who had Alzheimer's, for 4 years. The siblings did nothing. Did not even come to the funeral. This caregiving took a toll on me, my husband, our marriage, my kids, and my job. Frankly, I'm surprised I still HAVE a husband and a job. When Dad re-did his will, I insisted that my siblings and I all be treated equally. I believe that that is the only thing that is keeping them from attacking me the way Name Withheld's siblings are attacking her. I highly recommend a grief counselor to help work through this. And all you deadbeat siblings out there who are doing nothing for your aging parents need to get on the stick and provide respite and appreciation to the sibling who is doing the heavy lifting.
84
Possible that the other two siblings make a good living.......no excuse for being
left out, that said perhaps the caregiver is the loving,compassionate of the group. Who is not married, usually they will move in with parents.......as in my case brother lived a lifetime in their small town and I in New York City for forty years so it worked out ok.......however after returning and selling my house there have been squeaks in the outcome.......daily with the remaining parent still living and I have been the supplier of help financially....given their situation of being house rich......the feeling is that I do not deserve the right to receive as they worked all their lives for themselves.......so grievances come in many forms.
left out, that said perhaps the caregiver is the loving,compassionate of the group. Who is not married, usually they will move in with parents.......as in my case brother lived a lifetime in their small town and I in New York City for forty years so it worked out ok.......however after returning and selling my house there have been squeaks in the outcome.......daily with the remaining parent still living and I have been the supplier of help financially....given their situation of being house rich......the feeling is that I do not deserve the right to receive as they worked all their lives for themselves.......so grievances come in many forms.
4
I have to agree with the commenter who thought that there might be something a little fishy about this letter. It can take very little to pressure an elderly person into not having contact with certain of their children or to convince them that changing a will is for the best, and we haven't heard the brothers' side of the story, so I don't think the ethicist can properly answer it. The simplistic tone of this letter is almost sly and baiting.
13
Agree 100%. Also wonder why "one brother threatened to sue the day after the mother died". People do not have access to the reading of a will THAT soon after a death -- it is usually several weeks.
Did the sister brag on "getting everything" then? or waive the will in the faces of her brothers?
Did the sister brag on "getting everything" then? or waive the will in the faces of her brothers?
5
The bad actor is mom. Money equals love. A disinherited child feels rejected and hurt. They take it out on the child who inherits. Mom had the right to leave her property to whomever she wished. Mom did not have the right to sow discord among her children.
Daughter makes a good case for keeping the house. But what about the brothers' story? Were they close enough to help? Did they ever try to? Did mom's "critical and difficult" behavior keep them away? If yes, do they deserve to be disinherited after years of verbal abuse?
Any redistribution of assets should have been made immediately after mom's death. Daughter should have sat down with her brothers, acknowledged their pain, explained what she contributed to mom's care, and come up with a more fair distribution. Three years later is too late. Daughter's actions from the beginning show that she wanted to keep the house. Unless payments to the brothers are made with the sincere intent to acknowledge their feelings and renew the relationship, they shouldn't not be made.
P.S. Sister lucked out. If you are a child making financial sacrifices to take care of a parent and parent says that they will pay you in their will, see an attorney. Have them draw up a contract to that effect. Wills can be changed. Contracts cannot without both parties' consent.
Daughter makes a good case for keeping the house. But what about the brothers' story? Were they close enough to help? Did they ever try to? Did mom's "critical and difficult" behavior keep them away? If yes, do they deserve to be disinherited after years of verbal abuse?
Any redistribution of assets should have been made immediately after mom's death. Daughter should have sat down with her brothers, acknowledged their pain, explained what she contributed to mom's care, and come up with a more fair distribution. Three years later is too late. Daughter's actions from the beginning show that she wanted to keep the house. Unless payments to the brothers are made with the sincere intent to acknowledge their feelings and renew the relationship, they shouldn't not be made.
P.S. Sister lucked out. If you are a child making financial sacrifices to take care of a parent and parent says that they will pay you in their will, see an attorney. Have them draw up a contract to that effect. Wills can be changed. Contracts cannot without both parties' consent.
16
My older brother and I (only two of us) were executors of our father's estate when he died in March, 2008. My brother signed off on having me do the probate work the day after our father died as he didn't want to be involved in the 50/50 split and I was more than happy to take care of it as I am detail oriented and know how to get stuff done.
It took me six months to get the details of the transfer of the split funds that were in the estate as they related to stocks. The passing of the split happened the day before the crash of the market in October, 2008.
What I had split and transferred into my account -- and my brother's newly set up investment account -- decreased by 50% in two days.
My brother called and asked what happened to "his money". I explained that we got caught in the madness of the market at the worst time in years.
He didn't get it. I offered to send him the newspaper and all the documents as they came in to verify what I was telling him. He still didn't believe me and seemed to think that I had somehow ripped him off.
He hasn't spoken to me since.
It took me six months to get the details of the transfer of the split funds that were in the estate as they related to stocks. The passing of the split happened the day before the crash of the market in October, 2008.
What I had split and transferred into my account -- and my brother's newly set up investment account -- decreased by 50% in two days.
My brother called and asked what happened to "his money". I explained that we got caught in the madness of the market at the worst time in years.
He didn't get it. I offered to send him the newspaper and all the documents as they came in to verify what I was telling him. He still didn't believe me and seemed to think that I had somehow ripped him off.
He hasn't spoken to me since.
21
i recently experienced a similar situation, but in my case, my sister [bullied by another sister, who was not the executrix] sold my stock inheritance without informing me, immediately preceding the skyrocketing of the stock market between november 2016 and now. i did speak to a lawyer friend who indicated that there would be grounds for a lawsuit, as my executrix sister performed none of the notifications that are legally required in the execution of a trust. i spent many months at the crossroads of decision-making, but unlike joanne's brother, i appear to be opting for continuing family contact, as opposed to taking the litigious route. most days, anyway.
5
"But I want to do the right thing, and I am haunted by this."
I disagree with Mr. Appiah in his assessment. It is a very big 'if' to assume that the facts are exactly as you paint them. Your siblings could be upset for very legitimate reasons. The legal issue here is moot -- clearly, you can keep every cent; your issue is an ethical one -- you still have a guilty conscience -- the question is, why?
When an individual is 'haunted' by an ethical issue, it is usually because they are not revealing the other side of the coin. Inasmuch as it is wrong to make assumptions about what you might have done wrong here, it is equally wrong for any of us to assume that your sibling's complaints about your alleged malfeasance are wholly without merit.
Candidly, the facts that you present paint a different picture if viewed from a less subjective perspective. Most reasonable siblings will not sue a poorer one over money, even over an inheritance. More likely -- the issue here is one of honorable expectation; your siblings are expecting you to do right by them, and the use of your health and 'emotional blackmail' are telling indications of how they see your manipulation of the situation to get out of a very real obligation.
My guess is that you owe your siblings money -- they either lent it to you earlier in life, or you took it in another form that now weighs heavily on your conscience.
Fishing for absolution will not ease your mind. Only accepting the truth will.
I disagree with Mr. Appiah in his assessment. It is a very big 'if' to assume that the facts are exactly as you paint them. Your siblings could be upset for very legitimate reasons. The legal issue here is moot -- clearly, you can keep every cent; your issue is an ethical one -- you still have a guilty conscience -- the question is, why?
When an individual is 'haunted' by an ethical issue, it is usually because they are not revealing the other side of the coin. Inasmuch as it is wrong to make assumptions about what you might have done wrong here, it is equally wrong for any of us to assume that your sibling's complaints about your alleged malfeasance are wholly without merit.
Candidly, the facts that you present paint a different picture if viewed from a less subjective perspective. Most reasonable siblings will not sue a poorer one over money, even over an inheritance. More likely -- the issue here is one of honorable expectation; your siblings are expecting you to do right by them, and the use of your health and 'emotional blackmail' are telling indications of how they see your manipulation of the situation to get out of a very real obligation.
My guess is that you owe your siblings money -- they either lent it to you earlier in life, or you took it in another form that now weighs heavily on your conscience.
Fishing for absolution will not ease your mind. Only accepting the truth will.
17
This is by far the best comment here; thank you.
It is NOT a legal issue as many incorrectly assume. The will was valid -- this all happened 3 years ago -- probate is over, the house is in the LWs name -- so the reasons she is NOW feeling a "guilty conscience" are the real story.
Does she suddenly realize she is ALONE -- a 63 year old widow, with no children -- and now she has estranged her two brothers, their wives and any nieces or nephews? Was it worth it to get a $1million house all for yourself?
I think in her heart and conscience, the LW knows she manipulated her elderly, frail mother to ensure that she (LW) got the entire estate. Now she is either guilty or lonely, and looking for Mr. Appiah here to tell it that her actions were all A-OK.
Ultimately you have to ask yourself: is it more important to be RIGHT or to be HAPPY? she can legally keep the entire family estate to herself, but at what cost? cutting yourself off from your only family in your sixties? that's sounds like a lifetime of being lonely.
It is NOT a legal issue as many incorrectly assume. The will was valid -- this all happened 3 years ago -- probate is over, the house is in the LWs name -- so the reasons she is NOW feeling a "guilty conscience" are the real story.
Does she suddenly realize she is ALONE -- a 63 year old widow, with no children -- and now she has estranged her two brothers, their wives and any nieces or nephews? Was it worth it to get a $1million house all for yourself?
I think in her heart and conscience, the LW knows she manipulated her elderly, frail mother to ensure that she (LW) got the entire estate. Now she is either guilty or lonely, and looking for Mr. Appiah here to tell it that her actions were all A-OK.
Ultimately you have to ask yourself: is it more important to be RIGHT or to be HAPPY? she can legally keep the entire family estate to herself, but at what cost? cutting yourself off from your only family in your sixties? that's sounds like a lifetime of being lonely.
20
There have been many comments about the inheriting child being a daughter instead of a son as shown in the illustration. Maybe "widow" was misused and more information was given than was printed (the instructions do say to include a daytime phone number).
Also, has the meaning of "widow" changed in recent years to be gender-neutral? I always thought the term "widower" should mean the dead husband, as he made her a widow by dying.
The illustration could just be wrong, too.
Also, has the meaning of "widow" changed in recent years to be gender-neutral? I always thought the term "widower" should mean the dead husband, as he made her a widow by dying.
The illustration could just be wrong, too.
4
Sometimes illustrations are wrong. Also it could be a typo -- widow instead of WIDOWER -- I think that word "widow" is the ONLY reference to the LW being female.
If you eliminate that one word, I would have assumed the LW was a third brother.
If you eliminate that one word, I would have assumed the LW was a third brother.
1
My sister and I, sacrificed financially to be caregivers for both of our parents. We sacrificed income and savings for the future. Women overwhelming do the vast majority of care giving for both children and elderly parents, and our society does not value the work. "Society" like Name Withheld's brothers, enjoy getting the free ride from "women's work."
Name Withheld, your mother did the right thing for the right reasons. Honor it.
If you're still struggling, put a price on your care giving. You'd likely pay someone else $20+ per hour to care for your parents. Add up your time, your time represents potential earnings and savings that you sacrificed (what about your healthcare?). List all of the projects you did on your mother's house. Get on Angle's List or Home Advisor and find out what it would have cost to hire someone.
You did that out of love. But there is a measurable fiscal loss; in the gig economy, you could have been making money. Do this for yourself and consider that your brothers had no skin in this game. If your brothers continue to be jerks, send them the results. Show them what you sacrificed as you spent hours caring for your parents. It doesn't have to be confrontational, just matter-of-fact.
Society doesn't value the care giving and the results can be brutal. Your mother did value it. Take it. She gave it in love, take it in love. It is a justice.
Name Withheld, your mother did the right thing for the right reasons. Honor it.
If you're still struggling, put a price on your care giving. You'd likely pay someone else $20+ per hour to care for your parents. Add up your time, your time represents potential earnings and savings that you sacrificed (what about your healthcare?). List all of the projects you did on your mother's house. Get on Angle's List or Home Advisor and find out what it would have cost to hire someone.
You did that out of love. But there is a measurable fiscal loss; in the gig economy, you could have been making money. Do this for yourself and consider that your brothers had no skin in this game. If your brothers continue to be jerks, send them the results. Show them what you sacrificed as you spent hours caring for your parents. It doesn't have to be confrontational, just matter-of-fact.
Society doesn't value the care giving and the results can be brutal. Your mother did value it. Take it. She gave it in love, take it in love. It is a justice.
96
The brothers don't have a leg to stand on, that's why this hasn't gone past threats to sue.
Unless some kind of duress can be shown, she made her decision, and made her will, and her will is that she have the house and contents.
Sounds like her support of her mother in life is the reason. Indeed, that has long been an understood arrangement: that relative that takes on care during dotage, obtains the house.
An inheritance is unearned income; it's a windfall. A windfall not obtained, is not a loss. The brothers need to move on.
Unless some kind of duress can be shown, she made her decision, and made her will, and her will is that she have the house and contents.
Sounds like her support of her mother in life is the reason. Indeed, that has long been an understood arrangement: that relative that takes on care during dotage, obtains the house.
An inheritance is unearned income; it's a windfall. A windfall not obtained, is not a loss. The brothers need to move on.
52
As others said -- why three men in the illustration? It is a letter about two women (mother and daughter) and two men (the sons/brothers). That said, I am sorry the daughter has such a fraught relationship with her brothers, but even if she gave them every cent she had and lived in her car, they still would not become loving siblings. Her mother was very fortunate to have such a daughter.
76
The mother knew her children, and how that would end up. It sounds like she didn't like her own kids.
14
Or she knew two of them would not come to any good with the house and contents. Or, likely, she felt more of an obligation to the child who helped her, than to those that didn't.
47
There is something fishy about this story. Did the brothers (try to) have a relationship with their mother? Did the sister keep them away or in some way coerce the mother? As one other commenter asked, How soon before her death was this will written? And was everyone aware of this arrangement? The Ethicist seems tone-deaf to the fact that cutting children out of a will is an emotionally cruel act. The guilt-ridden sister's request for justification appears to imply some understanding of this, albeit rather late.
14
Connie: I know personally of situations, within my own family (but NOT directly affecting myself) where a vindictive parent cut adult children out of the will -- and there were little or no assets anyways! nursing home costs took the family home and any cash assets -- but the HURT that comes from seeing IN WRITING that your parent didn't love you or didn't want you to have one red cent -- that can NEVER be taken back nor undone. It is a lifetime hurt, even if you are over 60 at the time of your parent's demise.
18
My father had died and my mother had sold her house. I was a single adoptive parent. My mother and I bought a house together with joint rights so that neither of us would be without a home. However, it should be noted that I had no plans to buy a house with my mother other than she didn't want to be alone and was thrilled to start a new life together with me and my kids.
My siblings went about their lives doing whatever they wanted for 20+ years. My mother had made all her children beneficiaries for her IRA and I helped her make sure all her children were also beneficiaries for her other funds. This was not enough for some of my sisters. I was put through hell by them and will not ever feel the same about them. The house was mine to begin with not half my mothers as we had sat down with an attorney to begin with. The first thing I did was call the attorney we had to make sure that the deed was correct since I have seen lawyers make mistakes. I have no doubt that my sisters would have thrown me and my children out of our home if they could have. They were not happy with all the money they got and don't care how much money I saved them by not putting her in a nursing home. One sister did step up to the plate and help and I love her so much. The other two are con artists with no morals. So not only was I accused of getting half of my own home, but all the years that I spent taking care of my mother meant nothing to them. Family can be toxic.
My siblings went about their lives doing whatever they wanted for 20+ years. My mother had made all her children beneficiaries for her IRA and I helped her make sure all her children were also beneficiaries for her other funds. This was not enough for some of my sisters. I was put through hell by them and will not ever feel the same about them. The house was mine to begin with not half my mothers as we had sat down with an attorney to begin with. The first thing I did was call the attorney we had to make sure that the deed was correct since I have seen lawyers make mistakes. I have no doubt that my sisters would have thrown me and my children out of our home if they could have. They were not happy with all the money they got and don't care how much money I saved them by not putting her in a nursing home. One sister did step up to the plate and help and I love her so much. The other two are con artists with no morals. So not only was I accused of getting half of my own home, but all the years that I spent taking care of my mother meant nothing to them. Family can be toxic.
66
"My mother and I bought a house together with joint rights so that neither of us would be without a home. However, it should be noted that I had no plans to buy a house with my mother other than she didn't want to be alone..."
"The house was mine to begin with not half my mothers as we had sat down with an attorney to begin with."
If you bought the house together, why was it yours to begin with? Wouldn't it belong to both of you (presumably equally)?
"The house was mine to begin with not half my mothers as we had sat down with an attorney to begin with."
If you bought the house together, why was it yours to begin with? Wouldn't it belong to both of you (presumably equally)?
16
Excuse me, Tomi Um, but I think the letter writer was a daughter, not a son.
Which is ironic, because the letter describes a common situation in our sexist culture. First, it's the daughter who loses her husband with few resources to continue with. Second, it's the daughter that moved in with and took care of the mother. Third, it's the daughter that feels she has to sacrifice her well being to be the peacekeeper in the family. Finally, it's the daughter who feels (or is being made to feel) she is the selfish one for putting her needs before her brothers' wants.
We've all seen this family dynamic, many of us have been part of it, and it has to change. If the letter writer wishes to be part of that change, she has our support.
Which is ironic, because the letter describes a common situation in our sexist culture. First, it's the daughter who loses her husband with few resources to continue with. Second, it's the daughter that moved in with and took care of the mother. Third, it's the daughter that feels she has to sacrifice her well being to be the peacekeeper in the family. Finally, it's the daughter who feels (or is being made to feel) she is the selfish one for putting her needs before her brothers' wants.
We've all seen this family dynamic, many of us have been part of it, and it has to change. If the letter writer wishes to be part of that change, she has our support.
87
Most of these comments miss the point. Often, a vindictive parent will write her/his will just as this writer's mother did simply to foster the kind of family feud she/he knows will erupt. It is no accident when one out of four children receives all the estate. It is an intentional act of hate, which reflects the need of the deceased to cause a life-long dispute among the survivors. Such a will does not reflect on the lives of the grown children, of course, and the brothers who were abandoned had every right to feel slighted, no matter the size of the estate. A will should be drawn with a recognition of need to be fair, but often they are not. The facts in this case do not convince me, but if there were truly one grown child who carried most of the burden, the parent could have eased the pain she knew she was going to cause by leaving each child some personal momento, preferably something that demonstrates she loved each and every one of them, not just the fortunate heir.
16
This, is solved, by the realization, that an inheritance is owed NOBODY. It's a gift, a transfer of unearned income.
It's not to be planned around, it's not to be expected, it's not to be taken as an entitlement.
This kind of thinking has led, in my family, to the reasoning that someone is owed *the most* money, because they had the most kids. People's definition of "fair" has a way of morphing to the advantage of them's that does the defining.
Recognizing that a will is just that - an expression of someone's will, and expecting nothing to come falling into one's lap, goes a long way to understanding the situation.
It's not to be planned around, it's not to be expected, it's not to be taken as an entitlement.
This kind of thinking has led, in my family, to the reasoning that someone is owed *the most* money, because they had the most kids. People's definition of "fair" has a way of morphing to the advantage of them's that does the defining.
Recognizing that a will is just that - an expression of someone's will, and expecting nothing to come falling into one's lap, goes a long way to understanding the situation.
56
Banty: that is true LEGALLY -- not emotionally.
The pain of being cut out of a parent or grandparents will is PERMANENT -- a kind of rejection you can never get past, even if you are older or don't need the money.
I am surprised you are so coldhearted as not to see that. Even if the LW's mother had gone into a nursing home, and burned through every dime of the inheritance -- so NO money was left -- the pain of knowing your mother hated you so much, she did not leave you so much as a memento -- is really terribly cruel. And frankly, pointless -- it also means the LW's relationship with her own brothers is RUINED forever. Is that worth it?
The pain of being cut out of a parent or grandparents will is PERMANENT -- a kind of rejection you can never get past, even if you are older or don't need the money.
I am surprised you are so coldhearted as not to see that. Even if the LW's mother had gone into a nursing home, and burned through every dime of the inheritance -- so NO money was left -- the pain of knowing your mother hated you so much, she did not leave you so much as a memento -- is really terribly cruel. And frankly, pointless -- it also means the LW's relationship with her own brothers is RUINED forever. Is that worth it?
10
LW1 was fortunate to develop emotional connection to her mother. Her brothers didn't. It sounds like her brothers are mourning that lack of connection, which hurts more than the paralyzing grief experienced with good relations. Although the brothers may have bad maternal memories that the youngest didn't endure, she should send birthday and holiday greetings and hope they change.
8
My experience is so different from this letter writer. Our mother passed away at the age of eighty. She was widowed at 52 with three kids still at home. Oh, she had 11 children in total. After we had grown up and left home, some got married, some were single. As she grew older and sicker, one unmarried sister lived with her and one married brother lived right next door. They were responsible for the day to day caretaking. The other siblings lived hours or days away, but were in contact often. When she passed away, her will was divided equally among all 11 children. Anything of value given to our mother was returned to that child. Our lawyer said in all his years, he has never seen such civility among inheritors. We wouldn't sully our mother's memory over petty squabbling over who did what.
My own estate (such as it is) will be divided equally between my children.
My own estate (such as it is) will be divided equally between my children.
44
What a wonderful family and what an amazing tribute to what a fine, decent, fair woman your mother was -- that kind love, fairness and honor is a GIFT that passes on from generation to generation.
It is worth 1000 times more than any cash or jewelry or even real estate.
It is worth 1000 times more than any cash or jewelry or even real estate.
18
LW1: It has been three years since you lost your mother. The probate of her will closed a long time ago.
Instead of challenging the will in court, you assert that your brothers sent you threatening letters. No one with a sound legal argument does that. No ethical lawyer would ever advise their client to do that, and would drop a client who did.
Did you ever think that by engaging a mediator now, long after probate, you will create the appearance that you are conceding that something about your mother's will was illegitimate after all? That such an unusual course could be seen as an admission that you were involved in unduly influencing your mother, and that you feel overwhelmed by guilt about it now? If you are not guilty of some sort of overreaching, then do not act as though you were. This is not ethical toward anyone, and disrespects your mother's wishes.
If you really are a good human being who did nothing wrong, don't denigrate yourself and undermine your good reputation. Your brothers are the ones who need to come to terms with this in their own minds, not you.
Instead of challenging the will in court, you assert that your brothers sent you threatening letters. No one with a sound legal argument does that. No ethical lawyer would ever advise their client to do that, and would drop a client who did.
Did you ever think that by engaging a mediator now, long after probate, you will create the appearance that you are conceding that something about your mother's will was illegitimate after all? That such an unusual course could be seen as an admission that you were involved in unduly influencing your mother, and that you feel overwhelmed by guilt about it now? If you are not guilty of some sort of overreaching, then do not act as though you were. This is not ethical toward anyone, and disrespects your mother's wishes.
If you really are a good human being who did nothing wrong, don't denigrate yourself and undermine your good reputation. Your brothers are the ones who need to come to terms with this in their own minds, not you.
51
You are wrong. "Threatening" (or merely enquiring or even BEGGING) letters are very common. They carry no legal weight, but (as clearly indicated here) have emotional significance.
I was just chatting with a friend, and the subject of her late father's estate came up. He died a widower, but he had a girlfriend he was essentially living with. The adult children, then in their 30s, got the entire estate as the will was many years old, before the mother died or the girlfriend came into the picture.
One of the oddities of the case is that the father was only 59 when he died suddenly of a massive heart attack -- but the "girlfriend" was in her mid to late 70s. Not the usual set up!
Anyways, the will was very clear and the children inherited, but the girlfriend wrote them, very angry and upset and claiming "your father was supporting me and paying my rent!" and that she wanted part of the estate.
Lawyers told them there was no legal ground at all, and they would win any challenges...but that the threat of a claim from the girlfriend could hold up the disbursal of the estate. They advised giving her a token sum to "shut her up" and they did -- $4000 -- in 1990.
So in fact, writing a letter gave this NON RELATIVE a chunk of money to which she was not legally entitled.
I'd say writing the letter was a very effective, powerful tool.
I was just chatting with a friend, and the subject of her late father's estate came up. He died a widower, but he had a girlfriend he was essentially living with. The adult children, then in their 30s, got the entire estate as the will was many years old, before the mother died or the girlfriend came into the picture.
One of the oddities of the case is that the father was only 59 when he died suddenly of a massive heart attack -- but the "girlfriend" was in her mid to late 70s. Not the usual set up!
Anyways, the will was very clear and the children inherited, but the girlfriend wrote them, very angry and upset and claiming "your father was supporting me and paying my rent!" and that she wanted part of the estate.
Lawyers told them there was no legal ground at all, and they would win any challenges...but that the threat of a claim from the girlfriend could hold up the disbursal of the estate. They advised giving her a token sum to "shut her up" and they did -- $4000 -- in 1990.
So in fact, writing a letter gave this NON RELATIVE a chunk of money to which she was not legally entitled.
I'd say writing the letter was a very effective, powerful tool.
7
I was a partial heir of an odd split of my father's small estate, for which one of my brother's was executor. A few in the family though the split was unfair to me, but I did not contest it; it was my father's will. From LW1's comments, "I offered..., but they would not talk to me. ...I sent my elder brother a note asking to meet with a mediator, and I got no response," I am assuming she has opened a door for communication, but they did not come in. At that she should forget about it and go on with her life. Should they come back with other than threats, let them pay the legal fees to sue her, which will most surely result in the will being upheld. I am doubtful they will pursue this course.
On a side note, after all of my father's financials were settled, my executor brother asked me to sign a letter stating that I was in agreement with all that was done. I was, and had never raised a question about any of it (aside from a one-time curious inquiry regarding the quick disappearance of an almost brand-new refrigerator). For that reason, this letter hurt me deeply. While I understood it's intent, I found it unnecessary, given my non-contest during the year that preceded it, and so did nothing with it. I was never questioned about it. That was seven years ago and I believe we are all happily moved on from my father's will.
On a side note, after all of my father's financials were settled, my executor brother asked me to sign a letter stating that I was in agreement with all that was done. I was, and had never raised a question about any of it (aside from a one-time curious inquiry regarding the quick disappearance of an almost brand-new refrigerator). For that reason, this letter hurt me deeply. While I understood it's intent, I found it unnecessary, given my non-contest during the year that preceded it, and so did nothing with it. I was never questioned about it. That was seven years ago and I believe we are all happily moved on from my father's will.
13
If it will make you feel any better- I believe the letter you were asked to sign is a required legal formality: the executor must present it to all benefactors to give them the opportunity to object/contest the provisions of the will and the disbursal of funds/property. Your brother was required to give it to you, it was not an intentional slight of any kind, simply standard procedure.
28
Yes, Sarah, and thank you. I'm sure it was a requirement my brother did not enjoy completing, hence never questioning me about it's return. All is good. I love my brother and I miss my Dad.
17
Interesting graphic depicting the first letter. Three men? The writer says that they are a "widow".They also state they are very handy around the house.Is it possible that the artist thought the writer was male for this reason?
25
LW1 It doesn't matter if the brothers earn a good living. It doesn't matter if they were good to their mother. A will is a legal document. As long as the mother was of sound mind, the will stands. The house and its contents belong to the daughter. She is not obligated legally or ethically to share. If she wants to gift her brothers, that is her choice. But she is giving what is now hers, not sharing.
25
well... that's the general rule, but if the brothers can show undue influence, they can challenge. But they didn't. it's too late now.
8
Assuming the mother was of sound mind, she is definitely right legally. But what is right ethically? For the sake of discussion, consider the children to have the same relationship with the mother, contribute the same time to her care, and come from the same financial situation, etc. Would it be ethically OK for one child to accept the entire estate with nothing going to the others? The parent is free to decide how the estate is divided, or if it is even given to the children in the first place. I'm really not quite sure of the ethics involved here - or if any apply.
3
Dave: and parents can be unfair. They can "play favorites". They can have a favorite child. It is not rare for parents to favor the youngest child (as here) or the child who is the same gender as the parent (as here).
Also if one child lives much closer than the others...they have more opportunity to ingratiate themselves with a wealthy parent. The LW clearly knew the mother owned a very valuable house, with roughly a million dollars (as the brothers want a share of "hundreds of thousands each). Surely that influenced her!
A daughter who makes her mother take costly vacations and buy new cars -- vacations the daughter gets to go on! and cars she gets to drive! and knows she will inherit -- is not acting with her mother's best interests, but with her OWN financial interest at heart. She acted unethically, which is why she now feels guilty.
Also if one child lives much closer than the others...they have more opportunity to ingratiate themselves with a wealthy parent. The LW clearly knew the mother owned a very valuable house, with roughly a million dollars (as the brothers want a share of "hundreds of thousands each). Surely that influenced her!
A daughter who makes her mother take costly vacations and buy new cars -- vacations the daughter gets to go on! and cars she gets to drive! and knows she will inherit -- is not acting with her mother's best interests, but with her OWN financial interest at heart. She acted unethically, which is why she now feels guilty.
3
Regarding the disputed estate that excluded two siblings: the beneficiary of the will should obtain legal counsel and follow their advice. It sounds like legal advice has been provided and the letter writer is ignoring that advice and is resorting to consulting strangers for advice.
Probated estates are under the jurisdiction of the state where the will was executed and probated. Any sibling who believes he has a stake in an estate should file suit and let a court settle the matter.
Probated estates are under the jurisdiction of the state where the will was executed and probated. Any sibling who believes he has a stake in an estate should file suit and let a court settle the matter.
4
On the disputed probate: I am a trial lawyer; I litigate cases like this one in California, often representing those in the position of these brothers. The claim here is based on undue influence, perhaps with questions on the mother's capacity when she made her will.
Missing in the facts disclosed: when did she make her will? If the will was made shortly before the mother died, and if it varies from prior, more even-handed estate planning, the brothers may have grounds for suspicion.
Also missing: what does the will say about why daughter is favored, and why sons are disinherited? The estate planners I know would certainly address the former, and would probably have the will speak to the latter.
In my experience, these disputes are not at their core about the money, but about guilt over care, concern and love not given or expressed to a parent or other loved one. These sons now realize they failed their mother when she needed them, and no gift from the daughter can appease them, or win their love and respect.
That said: there is a will; it favors the daughter (who needs the financial help); the sons chose not to challenge. This will expressed the mother's wishes, and daughter should honor those wishes and accept the gift she has been given.
Missing in the facts disclosed: when did she make her will? If the will was made shortly before the mother died, and if it varies from prior, more even-handed estate planning, the brothers may have grounds for suspicion.
Also missing: what does the will say about why daughter is favored, and why sons are disinherited? The estate planners I know would certainly address the former, and would probably have the will speak to the latter.
In my experience, these disputes are not at their core about the money, but about guilt over care, concern and love not given or expressed to a parent or other loved one. These sons now realize they failed their mother when she needed them, and no gift from the daughter can appease them, or win their love and respect.
That said: there is a will; it favors the daughter (who needs the financial help); the sons chose not to challenge. This will expressed the mother's wishes, and daughter should honor those wishes and accept the gift she has been given.
75
Perfect answer, ProbateLawyer. Thank you.
People with a legal argument bring it to court. They don't write threatening letters.
People with a legal argument bring it to court. They don't write threatening letters.
17
Sonja: cases like these are rare, and very costly. A lawyer is going to see such cases but not know about the 10,000 times more where NOBODY can AFFORD to take it to court.
Such cases are extremely hard to prove and the costs of getting doctors, shrinks, neighbors etc. to testify are insanely expensive.
That is why few people do it. In many cases, litigation simply hands the estate to lawyers -- and not ANY of the family members.
You argue for taking this to court, but that is FUTILE for most people. In fact, writing the family member and trying to get them to act ethically is cheaper and more likely to work.
Such cases are extremely hard to prove and the costs of getting doctors, shrinks, neighbors etc. to testify are insanely expensive.
That is why few people do it. In many cases, litigation simply hands the estate to lawyers -- and not ANY of the family members.
You argue for taking this to court, but that is FUTILE for most people. In fact, writing the family member and trying to get them to act ethically is cheaper and more likely to work.
Having dealt with the problem both personally and advising others, transparency on the part of the estate to the beneficiaries is necessary. I have seen or been asked to mediate often enough that my wife and I have changed our own estate plans and made a friend who is known to all beneficiaries as the executor of our estate who is not related to any beneficiary. The simple use of an executor who is not related to the family has solved more problems in many instances. Additionally, every beneficiary of our estate has been duly notified and has a copy of the estate documents and gets any updates to the plan when we make changes. No one can claim they were not told.
22
Name Withheld: your mom wanted you to have her properties after her death. It spells out in her will. Legally, you owe your brothers nothing. If your brothers know only to threaten you because of money, maybe it is not people worth dealing with. True, blood is blood. You choose your friends but not your family. But in times like this, my friends' counsel is what you should count on
24
I despise the term..."non profit" Everyone there makes a living, at the top of the dung heap- more so!
I owned and managed a business for 26 years... a few of them were "non profit"
I owned and managed a business for 26 years... a few of them were "non profit"
4
Just what is your complaint? Do you understand the legal meaning of non-profit? Do you understand that the term non-profit covers organizations that range from huge health care complexes with large amounts of money passing through, high executive salaries (although not necessarily even decent incomes for many employees), and possibly large amounts of assets to tiny organizations where all employees make almost nothing and may even need to visit food banks to feed their families. At some non-profits employees are scarcely more than volunteers. The OP says she makes $25,000 a year; that may be a living, but it's hardly a good one, so what's your point?
28
Then think of them as third sector. Not government not for-profit. Sheesh.
4
Karl's comment is not on point but there's no reason to beat him up about it. I understand where he is coming from, since I have also had many years in which I made nothing whereas friends who work for nonprofits made good livings and have nice pensions.
Why do I so often hear people say they work for a nonprofit? To solicit approval or sympathy or something similar? What if the nonprofit is the KKK or the Stormfront website? Does that make a difference?
Why do I so often hear people say they work for a nonprofit? To solicit approval or sympathy or something similar? What if the nonprofit is the KKK or the Stormfront website? Does that make a difference?
7
Regarding letter #1, though not pertaining exactly to this situation, readers might be interested to know of the Child Caregiver exemption to Medicare rules around the preservation of assets for a parent entering a nursing home. The exemption allows a child who has lived with the parent for at least two years prior to the start of nursing care, and whose presence in the home has prevented the parent from needing nursing care, to become the owner of the parent's house (i.e., rather than having the value of the house go toward the cost of the nursing home).
Taking care of an elderly parent can take a great toll on a caregiver's own health and career progression. The Caregiver Child Exemption can be a godsend for staying afloat financially and moving forward if and when the parent does enter a nursing facility.
Don't take this as legal advice, but I encourage anyone faced with caring for an elderly parent to speak with an eldercare lawyer to find the best way of managing assets and protecting your own interests. Having a supportive family helps, of course.
Taking care of an elderly parent can take a great toll on a caregiver's own health and career progression. The Caregiver Child Exemption can be a godsend for staying afloat financially and moving forward if and when the parent does enter a nursing facility.
Don't take this as legal advice, but I encourage anyone faced with caring for an elderly parent to speak with an eldercare lawyer to find the best way of managing assets and protecting your own interests. Having a supportive family helps, of course.
36
The LW did NOT live with the mother in the family home. She is VERY CLEAR here that she had her own residence, and lived "two miles away".
2
The Ethicist can only respond to the facts presented in the question. The brothers are free to submit a separate question for ethical advice. This situation shows clearly that a parent's will must address his/her wishes regarding all children if the estate will not be split equally. If a child is to inherit nothing, the will should say that; if one child inherits the lion's share of the estate, state that the other children's inheritance will drop to $1.00 if they contest the will. Silence is not the answer. A lawyer can advise how best to make one's wishes known through a will.
Lw2 - unless you are a medical professional, family member or close friend, mind your own business.
Lw2 - unless you are a medical professional, family member or close friend, mind your own business.
11
Thank you, Lynn -
"The Ethicist can only respond to the facts presented in the question. The brothers are free to submit a separate question for ethical advice."
And -
"...unless you are a medical professional, family member or close friend, mind your own business."
Two of the very best comments I've ever read in the Ethicist column -- where every week, there seem to be fewer and fewer letters which actually pertain to a question of "ethics"...
"The Ethicist can only respond to the facts presented in the question. The brothers are free to submit a separate question for ethical advice."
And -
"...unless you are a medical professional, family member or close friend, mind your own business."
Two of the very best comments I've ever read in the Ethicist column -- where every week, there seem to be fewer and fewer letters which actually pertain to a question of "ethics"...
10
My husband’s mom passed away this week, after a 14yr battle with Lupus which had her bed-ridden for most of that time. Her husband took care of her during her while he was alive, but when he suffered a heart attack and passed in 2014, Mom’s staying at home hinged on finding a caregiver, so she tendered the job to her daughter and DSHS agreed to contribute a wage for these caregiving services, but not before placing a lien on the property. This wage, along with accommodations at Mother’s house, put a stop to the couch-surfing cycle the daughter had been on since high-school. Mother wanted to live long enough to see her youngest son graduate from high school, and she did manage that, and a bit more: Daughter was able to move forward with her own personal life, go on dates, get pregnant, have a baby, break up, hook back up again and now get a second baby on the way. The relationship between daughter and mother was perceived by some as abusive, and I myself witnessed more than once a house filled with stench and void of food, and the verbal abuse which likely caused the youngest son to leave soon after graduation, which isn’t the same as “not caring”. My husband, who returned from Iraq a severely injured combat veteran, unable to care for himself, was also deemed uncaring. The will notarized last fall quizzically excludes the sons this woman loved and singles out the one beneficiary as “the caring one”. I do think an offer to mediate would be appropriate, kudos to you for trying
7
Thank you; you should never assume that someone's lack of ability to care for an elderly parent is deliberate neglect. Your husband was a disabled vet! some adult children live out of town, or have their own families to care for -- sick spouses, disabled children -- to assume "one child good, the other two BAD" is very unfair.
4
Children often rewrite history. There are very few who are not, in their own minds, loving, caring, attentive, self-sacrificing. The mom's Will is all that counts. She may have made her plan because she knew the LW was a delusional person who could not survive without help. Or, maybe she loved this child more. Who knows? The reality of it doesn't matter and can never be established unless there is some great day of judgment when all of us are revealed (which I scoff at, such an absurd concept).
10
My late father was an educated, articulate bully who, at home or in public, liked to embarrass me, my two younger sibs, and my mother (when they were still married), about, for instance, how dumb we looked or recounting some mishap or minor problem in our lives.
Eventually, when I was married and had a child, my husband and I had to stop seeing him after he started bullying our daughter, then only 7, until she cried.
After Dad died 15 years later, my brother (who was the executor) broke it to me that Dad had left 10% of his estate to me and the rest to him and our sister. I was surprised to be in the will at all, but thanks to the size of his estate, I was thrilled. I spent a large part of it paying off my daughter's huge student loans, which was especially sweet, because he thought my daughter's degree was in something "stupid."
As an amusing aside, after Mom died (four months before Dad died), Dad told my sister that he asked his lawyer if he could sue for Mom's entire estate, because it was mainly funded by their divorce settlement. My sister wasn't surprised to hear that Dad's lawyer thought he was joking.
Eventually, when I was married and had a child, my husband and I had to stop seeing him after he started bullying our daughter, then only 7, until she cried.
After Dad died 15 years later, my brother (who was the executor) broke it to me that Dad had left 10% of his estate to me and the rest to him and our sister. I was surprised to be in the will at all, but thanks to the size of his estate, I was thrilled. I spent a large part of it paying off my daughter's huge student loans, which was especially sweet, because he thought my daughter's degree was in something "stupid."
As an amusing aside, after Mom died (four months before Dad died), Dad told my sister that he asked his lawyer if he could sue for Mom's entire estate, because it was mainly funded by their divorce settlement. My sister wasn't surprised to hear that Dad's lawyer thought he was joking.
31
Your mother wanted you to have her house. It was her Will and it was the Way she wanted it to be. Enjoy.
52
The brothers (in the first letter) who want their mother's fortune may have felt not only guilt for not keeping in closer touch with their elderly mother, but could also have felt demeaned by her ignoring them in her will. These two distant brothers may not have been in regular contact with their mother, but the mother--the real villain in this case--should have been a little more cognizant of the dreadful effect her sweeping and dramatic, eternal, disposal of them would inspire in people not wise or forebearing enough to accept their mother's final rejection.
7
It's a bit much to call the mother "the real villain". And how melodramatic to speak of her "sweeping and dramatic, eternal, disposal of them". Do you know how they treated their mother? These brothers sound pretty awful in the way they're treating their sister, so who knows just how awful they may have been to their mother. Even if they had "only" been neglectful by not being in regular contact, the mother could have rightfully felt hurt and "disposed" of herself. What exactly do you think she should have done?
13
Good point. My comments are based on the experience of a late partner whose mother (he was an only child) left her house and her estate to her next door neighbor. The son was gay, past retirement age, lived the life of an artist, but never asked his mother for a thing. She lived in the UK, he in Canada; they rarely visited each other but were certainly
on speaking terms. Then in her 80s she got cancer, and apparently her next door neighbour was one of her major caregivers presumably, although my partner's mother was married at the time of her death to her 2nd husband. Her son however waited until she was on her deathbed before he went to see her, though she may had made her well beforehand. She never to my knowledge expressed her "eternal" displeasure at his apparent lack of caring. In short a long and complicated story of mother-love gone wrong, and the son in my view not entirely the villain of the piece.
on speaking terms. Then in her 80s she got cancer, and apparently her next door neighbour was one of her major caregivers presumably, although my partner's mother was married at the time of her death to her 2nd husband. Her son however waited until she was on her deathbed before he went to see her, though she may had made her well beforehand. She never to my knowledge expressed her "eternal" displeasure at his apparent lack of caring. In short a long and complicated story of mother-love gone wrong, and the son in my view not entirely the villain of the piece.
1
Do not give in to your brothers' emotional blackmail. Live the life your mother wanted you to live.
47
This happened to me. My mother left everything to my sister. My mother objected to my involvement with the theater among other such things. I was surprised and terribly hurt, but it was hers to give. I suggested that my sister do what I considered the right thing, but my sister said that our mother didn't want the funds to be split up...like the funds were siblings. Well, there was nothing to do but accept it. Then karma kicked in and my sister developed early onset Alzheimer's. All of the funds she inherited went to her care. I look at this and decided I would rather be me than her.
39
Why would it have been the "right" thing for your sister to give you part of your mother's estate?
3
I don't think phrases such as "A lawyer friend told me to ignore their threats..." and "My mother's lawyer who drew up the will, agreed with that advice" should pass muster in an article in the New York Times Magazine.
Also, gender imperviousness does not help. Is the inheriting child male or femaile?
Also, gender imperviousness does not help. Is the inheriting child male or femaile?
7
The letter writer describes herself as a widow. Hence, probably female.
I am surprised at how many people missed this.
I am surprised at how many people missed this.
10
Lillie, all the commenters assumes it's a daughter, even though the illustration shows three sons.
Why do they assume it's a daughter? You're right, this column leaves a lot to be desired.
Why do they assume it's a daughter? You're right, this column leaves a lot to be desired.
4
They assume it's a daughter because the letter writer describes herself as a widow. Breathe.
15
The daughter should keep the house and not worry about what her brothers think. It is not likely they can initiate a lawsuit. She is not on good terms with them, so giving them money and impoverishing herself will not improve their relationships. In cases like this, it is frequently the family members who did nothing to care for a frail parent who always have their hands out. Whatever their issues are, don't make them yours. I doubt they feel any guilt, just greed.
LW2- Write the professor a short email saying you noticed a big voice change and you hope it is nothing serious. He can act on it if he wants. A well-known actor's life was saved by a doctor's sending a note backstage saying that he most likely had a pituitary gland tumor which needed treatment. Others have had people mention moles that look dangerous. The prof may already know what the problem is and is receiving treatment or it is not something that can be fixed. It won't hurt to mention it.
LW2- Write the professor a short email saying you noticed a big voice change and you hope it is nothing serious. He can act on it if he wants. A well-known actor's life was saved by a doctor's sending a note backstage saying that he most likely had a pituitary gland tumor which needed treatment. Others have had people mention moles that look dangerous. The prof may already know what the problem is and is receiving treatment or it is not something that can be fixed. It won't hurt to mention it.
15
Regarding the house left to one child: we don't know why the mother wanted this. Maybe it had nothing to do with the daughter helping her. Maybe her sons earned good salaries and the mother felt her daughter needed the inheritance more. Maybe there were conflicts between the mother and her sons. We can only know facts. The will is a fact. If money isn't an issue for the brothers, perhaps the sister can make a different goodwill gesture, such as digitizing family photos and giving each brother a DVD with them.
16
Splitting an estate evenly only makes sense if the older brothers needed the money. It sounds like they don't. Compare to the younger sibling who earns $25,000 a year. The mom knew what she was doing.
18
What if the brothers have illnesses -- they or their spouses? what if they have disabled children? what if their businesses have failed and they are losing their own homes? what if they are as poor as the LW? She only says "they are retired" and in their late 60s. That does not make them wealthy.
2
One reason why Letter Writer 2 might be better off remaining anonymous is that the professor is still responsible for grading his or her work. Personal interactions of this sort might affect that grade, either positively or negatively, depending on the outcome. In academia, even more than in an office environment, relations between two participants, one of whom has power over the other, have to be managed exceedingly carefully. I would advise an anonymous note -- warm, gracious, and concerned, but unsigned.
6
The prof. has power over the LW. Therefore, it is wisest to stay out of it completely until LW has completed all coursework with the prof.
4
I would advise the widow with the two older brothers to stick to the clear intent of her mother's will and not give in to her brothers' demands. I would also advise her to have an attorney send her brothers a "cease and desist" letter. She owes her brothers nothing!
My opinion is influenced by the behavior of my oldest brother after our parents died. He was the oldest of four siblings, three men and one woman. Oldest brother stole securities that my parents had in their safe deposit box and wanted to sell them privately; the executor of the estate threatened him with arrest if he didn't return the securities. Our mother willed all of her jewelry to our sister, her only daughter. Oldest brother took the jewelry and had it appraised, demanding that the value of the jewelry be deducted from her share of the rest of the estate. The executor of the estate again had to threaten him with arrest before he sent the jewelry to our sister. Only the threats of arrest for felony theft stopped oldest brother's behavior. But his behavior was a life long pattern of bullying and demands so his actions were expected.
None of his siblings had any further contact with oldest brother after these occurrences and we're thankful for it. As the Ethicist stated, losing any further contact with her brothers is the best option.
Finally, the widow should make her own will to ensure that the brothers continue to receive what their mother intended: nothing!
My opinion is influenced by the behavior of my oldest brother after our parents died. He was the oldest of four siblings, three men and one woman. Oldest brother stole securities that my parents had in their safe deposit box and wanted to sell them privately; the executor of the estate threatened him with arrest if he didn't return the securities. Our mother willed all of her jewelry to our sister, her only daughter. Oldest brother took the jewelry and had it appraised, demanding that the value of the jewelry be deducted from her share of the rest of the estate. The executor of the estate again had to threaten him with arrest before he sent the jewelry to our sister. Only the threats of arrest for felony theft stopped oldest brother's behavior. But his behavior was a life long pattern of bullying and demands so his actions were expected.
None of his siblings had any further contact with oldest brother after these occurrences and we're thankful for it. As the Ethicist stated, losing any further contact with her brothers is the best option.
Finally, the widow should make her own will to ensure that the brothers continue to receive what their mother intended: nothing!
40
As to the first letter writer, the house was her mother's, to do with as she pleased, and she chose to leave it to the letter writer. If there had been any basis for a claim of incompetency or undue influence the brothers would likely have raised it by now. All the other facts are irrelevant -- the letter writer should honor her mother's wishes and enjoy the house.
As to the second letter writer, if he or she is confident that there is a reasonable basis for concern I would encourage a telephone call to the professor. A text or email, whether or not anonymous, is a terrible medium for this kind of message; in a call he or she can adjust the message to respond to the professor's reaction in a way that is not possible in a text or email.
As to the second letter writer, if he or she is confident that there is a reasonable basis for concern I would encourage a telephone call to the professor. A text or email, whether or not anonymous, is a terrible medium for this kind of message; in a call he or she can adjust the message to respond to the professor's reaction in a way that is not possible in a text or email.
3
Joel: the sister has every right to keep everything she was left in the will -- indeed, she tells us the will passed probate and everything was transferred in her name. It is a done deal.
However, the PRICE OF THIS is that her brothers will now never speak to her again. All parties are in their SIXTIES -- senior citizens -- they don't have the time to spat and make up. It means permanent estrangement.
If the brothers have children, the LW has also cut herself off from nieces and nephews -- future weddings, baby showers, even funerals -- so that is the price of keeping a million dollar house all for yourself and not sharing.
I hope all the money makes her happy when she is totally alone (she tells us she is a childless widow!).
However, the PRICE OF THIS is that her brothers will now never speak to her again. All parties are in their SIXTIES -- senior citizens -- they don't have the time to spat and make up. It means permanent estrangement.
If the brothers have children, the LW has also cut herself off from nieces and nephews -- future weddings, baby showers, even funerals -- so that is the price of keeping a million dollar house all for yourself and not sharing.
I hope all the money makes her happy when she is totally alone (she tells us she is a childless widow!).
Like many others, I've witnessed this in my own family. The difference is that I gave in. It didn't make any difference. My difficult sibling got everything she wanted and she still cares nothing for me. I took care of my mom and I should have stood firm.
29
I witnessed this in my own family even though what my mother left was a mere pittance. My brothers turned into enormous jerks when the will was disclosed and the meager trust was to be settled; even though they knew about the will/trust and had 10 years to amend it. I later surmised part of their anger (etc.) came from guilt -- letting my sister and me do the heavy lifting of caring for our mother. It's safer to get angry than to really face the ways you may have let down a parent. I also believe that any unfinished emotional business will come out when a parent dies. So communicating clearly about everything up front is best.
51
As regards the first letter about the house inherited by one adult child: I don't think it is responsible to print a letter such as this one when there is no verification of facts. There are a lot of unreliable narrators out there.
For example, did the two older brothers contribute to their mother's expenses? None of this is mentioned. Love Mr. Appaih, but this letter should have been left in the pile.
For example, did the two older brothers contribute to their mother's expenses? None of this is mentioned. Love Mr. Appaih, but this letter should have been left in the pile.
8
What do the facts matter? That's not a comment on our political climate, but on the impact of this column. Whether told accurately or entirely made up, Appiah assesses it as the situation is presented. We read the situation as it is presented. He could have done with asking some more questions for thought though (e.g. what was mother/sons relationship, sons' financial status, etc.) to bracket his response a bit/give it context.
29
It is true that the contents of the letter cannot be verified and are not presented by a neutral third party but by one of the participants in the events. So are many of the letters Appiah uses. Yes, there is incomplete information--not least because the letters and responses must conform to the word limit of the column. The brothers may not partially or wholly resemble their depiction by the letter writer. But even so, the letter and Appiah's answer are quite relevant and generate a plethora of opinions and discussion, as evidenced in the roughly 140 comments to date.
2
Interesting comment, Lillie. However, this is a very common problem. My married brother lives 15 minutes from my mother. I moved in with her 5 years ago, thinking it would be much shorter term. In every meantime, my father passed away. In those 5 years, neither my brother nor his stay-at-home wife and adult daughter have EVER showed up with a sandwich from Arby's...let alone invite her for a holiday meal. I invited him over to discuss opportunities for him and his family to help with her social activities...and was told "you live here. That's your problem." He had the gall to say that in front of her. Without skipping a beat, went on to inform me that "everything in the house will be sold and split 50/50". Mind you, she's nowhere near dead. So I'm inclined to not doubt this woman's story, having gone through one very similar.
31
Play it tough, if you must,
Our wicked, compulsive gsmbler of a stepfather claimed a third of our mother's estate when she died suddenly in her earky forties in a hospital. Since we were all minors, our relatives moved in and took over when our stepfather refused to relinquish his one-third rights to her.estate. They persuaded my sister to file sex predator charges against him and he wound up in a holding cell where he reluctantly signed over his rights to the estate and was released.
All I'm suggesting here is that these two women generously offered to share with her brothers. In many other cases, the parties start playing hard balls. And then it's anything goes to win.
Our wicked, compulsive gsmbler of a stepfather claimed a third of our mother's estate when she died suddenly in her earky forties in a hospital. Since we were all minors, our relatives moved in and took over when our stepfather refused to relinquish his one-third rights to her.estate. They persuaded my sister to file sex predator charges against him and he wound up in a holding cell where he reluctantly signed over his rights to the estate and was released.
All I'm suggesting here is that these two women generously offered to share with her brothers. In many other cases, the parties start playing hard balls. And then it's anything goes to win.
Were the sex predator charges made up? Given that he was released, it sounds like they were. Definitely not ethical.
You say that your stepfather "claimed a third of her estate", and that he later "signed over his rights to the estate". Did he legitimately have rights to the estate? Was there a will granting a third of the estate to him? Did she die intestate and he was therefore entitled to a third of the estate? From the details you give, it sounds like you all ganged up on him, with trumped-up charges to take what was legitimately his (his personality aside).
You say that your stepfather "claimed a third of her estate", and that he later "signed over his rights to the estate". Did he legitimately have rights to the estate? Was there a will granting a third of the estate to him? Did she die intestate and he was therefore entitled to a third of the estate? From the details you give, it sounds like you all ganged up on him, with trumped-up charges to take what was legitimately his (his personality aside).
15
Isn't the first letter basically the plot of King Lear?
5
How so? The mother didn't reject the good child.
2
isn't life basically a plot from King Lear? Isn't that the reason Shakespeare is so celebrated?
14
1) I agree with Appiah for a change.
2) Tell the person. (Sorry if this has been mentioned, but a nurse who watched Tarek el Moussa on HGTV, Flip or Flop, noticed something about his neck. She got in touch with his producers who told him about the nurse. He went to a doctor and learned he had thyroid cancer. Got treatment. Many articles about it online.)
2) Tell the person. (Sorry if this has been mentioned, but a nurse who watched Tarek el Moussa on HGTV, Flip or Flop, noticed something about his neck. She got in touch with his producers who told him about the nurse. He went to a doctor and learned he had thyroid cancer. Got treatment. Many articles about it online.)
13
Re: Having Mom or Dad explain to the disowned children why....
I'm sorry but that's not a great idea either.
Similar situation in my neighbor's family. 80+ year old Dad tried to manipulate his adult children by variously disowning one or the other. Dad wanted free run of everyone's house all the time. Expected to be entertained whenever he showed up. Wanted approval for his 19 and 20 year old girlfriends, one of whom shoved him down a flight of stairs because he wouldn't "loan" her his credit card.
It was nothing but manipulation on their selfish Dad's part and, even when manipulation isn't the issue, adult children who want their "fair share" while someone else does all the work will see it that way.
I'm sorry but that's not a great idea either.
Similar situation in my neighbor's family. 80+ year old Dad tried to manipulate his adult children by variously disowning one or the other. Dad wanted free run of everyone's house all the time. Expected to be entertained whenever he showed up. Wanted approval for his 19 and 20 year old girlfriends, one of whom shoved him down a flight of stairs because he wouldn't "loan" her his credit card.
It was nothing but manipulation on their selfish Dad's part and, even when manipulation isn't the issue, adult children who want their "fair share" while someone else does all the work will see it that way.
6
Regarding the will, we can't begin to comprehend all the family dynamics by reading an account from one party. Still, it seems clear that the mother intended to leave the house to her daughter, for whatever good, or not good reason. We also have no information about what the sons may have done for their mother over the years. Keep in mind the perception of such things, years later, does not always reflect reality. I am fairly certain that logs of work done were not kept, nor were any time clocks punched.
The property must be very valuable, or the brothers surely would not be demanding several hundred thousand dollars. It is entirely possible that the elderly woman had no conception of what her home was worth, even if she seemed to be " totally with it" in every other way.
The fact that the daughter has unfortunately ended up in poverty is completely unrelated. She paints herself as a virtuous and self-sacrificing saint, which is a little suspicious in this context, as other have noted.
The will, however, is valid and it seems extremely unlikely the family rift will ever heal. The daughter should enjoy her windfall. Parents or others intending to disinherit certain family members should have a family meeting and discussion about it, if at all possible.
My other suggestion, as noted by others, is that no one should plan their lives around an inheritance.
The property must be very valuable, or the brothers surely would not be demanding several hundred thousand dollars. It is entirely possible that the elderly woman had no conception of what her home was worth, even if she seemed to be " totally with it" in every other way.
The fact that the daughter has unfortunately ended up in poverty is completely unrelated. She paints herself as a virtuous and self-sacrificing saint, which is a little suspicious in this context, as other have noted.
The will, however, is valid and it seems extremely unlikely the family rift will ever heal. The daughter should enjoy her windfall. Parents or others intending to disinherit certain family members should have a family meeting and discussion about it, if at all possible.
My other suggestion, as noted by others, is that no one should plan their lives around an inheritance.
21
Well noted having recently come out of the battlefield where war was declared when my mother and her companion of forty years married. It was a love match. The inherited family that came with it was up in arms. Quietly. Her spouse thought his young relatives a bit dumb, my sibling and I were 'The Americans', the interlopers and years later they sued, it was impossible not to laugh because we had apparently taken off with the silver and furniture. It had all the ingredients for a Vanity Fair article.
There were four of us in this division of the spoils and I played the role of peacekeeper, the poor one who took up humanitarian causes. It was like being in a Balzac novel, and you would have thought that my mother, now a widow, was Madame Rockefeller.
It is quite astonishing how Christian and greedy we can be on these occasions, and I am going to take the author of this estate matter at her word by telling her to proceed with caution.
To my knowledge, any Will can be contested in a court of law and when a friend here in America told me that her mother who she loved had left her the house, her married sibling sued. Honest, forthright, a woman who has yet to take a shortcut in her life, bright and thoughtful, it nearly ended in heartbreak, out on the street without shelter.
There are many such stories. Have the lawyer friend and mother's lawyer 'fine-comb' this legal document and less is best when addressing the siblings, until safe to come out of the cold.
There were four of us in this division of the spoils and I played the role of peacekeeper, the poor one who took up humanitarian causes. It was like being in a Balzac novel, and you would have thought that my mother, now a widow, was Madame Rockefeller.
It is quite astonishing how Christian and greedy we can be on these occasions, and I am going to take the author of this estate matter at her word by telling her to proceed with caution.
To my knowledge, any Will can be contested in a court of law and when a friend here in America told me that her mother who she loved had left her the house, her married sibling sued. Honest, forthright, a woman who has yet to take a shortcut in her life, bright and thoughtful, it nearly ended in heartbreak, out on the street without shelter.
There are many such stories. Have the lawyer friend and mother's lawyer 'fine-comb' this legal document and less is best when addressing the siblings, until safe to come out of the cold.
5
Outstanding advice!
The brothers turned down the one third value of the house, so I assume they want compensation for the travel and other money spent on the 'helpful' (or not) daughter.
The brothers turned down the one third value of the house, so I assume they want compensation for the travel and other money spent on the 'helpful' (or not) daughter.
1
@Miss Ley:
"Christian and greedy" says it perfectly.
"Division of spoils" is right. Greed, and self-righteous hypocrisy are at the core of such intra-family disputes. I was a victim of it myself.
Love is almost impossible to find in this world. I envy your parents.
"Christian and greedy" says it perfectly.
"Division of spoils" is right. Greed, and self-righteous hypocrisy are at the core of such intra-family disputes. I was a victim of it myself.
Love is almost impossible to find in this world. I envy your parents.
3
I have listened to hundreds, maybe a thousand of elderly clients struggle with the ethics of an estate division. The living are too motivated by their own concerns to see the viewpoint of their departed. This is why the law asks for nothing more than competency and a voluntary act to honor a will.
20
I have had my own experience. My mother was a widow and lived to age 91. She had placed all of her 7 adult children on the deed of trust to her modest home which was debt free. After mom died we siblings & spouses agreed that the property should be sold with the proceeds divided equally. Sounds like it should have worked out, right? Nope.
One brother, a real estate agent, agreed to list the house & handle the documents. It was fine with all. Once the property sold he asked for a fee based upon the prevailing realtor fees at the time. I couldn't accept that & expressed my annoyance that he was "charging" for his services. All but this brother had for decades provided mom with major improvements & maintenance of her house. We bought all the materials and provided labor. My husband & two other brothers were professional contractors. It never occurred to us to charge mom for the labor or materials. The realtor brother never helped as he had no skills in construction nor did he offer to contribute to the cost of materials.
Without further argument the majority voiced their support to pay our brother his realtor fees. We did. Moral of the story: Do what's best to keep the peace in the family.
One brother, a real estate agent, agreed to list the house & handle the documents. It was fine with all. Once the property sold he asked for a fee based upon the prevailing realtor fees at the time. I couldn't accept that & expressed my annoyance that he was "charging" for his services. All but this brother had for decades provided mom with major improvements & maintenance of her house. We bought all the materials and provided labor. My husband & two other brothers were professional contractors. It never occurred to us to charge mom for the labor or materials. The realtor brother never helped as he had no skills in construction nor did he offer to contribute to the cost of materials.
Without further argument the majority voiced their support to pay our brother his realtor fees. We did. Moral of the story: Do what's best to keep the peace in the family.
3
Regarding the writer whose mother left her house to only the writer: live in the house and enjoy it. It sounds as if your mother was of sound mind and knew what she wanted. My ex and I, who are amicable, have a similar situation in our future. We have 4 children, all grown and launched. My ex has a small house in a nice neighborhood. It needs some repairs, but it's paid for. We've discussed it and agree that when he dies, he will leave it to the adult child who has helped him out the most, not to be sold with the proceeds evenly divided amongst the 4, but for that son to either live in or sell to buy something else. We've decided this because 2 of our other children already have their own houses, and the third is making enough to be able to get a mortgage to buy a house. The son who will inherit the house is a paramedic. He's great at what he does, but the fact is he'll never make enough money working as a paramedic to buy a house of his own. We've discussed this with the three who are doing OK financially, and they're fine with it. Hopefully, they'll still be fine with it after we're gone.
39
kudos to you and your ex, sounds like you have raised well adjusted kids.
6
It it is hard for me to take this at face value like the writer did. My brother told all his friends he took care of our mother at the end. The rest of us viewed it as he was closest and took advantage of her and used her. We all thought it was almost elder abuse. Luckily, my mother left things equally among her kids.
Another friend was with his mom when she drew up her will. She loved him the best even though he did not live near her. She left everything to him. When he saw this, he told her that was not fair to his 2 brothers and over time she split things equally among her 3 boys.
So I don't buy all I read here at face value. Many more questions have to be asked.
Another friend was with his mom when she drew up her will. She loved him the best even though he did not live near her. She left everything to him. When he saw this, he told her that was not fair to his 2 brothers and over time she split things equally among her 3 boys.
So I don't buy all I read here at face value. Many more questions have to be asked.
12
LW1, it appears your mother made decisions legally and by what she thought was right. Your brothers may be experiencing hurt (not related to financial) as a result of being excluded. Unfortunately, that cannot be fixed by you.
14
I am curious - what of the letter writer's father? Presumably he died before the mother did. What were his wishes? Did he tell the sons that he was planning to leave the estate to them? Did the mother surprise them by changing her will so that she disinherited the sons? If so, I can understand why they're angry. But the will is the will, and the daughter is the heir - there's nothing to be done. And if we can believe that she took care of the mother, she has nothing to feel guilty about. The brothers, meanwhile, can blame the mother.
3
It is best never to ignore a threat. it seldom goes away. In this context, look at your siblings as 'strangers' and start looking for a judge. Friends are protective but can be the unwitting cause of confusion when you are in need of objective and impartial guidance and counsel on these estate matters.
Wishing you peace of mind.
Wishing you peace of mind.
2
How about she first lets things cool down and tries to reconcile instead of treating family as strangers and getting a judge? What is a judge going to do for her anyway? There's no legal problem. This is a family problem.
2
Miss Ley: there is no legal issue here whatsoever, and no judge will intervene.
She states that the "will passed probate" (she held her breath, she says) and everything transferred to her, and she is now LIVING in the mother's house and fixing it up (despite saying earlier that she did repairs for her mom, and that her mom spent "a lot on fixing the house up").
So it is OVER. There is nothing left to dispute. The brothers are simply ASKING their sister to do the honorable thing, and share something with them. My guess is that will not happen; the greedhead has taken everything and greedheads do not share.
She states that the "will passed probate" (she held her breath, she says) and everything transferred to her, and she is now LIVING in the mother's house and fixing it up (despite saying earlier that she did repairs for her mom, and that her mom spent "a lot on fixing the house up").
So it is OVER. There is nothing left to dispute. The brothers are simply ASKING their sister to do the honorable thing, and share something with them. My guess is that will not happen; the greedhead has taken everything and greedheads do not share.
My beautiful young husband died when our children were 9 and 12 years old. He was a devoted loyal son and brother to a sister who never left her parents home. While he was alive, we went there nearly every week to visit. My sister in law never paid rent, never did anything for them. I continued to take my children every month to see their paternal grandparents. Going to that home was heartbreaking for me, I missed my husband so much. After my father in law died several years later (at a ripe age) my mother in law started to display symptoms of mental decline. To make a long story short, my sister in law, who was still there in the house, their only substantial asset, got my mother in law and some lawyer to put her name on the title to the house. You know what happened next... my mother in law died and while my mother in law had told me she had provided for her only grandchildren (my sister in law is a mentally ill hoarder and never married) the grandchildren ended up getting NOTHING, because there were no assets to fund an estate! Not a dime. In fact, my sister in law lives in that house to this day and has possession of my husband's childhood mementos.. items his CHILDREN should have, not his sister. Your advice is wrong ethicist, this sister can right the wrong of her mother - those brothers deserve something. And her mother and the lawyer were wrong to write a will that didn't include them and leave them bitter at the end of their lives. Period.
6
When his mother died, my husband's sister-in-law entered the house with his brother and announced she "took what [she] wanted." Twenty years later, my husband decided he wanted the now valuable first edition children's books his aunt had given him for his late life new grandaughter. "Ohhh! Those books bought my daughter's house! You weren't anywhere around," his sister-in-law said. His brother had his own copies. Turns out their son shared them on Antiques Roadshow and sold them. This will always be an unspoken memory between my children and their cousins.
Moral: If a house is explored by a single family member, request a list of its contents and determine if anything will be kept in trust or sold for a profit. Our daughter got no house down payment, and our grandaughter got no books. People you trust can come up with unexpected excuses.
Moral: If a house is explored by a single family member, request a list of its contents and determine if anything will be kept in trust or sold for a profit. Our daughter got no house down payment, and our grandaughter got no books. People you trust can come up with unexpected excuses.
9
THANK YOU. It is shocking how many people believe the sister's self-serving story or think it is OK to cut TWO of your children out of your will!
1
I'm surprised by the 'greedy' responses that others have left. Life is difficult but 'do unto others as you would have done unto you' should allow for open dialogue.
1
How would LW #1 be left destitute if she shares the estate? She's working. Not a great income, but an income.
For those who are shaming her - perhaps Professor Appiah could encourage the LW to encourage her brothers to write in, in the comments section.
Yes, fail on the illustration. The larger character should be female.
For those who are shaming her - perhaps Professor Appiah could encourage the LW to encourage her brothers to write in, in the comments section.
Yes, fail on the illustration. The larger character should be female.
5
The most telling phrase in the letter is "my mother was critical and difficult." That's a good enough reason for the sons to have kept their distance, and a good enough reason for the author of the letter to try to make peace with her brothers now that she's gone. I'm sure they've all suffered enough.
This is some lousy advice, coupled with a boatload of assumptions that somehow it would cause more a problem in this family if this woman gave her brothers something than if she gave them nothing. What?
Problems almost always happen when heirs are taken by surprise by the will. Before you die, if your estate will be divided up unevenly, let your children know what is in your will and why. I've seen this kind of debacle happen twice in my own extended family. If you have any interest in keeping your family together after you die, don't leave behind any shocking surprises. I'm surprised someone who calls himself The Ethicist wouldn't take this as a teaching moment on how to keep your family intact after you're gone.
By the way, the will is very simple to undo. Simply do the right thing and give your siblings at least some things of sentimental value to them. Yes, the brothers are acting like jerks, but it's more important to clear your own conscience than to take a defiant stance against family in order to conform to the letter of the will of a mean-spirited person.
This is some lousy advice, coupled with a boatload of assumptions that somehow it would cause more a problem in this family if this woman gave her brothers something than if she gave them nothing. What?
Problems almost always happen when heirs are taken by surprise by the will. Before you die, if your estate will be divided up unevenly, let your children know what is in your will and why. I've seen this kind of debacle happen twice in my own extended family. If you have any interest in keeping your family together after you die, don't leave behind any shocking surprises. I'm surprised someone who calls himself The Ethicist wouldn't take this as a teaching moment on how to keep your family intact after you're gone.
By the way, the will is very simple to undo. Simply do the right thing and give your siblings at least some things of sentimental value to them. Yes, the brothers are acting like jerks, but it's more important to clear your own conscience than to take a defiant stance against family in order to conform to the letter of the will of a mean-spirited person.
8
The brothers may have kept their distance because the mother was critical and difficult, but if the letter writer is being honest in what she says, the brothers sound pretty horrible themselves. Everyone seems to be overlooking the fact that they sent her a letter accusing her of "theft, coercion, emotional blackmail, mismanaging my mother’s funds and using my ill health as a way to bilk her of money." Pretty nasty accusations, especially considering that if the letter writer really were the kind of greedy person who used coercion, etc., to benefit at her brothers' expense, it's unlikely she would be concerned enough about the situation to write an advice columnist asking if she should sell the house and split the money with the brothers who won't even respond to her requests.
8
To LW #2 - I'd suggest that an email is not a creepy way to broach this subject, but instead a way for you to raise the issue without putting your advisor on the spot. It permits you to think carefully about the phrasing, and to include samples from the old and the new videos. You could even specify that you don't expect him to respond to you, due to the private nature of his health, and thus give him an out. In this way he could ponder what you've said, view the videos himself, and either thank you or tell you it's covered, or remain entirely silent and handle it without ever discussing it with you.
5
I don't understand how inheritance-daughter would be wiped out if she shares her mother's estate. Isn't she already on the lower financial end of the middle class?
2
Inheritance daughter is just greedy; she has clearly planned for many years to trick mom into giving her the very valuable house (apparently worth $1 million or more!) and all the cash, furnishings, assets, car.
Clearly in the mom's lifetime, the daughter maintained her own home -- "she lives 2 miles away" -- and has a job, which pays $25K (not a lot, but livable in some areas) -- and she has mooched off mom for many years, taking vacations that mom pays for and driving that Prius (mom had to have been in her late 80s!).
I'd be mad too if my scheming sibling took the entire parental estate, leaving me with NOTHING.
Clearly in the mom's lifetime, the daughter maintained her own home -- "she lives 2 miles away" -- and has a job, which pays $25K (not a lot, but livable in some areas) -- and she has mooched off mom for many years, taking vacations that mom pays for and driving that Prius (mom had to have been in her late 80s!).
I'd be mad too if my scheming sibling took the entire parental estate, leaving me with NOTHING.
1
Are the brothers Trumps??? Extreme jerks. They would not be happy if you gave them every penny. Please, don't give them anything. And, good riddance.
36
I'm surprised that Mr. Appiah took the first letter's author so quickly and totally at face value. She strikes me as posturing as the noble child and victim a bit too much. These types of family dynamics are rarely as one-sided as she depicts. She seems adept at depicting her siblings as monsters, an image she may have been insidiously promoting to her mother all those years for her personal gain. Of course she encouraged her mom to spend her money on trips that included her!
Some parents continue to punish their children all of their lives and often use inheritance as their their final and most painful way to reject their children for the indignation (real or perceived) that they feel or have been convinced of by another relative or child.
Name Withheld could very well be a passive aggressive who manipulated her mother's emotions, and ultimately her behavior, for her own gain.
Some parents continue to punish their children all of their lives and often use inheritance as their their final and most painful way to reject their children for the indignation (real or perceived) that they feel or have been convinced of by another relative or child.
Name Withheld could very well be a passive aggressive who manipulated her mother's emotions, and ultimately her behavior, for her own gain.
24
Or, like in many cultures, the burden of taking care of parents falls on the daughters, and the sons are free to live their own lives, which they apparently did.
203
@ND:
"These types of family dynamics are rarely as one-sided as she depicts. She seems adept at depicting her siblings as monsters ... ".
You obviously haven't had much experience with toxic family dynamics.
In the college town where I lived in many years ago my favorite bar became a kind of Gettysburg during Thanksgiving and Christmas week, the scene many pitched battles, two, even three per night; Saturday the worst. And I never recognized any of the combatants. The usual patrons were a sedate crowd, so I found these outbreaks of violence among strangers a bit of a head-scratcher.
But bartenders are psychology students, astute judges of character and human behavior. My friend-the-bartender Adam gave me thevskinny, clued me in on the underlying dynamic: "all in the family". Paraphrasing what he told me:
"Adult children living separate lives in the Bay Area return during Thanksgiving and Christmas to attend the family dinner just to please their elderly parents. But they thoroughly detest each other, so inside their parents' home the best they can manage is a temporary truce. Later, they show up here already drunk, order more alcohol and lose their inhibitions. The truce dissolves. All the old hurts, anger and resentments resurface. Conversations get loud, then heated, become insult-laced arguments until, finally, the most intoxicated sibling throws a glass, punch or chair and we're off to the races."
That's what he told me. I watched it happen year-after-year.
"These types of family dynamics are rarely as one-sided as she depicts. She seems adept at depicting her siblings as monsters ... ".
You obviously haven't had much experience with toxic family dynamics.
In the college town where I lived in many years ago my favorite bar became a kind of Gettysburg during Thanksgiving and Christmas week, the scene many pitched battles, two, even three per night; Saturday the worst. And I never recognized any of the combatants. The usual patrons were a sedate crowd, so I found these outbreaks of violence among strangers a bit of a head-scratcher.
But bartenders are psychology students, astute judges of character and human behavior. My friend-the-bartender Adam gave me thevskinny, clued me in on the underlying dynamic: "all in the family". Paraphrasing what he told me:
"Adult children living separate lives in the Bay Area return during Thanksgiving and Christmas to attend the family dinner just to please their elderly parents. But they thoroughly detest each other, so inside their parents' home the best they can manage is a temporary truce. Later, they show up here already drunk, order more alcohol and lose their inhibitions. The truce dissolves. All the old hurts, anger and resentments resurface. Conversations get loud, then heated, become insult-laced arguments until, finally, the most intoxicated sibling throws a glass, punch or chair and we're off to the races."
That's what he told me. I watched it happen year-after-year.
7
It's true that anyone writing in could slant the way an issue is described to show themselves in the best light. But what makes you an expert in knowing the story of her family, you have concocted your own story that is based on your own projections. She is a liar, her mother was manipulator and her brothers are victims (according to you).
I just want you to realize that you have no idea whether that is truthful. The woman could be giving an honest accounting. Please don't believe in every story you make up.
I just want you to realize that you have no idea whether that is truthful. The woman could be giving an honest accounting. Please don't believe in every story you make up.
15
To the LW 1 who inherited the house. Your mom drew up a legal document. For whatever reason she left the house to you. You owe your siblings nothing, especially in light of how they are now behaving by accusing you. Were they there to take care of your mom? Hardly. Obviously your mom knew of your finances and was trying to help you. Your friend is right: Your siblings are not worth living in poverty especially as you took care of your parents in their end stages of life. The right thing is to accept the gift and ignore the carping. You did nothing wrong and they have no right to demand anything.
103
Your mother likely chose to give her estate to the person who helped her and didn't have much money of her own. Reasonable people should live their lives as if they will never get an inheritance. I'm sorry your greedy siblings never realized that.
I agree that money is not going to fix your relationship with them, so don't bother.
I agree that money is not going to fix your relationship with them, so don't bother.
141
This is perfect advice: "Reasonable people should live their lives as if they will never get an inheritance."
7
Virtually impossible to undo the Will, especially if your Mom was of sound mind. Appears you were the one responsible for her care. The home is yours, enjoy it.
67
I know this might be nitpicking, but the illustration seems to show 3 brothers; the letter clearly states the writer is a widow.
50
You're right. It is.
4
I wish there were more clarity about this.
To the first letter writer, you have my sympathy. You have a lot on your plate and don't need all of that stress from your brothers.
I say you should follow the law. Abide by your mother's Will & Testament and also her personal wishes. It is very difficult cutting family members out of one's life but if you have to sever all ties, so be it.
Very best of luck to you.
I say you should follow the law. Abide by your mother's Will & Testament and also her personal wishes. It is very difficult cutting family members out of one's life but if you have to sever all ties, so be it.
Very best of luck to you.
42
To the Daughter who Inherited her mother's house:
Whew! Your brothers sound like died-in-the-wool bullies. You took solo care of a difficult mother, fixing up her house, taking her to all her appointments, etc. In gratitude, she left you her house. Enjoy it. The one thing I know about bullies is that giving into them is never enough. They will just become more outrageous in their demands. Hold firm, and they may even grow to respect you. Or not, but who cares? Build a good life for yourself, and forget about them. You are obviously a kind, warm person who can easily make many friends.
Whew! Your brothers sound like died-in-the-wool bullies. You took solo care of a difficult mother, fixing up her house, taking her to all her appointments, etc. In gratitude, she left you her house. Enjoy it. The one thing I know about bullies is that giving into them is never enough. They will just become more outrageous in their demands. Hold firm, and they may even grow to respect you. Or not, but who cares? Build a good life for yourself, and forget about them. You are obviously a kind, warm person who can easily make many friends.
67
If the writer of the letter is female (she says she's a widow), why is the illustration of a man and his two brothers?
45
Wow. Can't pull the wool over your eyes!
1
I'm sure it is painful but the brothers aren't worth fretting over. To paraphrase Carly Simon -- you haven't got time for the pain. Live your life and forget them.
39
One side of the story is exactly that. Forming opinions based on one side is fool hardy.
9
That is the basis of this column. A letter is written from one point of view.If you d like the format, why comment?
6
One side is only that, however the one side we heard has the weight of the law behind it, forming legal opinions based on fact only requires the side we are seeing. Probate has passed and the other two siblings likely know they have virtually no chance of a successful legal action.
8
Give them nothing. They deserve nothing.
42
The person responsible for the current discord with your brothers is your mother. What was she thinking (or was she) when she left you everything and denied your brothers anything? I can assure you, your brothers aren't hurt due to the money (which doesn't sound like too much) but the total rejection by their own mother. I couldn't disagree more with the ethicist on this issue. It appears quite clearly your mother favored you as an attempt to assuage her guilt for your ill health, which I note you do not expand on.
The ethicist would have no argument even if all things were equal; which they obviously weren't. We aren't privileged to hear from your brothers; whom I guess would have a very different story to tell.
My response would be for you to apply a reasonable local wage for a caretaker, for the time (portion of day x days x weeks) you, in fact, spent engaged in care taking, until her death. Apply this value against the appraised current value of her estate, and divide the remainder equally amongst the three of you. THAT would be fair to all of you. And you will be reimbursed for the time you cared for her. This would also remove the stigma of deviousness your brothers are accusing you of.
I don't buy the other letter writers claims of your brothers being jerks. I suggest both you and they stand in your brothers shoes.
The ethicist would have no argument even if all things were equal; which they obviously weren't. We aren't privileged to hear from your brothers; whom I guess would have a very different story to tell.
My response would be for you to apply a reasonable local wage for a caretaker, for the time (portion of day x days x weeks) you, in fact, spent engaged in care taking, until her death. Apply this value against the appraised current value of her estate, and divide the remainder equally amongst the three of you. THAT would be fair to all of you. And you will be reimbursed for the time you cared for her. This would also remove the stigma of deviousness your brothers are accusing you of.
I don't buy the other letter writers claims of your brothers being jerks. I suggest both you and they stand in your brothers shoes.
10
"The person responsible for the current discord with your brothers is your mother."
Exactly. So why are you putting the onus on LW1 to fix that? The mother wrote the will she wanted, as was her right. The sons, and childen in general, need to stop feeling entitled to their parent's estates. In addition, by emotionally bullying the LW, the brothers are showing why the mother didn't leave them anything.
Exactly. So why are you putting the onus on LW1 to fix that? The mother wrote the will she wanted, as was her right. The sons, and childen in general, need to stop feeling entitled to their parent's estates. In addition, by emotionally bullying the LW, the brothers are showing why the mother didn't leave them anything.
8
"We aren't privileged to hear from your brothers; whom I guess would have a very different story to tell."
Maybe they'll write in.
Maybe they'll write in.
2
Something a man would say...
4
Writer #1 sounds like a very selfless individual. Keeping the house may be the first big thing ever done for oneself, and so it may feel uncomfortable acting in one's best interest. But really TRY. to do what is best for yourself.
brothers such as these will not be helpful if the sale of the home and distribution of the proceeds leaves this person homeless and destitute someday.
It is also well within the person's right to sell the home, move to a cheaper home, and keep the entirety of the proceeds.
brothers such as these will not be helpful if the sale of the home and distribution of the proceeds leaves this person homeless and destitute someday.
It is also well within the person's right to sell the home, move to a cheaper home, and keep the entirety of the proceeds.
30
Surely somewhere between "a million dollar house" and "destitute on the streets" is something realistic!
The LW never says she is poor or destitute -- she has a job -- she's a widow, so likely had life insurance or an inheritance from her husband -- is old enough to be getting Social Security.
Also the mother's estate clearly included cash, the furnishings of the house and the new Prius -- so even if the house was divided more fairly, it is likely the LW would be doing fine. She did not live with her mother, but "2 miles away" so she clearly had a house or apartment prior to this.
The LW never says she is poor or destitute -- she has a job -- she's a widow, so likely had life insurance or an inheritance from her husband -- is old enough to be getting Social Security.
Also the mother's estate clearly included cash, the furnishings of the house and the new Prius -- so even if the house was divided more fairly, it is likely the LW would be doing fine. She did not live with her mother, but "2 miles away" so she clearly had a house or apartment prior to this.
The first letter reminds me of a limerick:
Coexecutrix Lil thought that Jill
Should have nothing to do with the will.
So they set in to fighting
(With lawyers, not biting)—
In the end, all each got was a bill.
Coexecutrix Lil thought that Jill
Should have nothing to do with the will.
So they set in to fighting
(With lawyers, not biting)—
In the end, all each got was a bill.
15
The right thing to do now is: take care of yourself.
Life only gets harder as you get old. Believe me, I never imagined how hard it gets. You simply can't afford to surrender any of your "vital substance", the roof over your head your mother willed you probably the most vital, second only to good health.
She did it for a reason. She understood your situation better than you know. For much of her later life she probably feared losing everything and ending up on the streets, homeless. Willing her house to you and you alone indicates that she feared destitution and homelessness might befall you as well. She took whatever steps were practical given her circumstances to prevent that.
Also, reverse the roles. If you showed up on your brothers' doorsteps in distress would they open their homes to you? Or wouldvthey shove you in the general direction from which you came -- the street? Their cold silence, bullying and threats are what poker players call a "tell" because they tell you everything you need to know. So why are we having this discussion? Do everything you can to protect yourself, especially from them.
Especially.
Your mother's house is your lifeboat in storm-tossed seas. Take good care of it. Honor her memory by living there every day. That's the right thing to do.
Life only gets harder as you get old. Believe me, I never imagined how hard it gets. You simply can't afford to surrender any of your "vital substance", the roof over your head your mother willed you probably the most vital, second only to good health.
She did it for a reason. She understood your situation better than you know. For much of her later life she probably feared losing everything and ending up on the streets, homeless. Willing her house to you and you alone indicates that she feared destitution and homelessness might befall you as well. She took whatever steps were practical given her circumstances to prevent that.
Also, reverse the roles. If you showed up on your brothers' doorsteps in distress would they open their homes to you? Or wouldvthey shove you in the general direction from which you came -- the street? Their cold silence, bullying and threats are what poker players call a "tell" because they tell you everything you need to know. So why are we having this discussion? Do everything you can to protect yourself, especially from them.
Especially.
Your mother's house is your lifeboat in storm-tossed seas. Take good care of it. Honor her memory by living there every day. That's the right thing to do.
89
You are reading far too much into this -- the mother was afraid of being destitute? There is not one jot of evidence for this, not even a reference from the daughter.
BTW: most people never get a million dollar house as an inheritance, and it is not a "life boat" as the LW was married, probably had an inheritance from her late husband -- did she run through it all? -- and at 62, is in SS and close to Medicare as well.
BTW: most people never get a million dollar house as an inheritance, and it is not a "life boat" as the LW was married, probably had an inheritance from her late husband -- did she run through it all? -- and at 62, is in SS and close to Medicare as well.
Re the second letter: I am a speech-language pathologist who deals with vocal issues. The first requirement of treatment is the patient seeking it.
11
I agree with Mr. Appiah's response to the woman with sibling problems about their mother's bequest. A valuable asset which cannot be divided is a frequent source of such disputes. In my situation, I own permanent life insurance to equalize the estate among the siblings. One child will get my business, the others will quickly get a tax-free check. The amounts may not be precise, but I expect that will be enough to maintain peace. A little planning can go a long way.
13
To the graduate student, I would only add that you might think about waiting to communicate your concern for your professor's health at least until the end of the term and the grades are in, when he/she is no longer in a position of having to evaluate your work. After that, don't delay. I also believe that, though delicate, the subject can be addressed in an email. It's less personal but you might benefit from the precision of language it affords, and your professor might appreciate the opportunity to process before responding.
10
Oh, my. Whatever one feels is morally right here, there is absolutely no way that deciding to delay until grades are in is an ethical choice. This implies that the key factor is potential COI. What is this? Ethics, HR style?
1
Our situation as the opposite of Case #1. Our mother's will specifies that her assets are to be divided equally among her children. One sister, however, lives nearby and has cared for our mother selflessly for years. My other siblings and I agree that all of my mother's estate proceeds, except for a few designated items, should go to that one sister, who also has the greatest financial need. Both she and Mom say they want her will to be honored. The rest of us would prefer that Mom changes the will, but have pledged to forfeit our shares to a trust on behalf of the sister's children if she does not.
194
You can all give your sister what you wish her to have. You don't even have to wait for the proceeds of the estate to be distributed!
4
It's the right thing to do. I hope when that sad time arrives, you and your siblings can get your sister to accept this.
4
Another way to do that would be to establish or contribute to 529 funds for your sister's children.
3
For those of you thinking about writing a will that does anything other than split the assets evenly among the offspring, consider including in the will itself a firm statement of intent and explanation. E.g., "Because of her many years of caring for me lovingly and selflessly and without thought or mention of repayment, and because I can rest comfortably in the knowledge that her brothers have ample financial means of their own already, I bequeath the house to daughter."
183
Along with this suggestion, why not leave a personal momento, or a piece of furniture to each of the children who are cut out of the will and will no doubt be emotionally damaged by your decision? And if one child does all the late-in-life caring, and the parent decides to cut her out of the will (an extrememly common occurrence), the remaining children should recognize her sacrifice. The parent obviously took her for granted, but there is no need for the other grown children to do so.
4
Given the mother's wealth and a house that is worth close to a million dollars (if the LW's being accurate here)...surely the brothers could have gotten SOMETHING? some heirlooms? family photos? belongings from their father?
To leave NOTHING to your sons is very harsh and cruel, and should only be done when there is real abuse or neglect over the years.
There is no evidence of this here.
Also, frail elderly people become dependent on caretakers -- even those not related -- and therefore, can be easily manipulated to give them things in advance of death or leave whole estates to them. Early stage dementia can play a role here also.
To leave NOTHING to your sons is very harsh and cruel, and should only be done when there is real abuse or neglect over the years.
There is no evidence of this here.
Also, frail elderly people become dependent on caretakers -- even those not related -- and therefore, can be easily manipulated to give them things in advance of death or leave whole estates to them. Early stage dementia can play a role here also.
1
In France the share of siblings is mandated and, all told, is a reasonable way of doing things. It puts an end to surprise wills appearing at the end of a person's life, puts an end to favoritism, puts an end to all manner of considerations that go far beyond the case presented here.
5
Great, so the government gets to tell you what to do with your own property after death even for a child who may have been an abusive user. Sorry, not a system I'd favor.
2
A will is supposed to be my wishes for the stuff I acquired. If I don't want my children to benefit equally from my estate, that should be MY choice. Otherwise why write a will at all? It is sickening how everyone has an opinion about how someone should divide their possessions. My children will not benefit equally from my estate because I have a child for whom I am their only parent, a child with both parents and all 4 grandparents and children that have 3 parents and extended family. I hope I will have raised my children to not be entitled and to know they are not owed anything from anyone. Even me.
1
And I'll bet that the female relatives still do the majority of the care-giving.
3
We only have one side of the story, but it sounds as if LW#1 took on a heavy burden of unpaid caregiving while her brothers contributed financially to the mother's case, if they did so at all. If that's the case, then the mother probably recognized that enormous labor of love by giving her the house. She may also have taken into consideration that LW#1 may have had a lower-paying job than her siblings, perhaps even in part to facilitate that caregiving. While the mother had the right to leave the house to whomever she wished, these reasons (if applicable) would be an entirely just basis for the decision. LW#1 should enjoy the house and feel no qualms at all.
33
The LW was paid at least in part, by the new Prius (clearly for HER, not her 89 year old mother!) and all those fancy vacations that "she insisted mom take!" -- also I imagine countless meals out, and having access to the family home, money, heirlooms etc. It is clear the LW -- earning only $25,000 a year -- was living the high life off of mom's money FOR YEARS.
1
I think Dutiful Daughter has a duty, which is to respect her mother's wishes regarding the mother's property. Her letter shows that she made every effort to support and accommodate her mother, and that her mother was conscious of that when she made her will. In contrast, the brothers were evidently happy to allow this burden to fall on their sister, and to rely on her to be her principal companion, and mother's handyman, as well. DD should also be conscious of the fact that most states strictly limit the time to challenge a decedent's will, and the fact that her brothers did not do so indicates that they probably recognize the justice of mother's decision. Of course, that does not mean that they are not upset and unhappy about it, but that is a different thing. So unless mother overlooked a sibling who was equally attentive, DD should welcome mother's gift with the assurance that in her mother's eyes, she deserved it.
27
I have to disagree with your characterization of the writer's brothers as monsters. While I agree that the parties haven't acted the way one would hope, I'm sure the brothers are struggling with emotions that center around why mom left them out of the will. The writer has suggested that she/he was the main caretaker, but doesn't indicate that the brothers were at all absent and/or had no relationship with their mother.
In my opinion, none of the parties have acted morally or ethically--certainly threats of legal action are not the way to handle this. It would be nice if they could sit down with a mediator. Perhaps the brothers are not familiar with the writer's financial issues and learning this could be valuable. Perhaps the brothers were not in a position to help as much as the writer due to location, work, children, health, etc. A mediator could help facilitate these discussions and perhaps save the relationships and help them to heal, even if the writer actually keeps the money.
In my opinion, none of the parties have acted morally or ethically--certainly threats of legal action are not the way to handle this. It would be nice if they could sit down with a mediator. Perhaps the brothers are not familiar with the writer's financial issues and learning this could be valuable. Perhaps the brothers were not in a position to help as much as the writer due to location, work, children, health, etc. A mediator could help facilitate these discussions and perhaps save the relationships and help them to heal, even if the writer actually keeps the money.
6
@ Kelli:
Regardless of their intrinsic nature (and of whatever grievances they may have), the brothers are behaving in a monstrous fashion. Perhaps they are not monsters but stayed last night in a Bates Motel. In any case, LW1 should give strong consideration to shedding these toxic people totally. The loss of such poisonous relatives may be far less painful than their presence in her life. Have good friends and enjoy the rest of your life.
Regardless of their intrinsic nature (and of whatever grievances they may have), the brothers are behaving in a monstrous fashion. Perhaps they are not monsters but stayed last night in a Bates Motel. In any case, LW1 should give strong consideration to shedding these toxic people totally. The loss of such poisonous relatives may be far less painful than their presence in her life. Have good friends and enjoy the rest of your life.
5
I admire Dr. Appiah's responses to these questions. I would just add one point regarding the second: when approaching the professor, remember that you do not know what is causing the vocal changes. The word "surely" in the phrase "... stark and progressively worsening vocal changes that surely indicate a health issue" gives me pause; are you really sure? There are other possibilities: maybe he recorded the more recent videos back to back and started getting tired, maybe the recording quality was worse the second time around, or maybe he had a cold or hay fever. Tell him your observations and express concern--but refrain from drawing conclusions. Leave those to him. That said, I see every reason to bring this up courteously, discreetly, and, as Dr. Appiah suggested, in person or at least in a way that identifies you.
18
And just like that my mother was put in a nursing home. Three years later she died. I don't question the decision to move her to a place with better care, or her decisions regarding last arrangements - both made with my siblings. But just like that there were no more Christmas or Thanksgiving or Fourth of July. No more shared coffee over the dining table. I did not grow up in the house, but suddenly it was locked and my last memories are of driving past for one more look. But when one of my siblings asked that I sign over my share of the estate to them I did. We aren't talking life changing sums, just life changing times. And they were gone and in the past.
4
Lots of issues with the letter from the woman who inherited her mother’s house.
We simply do not know why a mother would cut two sons completely out of her will. It is a very strange thing to do and usually only happens when children are completely alienated from their parents by some event in the past. The writer spends a lot of time telling us what a good daughter she was but tells us nothing about any issue with the sons. Other mysteries abound – she states that “the day after she died, one of my brothers threatened to sue me for his share of the inheritance.” This indicates that the brother already knew the contents of the will, meaning there was very likely previous discussion about it, but we have no information on this.
The fact that the brothers did not sue does not prove they did not have a case. A lawsuit alleging undue influence would be difficult to win and very costly, probably eating up most of the assets even if the brothers won.
It may be that the mother had every reason to leave her home and possessions to her daughter (we never hear what the sons inherited – presumably a portion of the liquid assets, which is why it’s relevant that the daughter encouraged the mother to spend such assets on the house and a new car, which the daughter inherited) but you cannot tell from this letter what it was. It’s like reading a letter from one half of a divorcing couple. You may be fairly confident that the other side would frame the events differently.
We simply do not know why a mother would cut two sons completely out of her will. It is a very strange thing to do and usually only happens when children are completely alienated from their parents by some event in the past. The writer spends a lot of time telling us what a good daughter she was but tells us nothing about any issue with the sons. Other mysteries abound – she states that “the day after she died, one of my brothers threatened to sue me for his share of the inheritance.” This indicates that the brother already knew the contents of the will, meaning there was very likely previous discussion about it, but we have no information on this.
The fact that the brothers did not sue does not prove they did not have a case. A lawsuit alleging undue influence would be difficult to win and very costly, probably eating up most of the assets even if the brothers won.
It may be that the mother had every reason to leave her home and possessions to her daughter (we never hear what the sons inherited – presumably a portion of the liquid assets, which is why it’s relevant that the daughter encouraged the mother to spend such assets on the house and a new car, which the daughter inherited) but you cannot tell from this letter what it was. It’s like reading a letter from one half of a divorcing couple. You may be fairly confident that the other side would frame the events differently.
15
The two brothers did NOT get any liquid or financial assets -- read it again! they got NOTHING -- absolutely nothing -- they were written completely out of the will.
I assure you that this is a very hurtful thing, and only should be done in cases of really extreme abuse or neglect by adult children. At least, the mother could have left them some heirlooms or a token sum of cash.
Despite what some posters have said, suing over an estate is nearly impossible -- it requires a huge upfront investment -- and courts are reluctant to overturn a will. Just saying "it is unfair" would not be enough.
While the brothers got nothing, I found it extremely odd the daughter was encouraging the mother to spend spend spend -- new cars (for a woman in her late 80s?) -- fancy vacations each year -- I can just imagine those brothers being horrified at how the sister was spending mom's money on things for HERSELF. Yet being out of town, they were helpless to take any direct action. It is also very likely the daughter cut her brothers out of mom's life, and may have talked them down, with the clear intent of making mom dependent on her.
It is also completely possible the daughter or her "lawyer friend" wrote this will -- benefiting the daughter 100% -- and then pressured mom (who might have had early stage dementia and in any event, was totally dependent on her daughter) to sign it.
I assure you that this is a very hurtful thing, and only should be done in cases of really extreme abuse or neglect by adult children. At least, the mother could have left them some heirlooms or a token sum of cash.
Despite what some posters have said, suing over an estate is nearly impossible -- it requires a huge upfront investment -- and courts are reluctant to overturn a will. Just saying "it is unfair" would not be enough.
While the brothers got nothing, I found it extremely odd the daughter was encouraging the mother to spend spend spend -- new cars (for a woman in her late 80s?) -- fancy vacations each year -- I can just imagine those brothers being horrified at how the sister was spending mom's money on things for HERSELF. Yet being out of town, they were helpless to take any direct action. It is also very likely the daughter cut her brothers out of mom's life, and may have talked them down, with the clear intent of making mom dependent on her.
It is also completely possible the daughter or her "lawyer friend" wrote this will -- benefiting the daughter 100% -- and then pressured mom (who might have had early stage dementia and in any event, was totally dependent on her daughter) to sign it.
I totally agree with your response to the first letter writer. In a way, I was on the other side of the inheritance issue when my parents passed away. They left everything to my younger brother and because he was unable to control his spending, they also left me as trustee. To some extent, I was angry about this because I always felt that he was emotionally abusive to them, and neglectfully abusive when they got old. But it was their money and their decision. And my husband and I have been successful in life and we are quite comfortable, so I didn't resent the money side of it at all. After my mother died, our extended family was supportive and we got himsettled with an apartment, bill pay, income stream, etc.
This woman spent time and energy with her mother in her declining years. She should enjoy the security her mother bequeathed to her.
This woman spent time and energy with her mother in her declining years. She should enjoy the security her mother bequeathed to her.
39
I am lucky to have a brother who has done very well financially, and has never begrudged me the money our parents have given me over the years (mostly for medical insurance, bills, and other costs due to a chronic illness). That said, they made it clear to us that my brother would receive an equal amount of money, either during their lifetimes or as a bigger share of their property when they both passed away.
In Name Withheld's situation, it appears that proper procedures in drafting the will were followed, and she is properly refusing to accede to her brothers' demands instead of accepting her mother's decision. If her brothers had any valid claim to more of the estate, they should filed claims during probate to dispute it, rather than making personal attacks on the beneficiary.
I would suggest that Name Withheld have the attorney who drew up the will send the brothers a letter setting out the reasons why the will is valid, and requesting that they follow proper legal channels if they intend to continue disputing it. Appeasement of these disgruntled siblings is neither required nor appropriate, and trying to pay them off is not a guarantee of any better future relationships.
In Name Withheld's situation, it appears that proper procedures in drafting the will were followed, and she is properly refusing to accede to her brothers' demands instead of accepting her mother's decision. If her brothers had any valid claim to more of the estate, they should filed claims during probate to dispute it, rather than making personal attacks on the beneficiary.
I would suggest that Name Withheld have the attorney who drew up the will send the brothers a letter setting out the reasons why the will is valid, and requesting that they follow proper legal channels if they intend to continue disputing it. Appeasement of these disgruntled siblings is neither required nor appropriate, and trying to pay them off is not a guarantee of any better future relationships.
16
It is nearly impossible for ordinary people of average means to contest a will.
The costs of legal representation alone might well outweigh anything in the estate -- and you'd have to come up with a retainer, in cash, in advance -- with no guarantee of getting ANYTHING.
Courts are very reluctant to overturn wills, especially if they are valid wills written by an attorney.
I am sure the brothers talked to lawyers and were told this. Also that their ONLY HOPE was to write the sister, and ask her to be fair -- because the mother's will is clearly unfair and appears to be influenced.
And the sister is actually considered this, even after the will was settled. So the brothers did what they could. It appears however, that the greedy sister will take all.
The costs of legal representation alone might well outweigh anything in the estate -- and you'd have to come up with a retainer, in cash, in advance -- with no guarantee of getting ANYTHING.
Courts are very reluctant to overturn wills, especially if they are valid wills written by an attorney.
I am sure the brothers talked to lawyers and were told this. Also that their ONLY HOPE was to write the sister, and ask her to be fair -- because the mother's will is clearly unfair and appears to be influenced.
And the sister is actually considered this, even after the will was settled. So the brothers did what they could. It appears however, that the greedy sister will take all.
Name Withheld is witnessing a demonstration of why her mother left the property to her, instead of to all the siblings. NW deserves to live well and safely. She should *not* sacrifice her life to her brothers. Her brothers are capable of fending for themselves. If she wants to be generous with them later in life, her improved living situation, resulting of accepting her mother's bequest, will be a foundation for her to accumulate enough to allow for generosity. Her mother wanted to benefit NW. NW should accept her mother's love in material form.
14
I am surprised at the response to the woman who inherited the house. It seems like everyone is judging the brothers based on her claim and her claim alone. While she might have deserved a larger share of the estate, it seems that deliberately leaving out the brothers will only serves to alienate the family. Since she, by her own accord, made a small salary, and was the companion to traveling with her mom, that was already a larger share of the estate. Also, it seems like some manipulating could have been done by her to ensure that she got it all. She might feel guilty, but she isn't even offering a portion of the estate to her siblings, while keeping the lion's share and then is consoling herself with her mom's "wishes" which would be suspect from a sick, frail, older woman dependent on her geographically closest child. Don't love your answer
9
It depends on when their mother changed her will to give the house to the writer. If it was recently and the mom was in her 90s, then maybe she was not of sound enough mind. If it was before her mind deteriorated (say pre-75 year old) then it is fine.
1
Wills are wills. "Sound mind" is not something that is proven when I will is drawn up in the sense that it is testified to by anyone. You can go online to LegalZoom, for instance, and drawn up a will. No one is going to send out a physician or a psychologist or a detective or a court justice to determine if you are compos mentis enough. So it doesn't matter when. Not to say that it all can't be contested in a court of law, but the burden of proof would fall to the contesting party(ies) - the sons (in this case).
2
Matthew: unless the deceased was entirely gone to dementia, in a nursing home....it is next to impossible to prove "diminished capacity".
Remember it is all "after the fact" and the patient dead, and its really too late to bring up things like changes in a will at that point.
That means elderly people are often at the mercy of greedy, controlling parties -- their children or even a paid caretaker -- if large sums of money are involved, people can do very unethical things to "grab the whole pot".
Remember it is all "after the fact" and the patient dead, and its really too late to bring up things like changes in a will at that point.
That means elderly people are often at the mercy of greedy, controlling parties -- their children or even a paid caretaker -- if large sums of money are involved, people can do very unethical things to "grab the whole pot".
I spent 42 years in the trust & investment business and saw this sort of situation far too many times. Everyone is happy to have the designated sibling take care of mom/dad for as long as necessary, sacrificing their own wants and needs along the way, but the moment whatever is left is being divided, it suddenly becomes all about fair play (really?), or mom/dad were coerced into leaving everything to the sibling who actually cared for them.
Don't get me wrong: parents are regularly coerced into making choices regarding their estates that they might not otherwise make were they not under duress. However, absent any evidence of duress, the issue is simple: the money belongs to mom and dad, and they are free to leave it to whomever they choose.
What could have helped is if, in this instance, mom had informed all of her children of her decision to leave the house to her daughter and her reasons for doing so. It is not a case of asking for their permission - she needed none - but this approach does allow an opportunity to ask questions while mom is still living that can't be asked once she's gone. It can also help dispel any later claims of coercion.
Don't get me wrong: parents are regularly coerced into making choices regarding their estates that they might not otherwise make were they not under duress. However, absent any evidence of duress, the issue is simple: the money belongs to mom and dad, and they are free to leave it to whomever they choose.
What could have helped is if, in this instance, mom had informed all of her children of her decision to leave the house to her daughter and her reasons for doing so. It is not a case of asking for their permission - she needed none - but this approach does allow an opportunity to ask questions while mom is still living that can't be asked once she's gone. It can also help dispel any later claims of coercion.
44
It appears that the brothers did know of this in advance, since they jumped on their sibling immediately after the mother's death.
3
its very difficult to have those discussions and older parents are very reluctant to do so -- BUT they should clearly have a detailed explanation in the will telling everyone why the will was written the way it was
4
@ Scott B:
My observation about the modern nuclear (American) family is sanguinary. They are often a serpent's nest, the seat of great cruelty. Not always, but usually.
On the rare occasions that I proffer investment advice these days ("often wrong but never in doubt ..." will be engraved on my tombstone), usually after being cornered, the first thought that enters my mind is: "expect the worst and you will never be disappointed ...".
My observation about the modern nuclear (American) family is sanguinary. They are often a serpent's nest, the seat of great cruelty. Not always, but usually.
On the rare occasions that I proffer investment advice these days ("often wrong but never in doubt ..." will be engraved on my tombstone), usually after being cornered, the first thought that enters my mind is: "expect the worst and you will never be disappointed ...".
2
I'm surprised that Mr. Appiah took the first letter's author so quickly and totally at face value. He strikes me as posturing as the noble son and victim a bit too much. These types of family dynamics are rarely as one-sided as he depicts. He seems adept at depicting his siblings as monsters, an image he may have been insidiously promoting to his mother all those years for his personal gain. Of course he encouraged her to spend her money on trips that included him!
Some parents continue to punish their children all of their lives and often use inheritance as their their final and most painful way to reject their children for the indignation (real or perceived) that they feel or have been convinced of by another relative or child.
Name Withheld could very well be a passive aggressive who manipulated his mother's emotions, and ultimately her behavior, for his own gain.
Some parents continue to punish their children all of their lives and often use inheritance as their their final and most painful way to reject their children for the indignation (real or perceived) that they feel or have been convinced of by another relative or child.
Name Withheld could very well be a passive aggressive who manipulated his mother's emotions, and ultimately her behavior, for his own gain.
4
"He strikes me as posturing as the noble son and victim a bit too much. These types of family dynamics are rarely as one-sided as he depicts. He seems adept at depicting his siblings as monsters, an image he may have been insidiously promoting to his mother all those years for his personal gain. Of course he encouraged her to spend her money on trips that included him!"
From the letter: "I am a widow, and I lived two miles away."
The letter writer is a daughter, being hounded by her older brothers.
From the letter: "I am a widow, and I lived two miles away."
The letter writer is a daughter, being hounded by her older brothers.
11
Yes. Thank you for the correction. I saw that later and corrected my comment, but this one remained.
But I still think it's a very one-sided depiction of the situation.
But I still think it's a very one-sided depiction of the situation.
2
Years ago my then-boyfriend's grandfather died and left everything to my boyfriend's father and nothing to his other son. My boyfriend's father, that very day, called his brother and said "It's mine now, and my decision is to divide it equally between us." (My experience in my own family when my father died was, to say the least, not the same!)
20
There are a few honorable and decent people in this world, even still, who will not take advantage of an unfair will from a bitter or controlling parent/relative.
But those are few and far between. People are greedy, and in an era of diminishing equality and lack of good jobs....a fat inheritance may be the only way to get your hands on a lump sum of money or valuables. That turns otherwise nice people into greedheads.
But those are few and far between. People are greedy, and in an era of diminishing equality and lack of good jobs....a fat inheritance may be the only way to get your hands on a lump sum of money or valuables. That turns otherwise nice people into greedheads.
Not splitting the inheritance equally is an atom bomb that destroyed any relationship between these siblings. Perhaps the mom did like this child best or maybe she wanted to punish the brothers for some long ago slight. It's not the writer who broke up the family, it was the mother and she seems to have done it deliberately. If the writer lawyers up, she will likely win unless the brothers can invalidate the will. Her relationship with them is likely over, but she has a house now so maybe she doesn't need family.
15
Rick: she has already "won". The will was valid and prepared by an attorney. It passed probate. The property and money and car are all hers.
So I wonder why she writes this, except to get an "OK" from an outside party. She's won. There is no little avenue for her brothers to get any money.
However, the price of taking the "whole pie" was and is that she will be alone for the rest of her life, without family.
Only she can say if it is worth it.
BTW: obviously as a stranger, I can only read between the lines, but from her story, I do think she used emotional pressure on her mother ("oh I'm so poor and I only earn $25,000 a year!") to get her mother to favor her in the will. Also the fact she was the only (and unmarried) daughter appears to be a factor.
It's sad, but parents often DO favor one child over another -- despite all the sayings about "We love ALL OF YOU EQUALLY"....it really just is not true in many families.
So I wonder why she writes this, except to get an "OK" from an outside party. She's won. There is no little avenue for her brothers to get any money.
However, the price of taking the "whole pie" was and is that she will be alone for the rest of her life, without family.
Only she can say if it is worth it.
BTW: obviously as a stranger, I can only read between the lines, but from her story, I do think she used emotional pressure on her mother ("oh I'm so poor and I only earn $25,000 a year!") to get her mother to favor her in the will. Also the fact she was the only (and unmarried) daughter appears to be a factor.
It's sad, but parents often DO favor one child over another -- despite all the sayings about "We love ALL OF YOU EQUALLY"....it really just is not true in many families.
5
Concerned Citizen - perhaps if the LW hadn't had to devote prime working years to caring for her mother, she could have advanced her career? As I have mentioned elsewhere, her brothers owe her.
7
SATX: there is no evidence of that at all. She is a widow; she does not say when her husband died, but actuarially it is likely just a few years ago. There is no evidence nor claim here that she "gave up a career to care for her mother". Also mom was clearly very affluent, and could have hired some outside help -- cleaning services, yard care, etc.
We also do not know the brothers "did nothing". They lived further away, and their spouses are presumably still alive, so they may have obligations greater than their childless, widowed sister.
For all we know, the brothers tried for YEARS to help mom, but the sister rebuffed them. I've seen controlling adult children who kept a parent away from the rest of the family -- precisely to "control" the estate in this way.
There is a real danger is believing just one side of a story. If I were Mr. Appiah, I would have asked the sister if she had exercised undo influence over her mother, to grab the whole estate -- if there was a prior will that left the children equally provided, and the sister wanted that redone -- if the mother made out the will completely independently -- if the sister KNEW for years that she would be the sole heir or if this came as a big shock to her.
If you don't ask the right questions, you won't get any useful answers.
We also do not know the brothers "did nothing". They lived further away, and their spouses are presumably still alive, so they may have obligations greater than their childless, widowed sister.
For all we know, the brothers tried for YEARS to help mom, but the sister rebuffed them. I've seen controlling adult children who kept a parent away from the rest of the family -- precisely to "control" the estate in this way.
There is a real danger is believing just one side of a story. If I were Mr. Appiah, I would have asked the sister if she had exercised undo influence over her mother, to grab the whole estate -- if there was a prior will that left the children equally provided, and the sister wanted that redone -- if the mother made out the will completely independently -- if the sister KNEW for years that she would be the sole heir or if this came as a big shock to her.
If you don't ask the right questions, you won't get any useful answers.
1
Gee, perhaps the attitude of the brothers is precisely why their mother left them out of the will. The letter writer - and the mother - owe them nothing.
39
In response to the MA student: This is a person with whom you have a professional relationship - teacher/student. The symptoms you mention are a growing vocal dysfunction. This is not something that man doesn't know. His intimates also know it. They communicate with him daily and such changes make that communication difficult. However, it is, in fact, none of your business.
2
I think that the student should communicate his concern with the teacher for the very reason that what you state may very well not be true. People who see each other regularly may not recognize changes in each other simply because the changes are so gradual. The professor may also not know this about himself for the same reason. When my mother and dad were in their later years, I--who lived five hours away and saw my family every few months vs. my sisters who lived in the same town--recognized changes in my parents functioning that were not apparent to my siblings, two of whom are nurses.
If the professor is aware of the situation and has addressed it, or found out it is harmless, he will likely still be appreciative of the student's concern as long as the student expresses it tactfully.
If the professor is aware of the situation and has addressed it, or found out it is harmless, he will likely still be appreciative of the student's concern as long as the student expresses it tactfully.
7
Parents are under no obligation to their children when it comes to leaving property in a will. They could leave everything to a charity if they wanted, since its their money. There are children who have cared for parents, as this lady seems to have done while her brothers did not, and her mother expressed her thankfulness in her will. So be it. The brothers are owed nothing.
21
Obviously you can do anything you want in a will, including disinheriting ALL of your children. It is perfectly legal.
However...IF you do what this mother has done, you will cause a rift that will destroy the family you built, and ensure the sons never talk to their sister again.
Money is great, but what if she -- an older widow -- NEEDS her brothers? if she gets sick? needs a kidney transplant? just wants company and connection to her family roots? Her mother has ensured that now her children hate each other and will never be close again.
I've seen similar situations in my own and my husband's family, and I ASSURE you it was never worth it -- not even to get a house or money. The ONLY fair will for a parent is to split it equally between all the children (the only exception would be if one child were disabled or handicapped and the other not).
I'd also like to add: I've seen very similar situations where one adult child "ingratiates" themselves with an elderly or infirm parent -- the "caring" is only done to get their hands on the future inheritance. I am especially suspicious that this writer says "she encouraged her mother to go on expensive vacations because...SHE DESERVED IT" but the writer was accompanying Mother on those vacations! It was totally self-serving. Sorry, I do not believe her version of things.
However...IF you do what this mother has done, you will cause a rift that will destroy the family you built, and ensure the sons never talk to their sister again.
Money is great, but what if she -- an older widow -- NEEDS her brothers? if she gets sick? needs a kidney transplant? just wants company and connection to her family roots? Her mother has ensured that now her children hate each other and will never be close again.
I've seen similar situations in my own and my husband's family, and I ASSURE you it was never worth it -- not even to get a house or money. The ONLY fair will for a parent is to split it equally between all the children (the only exception would be if one child were disabled or handicapped and the other not).
I'd also like to add: I've seen very similar situations where one adult child "ingratiates" themselves with an elderly or infirm parent -- the "caring" is only done to get their hands on the future inheritance. I am especially suspicious that this writer says "she encouraged her mother to go on expensive vacations because...SHE DESERVED IT" but the writer was accompanying Mother on those vacations! It was totally self-serving. Sorry, I do not believe her version of things.
3
Concerned Citizen - it doesn't seem the relationship with her brothers was good before the mother's death. As far as the vacations, did you consider that the mother may have had mobility issues and that she couldn't travel at all without her daughter? I have no problem at all with that part.
3
I don't think most of us credit her version, but we are using it as a hypothetical starting point. I don't believe her, but have no reason to disbelieve her, either.
LW seems to be suffering from guilt, or at least serious second thoughts, even though probate is over and the estate is hers. She may or may not have a good reason to feel guilty. She may have been manipulated by her brothers to feel that way, or she may be ruminating about what she did, over a period of years, to influence her elderly mother to write her own brothers out of the will.
She may also be an honest person who does not know how to make a good case for herself. She may sound defensive because she has been attacked, and shunned, and does not realize how she needs to present her case to come across well in the face of an attack. A lot of people have that weakness. On the other hand, as you suggest, her defensiveness may be the most revealing thing in this letter.
In short, you're right. We don't know. There is one fact, however -- if a will is likely to be the result of undue influence by the beneficiary, those who had every right to expect to inherit but were excluded usually get a lawyer and challenge the will. And should. But they don't write threatening letters.
If she's not making that part up, there is very good reason to think the advice she got here was sound.
LW seems to be suffering from guilt, or at least serious second thoughts, even though probate is over and the estate is hers. She may or may not have a good reason to feel guilty. She may have been manipulated by her brothers to feel that way, or she may be ruminating about what she did, over a period of years, to influence her elderly mother to write her own brothers out of the will.
She may also be an honest person who does not know how to make a good case for herself. She may sound defensive because she has been attacked, and shunned, and does not realize how she needs to present her case to come across well in the face of an attack. A lot of people have that weakness. On the other hand, as you suggest, her defensiveness may be the most revealing thing in this letter.
In short, you're right. We don't know. There is one fact, however -- if a will is likely to be the result of undue influence by the beneficiary, those who had every right to expect to inherit but were excluded usually get a lawyer and challenge the will. And should. But they don't write threatening letters.
If she's not making that part up, there is very good reason to think the advice she got here was sound.
3
Many people don't understand that until someone dies, her stuff is hers to do with as she sees fit. When that person passes, the siblings turn back into children. Someone still resents the sister who got to sit at the adults table, or the brother who didn't pass the gravy boat, and the fight begins. It's not about the money. It's not about what Mom wanted. It's manifestly clear that she wanted her daughter to have her assets. They were close. Whatever the reason, she wasn't close to her sons. They can't heal the breach with mom anymore and they have to live with that forever. All they can do is fight with the sister. If she sold everything and lived in her car it would not give the brothers what they really want. She should honor her mother's wishes.
23
But you have no idea if the daughter -- wanting very much to keep all the money -- has told you the truth. You have never heard the brother's point of view!
Maybe they helped more than she indicates. Maybe they were out of town, or had problems -- their own health, sick children, job loss -- that prevented them from being present more. Maybe they OFFERED to help, but the greedy daughter circumvented them at every turn.
I know such adult children who use their close relationship with a parent to keep other siblings, even grandchildren, away so they can manipulate the senior. If money is involved, this is VERY common.
Remember: she already has the inheritance. Probate was finished. The will was not contested. She has EVERYTHING -- all the money, a house worth "hundreds of thousands of dollars" and her brothers have nothing. For all you know, the brothers are in their late 60s, and in poverty. You just don't know! be very careful of believing only ONE SIDE of any story.
Maybe they helped more than she indicates. Maybe they were out of town, or had problems -- their own health, sick children, job loss -- that prevented them from being present more. Maybe they OFFERED to help, but the greedy daughter circumvented them at every turn.
I know such adult children who use their close relationship with a parent to keep other siblings, even grandchildren, away so they can manipulate the senior. If money is involved, this is VERY common.
Remember: she already has the inheritance. Probate was finished. The will was not contested. She has EVERYTHING -- all the money, a house worth "hundreds of thousands of dollars" and her brothers have nothing. For all you know, the brothers are in their late 60s, and in poverty. You just don't know! be very careful of believing only ONE SIDE of any story.
2
All we have is the letter to go by. And to us, it's purely hypothetical, so it really doesn't matter if she's lying. What is being assessed is the situation she constructed.
6
Dave: are you saying these letters are fictional and invented by Mr. Appiah? because I've been reading them for ages, and believed they were actual letters from real people!
LW 1: you gave your mother the best gift any child can offer: your love, time, care, trips together and attention to her needs. She returned the favor with the house that you helped her build. Keep that gift. I'm sorry your brothers are not as generous as you are.
18
Did your brothers help your mother out? Did they live two miles away? I don't think so. People aren't entitled to an inheritance from a parent. My feeling is that the person who takes care of a person is the one who should get the money. Refer your brothers to your attorney and tell your attorney to tell them "No". You aren't going to get peace or get on good terms with them, even if you give them some of the money from the sale of the house. You will feel cheated of your house and they will insist that they are got what they deserved only after fighting you for it. So, there won't be any good will.
It is often the person who isn't making the most money in the sibling group who takes care of an elderly parent. I have a brother who lives with my mother right now. In my opinion, he can have my share. I haven't earned anything and it would take away from his life. He has lived with my mom for years. No stranger moved in an gulled her out of her money or home. He has been making sure she was well and fed and able to get out and do things as she got older. I've been far away and done nothing. Why should I feel I have a right to property, just because I'm related. I have made my own money. His life has been subtly changed by taking care of mom. He hasn't made a fortune on his own house because he was living in her house and paying her rent. Which she could then use to supplement her retirement income.
Keep your house and be grateful. Your mom knew what she was doing.
It is often the person who isn't making the most money in the sibling group who takes care of an elderly parent. I have a brother who lives with my mother right now. In my opinion, he can have my share. I haven't earned anything and it would take away from his life. He has lived with my mom for years. No stranger moved in an gulled her out of her money or home. He has been making sure she was well and fed and able to get out and do things as she got older. I've been far away and done nothing. Why should I feel I have a right to property, just because I'm related. I have made my own money. His life has been subtly changed by taking care of mom. He hasn't made a fortune on his own house because he was living in her house and paying her rent. Which she could then use to supplement her retirement income.
Keep your house and be grateful. Your mom knew what she was doing.
27
Laughingdragon: posters here are SO eager to take her side, but they are only hearing ONE SIDE of this story. How do you KNOW the brothers did not help out? Maybe they funneled money to their mother FOR YEARS. Clearly they did not anticipate being cut out of her will!
Maybe the daughter, using her close location, manipulated the mother. I am suspicious because she says "she encouraged her mom to take many costly trips, as she deserved it" -- but SHE (the daughter) went on all of those trips! In other words, she talked her mother into fancy vacations so SHE could go on those vacations!
And it is hardly fair to blame the brothers because they all did not live "two miles down the road from mom". That isn't possible for many men with families and careers. It does not mean they did not love or care for their mother, or helped her, or TRIED to help her.
I think it is very possible given the LWs tone, that she actively kept her brothers at a distance, to have the maximum influence over her mother.
Don't assume that because your brother supports YOUR mother, that in this case, the daughter supported HER mother. It sounds like the daughter had no money here, and was leeching off of a wealthy parent.
Maybe the daughter, using her close location, manipulated the mother. I am suspicious because she says "she encouraged her mom to take many costly trips, as she deserved it" -- but SHE (the daughter) went on all of those trips! In other words, she talked her mother into fancy vacations so SHE could go on those vacations!
And it is hardly fair to blame the brothers because they all did not live "two miles down the road from mom". That isn't possible for many men with families and careers. It does not mean they did not love or care for their mother, or helped her, or TRIED to help her.
I think it is very possible given the LWs tone, that she actively kept her brothers at a distance, to have the maximum influence over her mother.
Don't assume that because your brother supports YOUR mother, that in this case, the daughter supported HER mother. It sounds like the daughter had no money here, and was leeching off of a wealthy parent.
3
Good advice. May I suggest one more thing -- it's a lot to live with and take care of an aging parent. Most caregivers do so at their own expense and suffer a loss of income and other limitations. So if you are financially able, consider contributing something to the household; a housekeeper weekly or every other week, hair appointments for your mother (if she likes that), dinners out, a gas card, and even a paid vacation for your brother or something meaningful to him. Wouldn't you want this "good care" to continue -- for as long as possible -- for your peace of mind? A little extra support may be able to keep things on track and add to the quality of life of your mother and brother.
4
Those brothers have behaved shamefully. The mother was justified in leaving the inheritance to the child who was there for her in the end of her life. I would not give the brothers a cent, especially as it would leave the daughter in poverty.
The daughter has made overtures to the brothers and they rejected them. Perhaps in time they will come around, but if not, I hope the daughter has a comfortable and peaceful life and under no circumstances should she offer them anything. I am shocked that she did so already,
The daughter has made overtures to the brothers and they rejected them. Perhaps in time they will come around, but if not, I hope the daughter has a comfortable and peaceful life and under no circumstances should she offer them anything. I am shocked that she did so already,
20
It would NOT leave her in poverty -- where was she living before? Two miles down the road? then she lived in the same affluent area as her mother. She has a job. She is a widow, so she gets Social Security plus likely an inheritance from her late husband. There is no evidence she is "poor". She just wants to keep 100% of the family assets for herself.
I also don't find it credible that a baby boomer woman of 62 is only earning $12 an hour, but can afford rents in a neighborhood where mom's house is worth "hundreds of thousands of dollars".
I also don't find it credible that a baby boomer woman of 62 is only earning $12 an hour, but can afford rents in a neighborhood where mom's house is worth "hundreds of thousands of dollars".
1
The mother wanted her daughter to have the house, which can seem unfair. It might be plausible for Nameless to write a will leaving the brothers' or their descendants the shares they believe they are entitled to upon her death.
2
That would give a motive for the brothers to hound her to death...
2
Here is the problem: we only hear the daughters POV, and she's already "won" -- the will stood up in court. Probate is over. She has already inherited and moved into the house. Her brothers have no legal standing.
HOWEVER....there are moral and ethical considerations, even if the will is valid. I believe this woman used influence and psychological trickery to make her mother dependent on her, edging her brothers out and perhaps even estranging her mother from them ("aren't Bill and Ted terrible? they never call!" while meantime, she erases their phone messages and tosses the cards they send). Don't think this does not happen!
The main evidence against this LW is that she went on numerous expensive vacations with her mom, on mom's money -- telling mom "you deserve it!" -- getting mom (who mathematically had to be in her late 80s, if she has sons in their late 60s) to buy a new Prius? Hello! the LW had to know that Prius would soon be hers! and who thinks their 89 year old mom is "going to live another 10 years"? COME ON.
She manipulated the situation. Also, if the house and cash are so valuable -- "hundreds of thousands of dollars" -- there are ample funds for each child to get a generous, fair share and nobody would be "left in poverty".
HOWEVER....there are moral and ethical considerations, even if the will is valid. I believe this woman used influence and psychological trickery to make her mother dependent on her, edging her brothers out and perhaps even estranging her mother from them ("aren't Bill and Ted terrible? they never call!" while meantime, she erases their phone messages and tosses the cards they send). Don't think this does not happen!
The main evidence against this LW is that she went on numerous expensive vacations with her mom, on mom's money -- telling mom "you deserve it!" -- getting mom (who mathematically had to be in her late 80s, if she has sons in their late 60s) to buy a new Prius? Hello! the LW had to know that Prius would soon be hers! and who thinks their 89 year old mom is "going to live another 10 years"? COME ON.
She manipulated the situation. Also, if the house and cash are so valuable -- "hundreds of thousands of dollars" -- there are ample funds for each child to get a generous, fair share and nobody would be "left in poverty".
4
Concerned Citizen, there is one glaring problem.
There were two brothers, and only one of her. If she did unduly influence her mother to write them out of the will (and of course she may have), why so much effort to undermine her psychologically with threatening letters, but no effort at all to retain a lawyer and challenge the will? Wills like this are challenged all the time, and suits of this nature settle quickly. They are neither unusual nor expensive. If she did manipulate the situation, as you put it, they certainly should have sued, not written hate mail to their bereaved sister.
There were two brothers, and only one of her. If she did unduly influence her mother to write them out of the will (and of course she may have), why so much effort to undermine her psychologically with threatening letters, but no effort at all to retain a lawyer and challenge the will? Wills like this are challenged all the time, and suits of this nature settle quickly. They are neither unusual nor expensive. If she did manipulate the situation, as you put it, they certainly should have sued, not written hate mail to their bereaved sister.
4
Your mother signed a will leaving you her house. It was her house and she could deal with the disposition of her property in any way she wanted. She left it to you under her will. If you ignore her wishes you are acting against her clearly expressed desires re ownership of the house. There are probably very good reasons why she cut off your brothers. Honor your mother's desires without guilt. Perhaps your lawyer could write their lawyer a letter threatening a harassment suit if they keep up the pestering. House was left to you in probate by a judge's order. Ownership issue settled. Period. Just my opinion, not legal advice.
15
An autopsy, CC?
What about simply challenging the will?
What about simply challenging the will?
Re Sibling Dispute: I had the similar experience, in my case, family members who didn't show their face or lift a finger for decades came out of the woodwork to claim a share of the estate. It was a contentious three year fiasco and in the end, all parties ended up with very little and today, we are not speaking, and 10 years later, I do not miss them.
You were the one who took on the role of caregiver and gave much of yourself and your time to your Mom. It's doesn't sound like the others assisted much or offered to pitch in.
Your recounting the brother's anger at your Mom spending her money on herself is the part that is the most telling. It sounds as if they were counting their money whilst she was alive - and faulted you for encouraging her to spend her savings to enjoy her life rather than save it for you. Follow your two attorney's advice: do not do penance where no sin exists.
You were the one who took on the role of caregiver and gave much of yourself and your time to your Mom. It's doesn't sound like the others assisted much or offered to pitch in.
Your recounting the brother's anger at your Mom spending her money on herself is the part that is the most telling. It sounds as if they were counting their money whilst she was alive - and faulted you for encouraging her to spend her savings to enjoy her life rather than save it for you. Follow your two attorney's advice: do not do penance where no sin exists.
23
The daughter encouraged the mother to take trips -- WITH THE DAUGHTER -- in other words, she got her elderly (perhaps confused) mother to take HER the daughter on vacations! that's not "looking out for mom". That's taking advantage of your mom.
How many elderly widows in their late 80s decide what they really need -- when they very likely are no longer driving -- a brand new Prius? Ever get in and out of a Prius? It's the last car you'd buy for an elderly, frail person.
The story is not credible. I believe this woman "worked on" a frail elderly mother to get her to sign a will that cheated her brothers out of even a small token inheritance. How much does a mother have to hate her sons, to not even leave them a bequest or small sum of money, just to show "I love you and I have remembered you"?
How many elderly widows in their late 80s decide what they really need -- when they very likely are no longer driving -- a brand new Prius? Ever get in and out of a Prius? It's the last car you'd buy for an elderly, frail person.
The story is not credible. I believe this woman "worked on" a frail elderly mother to get her to sign a will that cheated her brothers out of even a small token inheritance. How much does a mother have to hate her sons, to not even leave them a bequest or small sum of money, just to show "I love you and I have remembered you"?
4
When my grandfather died in the early 60's, he left the family business to my two uncles (they ran it), a building in Brooklyn to my other uncle (it would be worth millions today) and nothing to my mother. The reason was simple - she was a girl! My grandfather was from the old country...
My uncle sold the building and gave half to my mom. No one had to say anything apparently - he just did it because it was the right thing to do.
Your mother had a reason for leaving you the house. Sadly, she's gone now and cannot explain herself. But you likely know what it is. And I suspect so do your brothers. And if her reasoning was true and honorable... Perhaps, even if it was spiteful and vindictive, it was her property and she can do with it what she pleases.
Clearly this is a heart wrenching decision and I doubt your mother purposely put you in this bind. But if it was her wish for you to have the house, then so be it.
My uncle sold the building and gave half to my mom. No one had to say anything apparently - he just did it because it was the right thing to do.
Your mother had a reason for leaving you the house. Sadly, she's gone now and cannot explain herself. But you likely know what it is. And I suspect so do your brothers. And if her reasoning was true and honorable... Perhaps, even if it was spiteful and vindictive, it was her property and she can do with it what she pleases.
Clearly this is a heart wrenching decision and I doubt your mother purposely put you in this bind. But if it was her wish for you to have the house, then so be it.
18
Your uncle was an honorable man. Unfortunately today -- especially with real estate in some parts of the country being obscenely valuable -- most people are NOT ethical nor honest.
The mother could have had a reason -- or the daughter could have exercised undue influence over her. For all we know, the DAUGHTER wrote the will and then pressured mom to get an attorney and make it all legal. The mother was in her late 80s; she could have had early stage dementia.
Don't be so sure the daughter did not "edge out" the brothers and keep them from her mother. Clearly she had a very powerful interest in getting the house, and enough money to retire on -- and she tells us clearly "getting a 1/3rd share WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH to maintain her lifestyle"....however, we have no idea therefore, how she was managing to live on $25,000 prior to this! Clearly she lived off of her mother for many years.
The mother could have had a reason -- or the daughter could have exercised undue influence over her. For all we know, the DAUGHTER wrote the will and then pressured mom to get an attorney and make it all legal. The mother was in her late 80s; she could have had early stage dementia.
Don't be so sure the daughter did not "edge out" the brothers and keep them from her mother. Clearly she had a very powerful interest in getting the house, and enough money to retire on -- and she tells us clearly "getting a 1/3rd share WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH to maintain her lifestyle"....however, we have no idea therefore, how she was managing to live on $25,000 prior to this! Clearly she lived off of her mother for many years.
2
Right on both issues!
3
Regarding the second Mx. Withheld, I don't see it as a privacy issue, as Mx. Withheld is merely commenting on the PUBLIC symptoms. It seems reasonable to preface a statement with something like "I just had a family member go through this"/some other reason that he/she may be a reliable source, and then to mention the symptoms he/she noticed, and say that he/she is only trying to alert him (or her?) of a potential issue because he might not notice it.
How would this jeopardize the professor's employment? Will the school monitor the professor's communications to learn about what the student says?
How would this jeopardize the professor's employment? Will the school monitor the professor's communications to learn about what the student says?
7
Nothing is private. Email on a company's server belongs to the organization.
2
Sure, it belongs to the organization, but will the organization comb through the e-mails looking for it? I'm also pretty sure it's illegal to use a health condition as grounds for firing (assuming he/she can still do the job).
1
First letter writer: Your mom wanted *you* to have the house. It was her house and she formally chose what to do with it. The behavior of your brothers might be an indication of why she chose you. They are ungrateful whiners.
My mother, who had been providing a home for my sister for decades, wanted her house sold, and spent a fair amount of money to make it known legally in a trust. Before she died she made me promise not to let my sister end up with the house, but that I did not have to use the same attorney she used to create the trust. I laughed because I really did not think it would be an issue, but my mom insisted. Boy was I wrong. In spite of a formal trust stating the house had to be sold with proceeds divided equally, I had to take my sister to court in order to enforce the trust. She believed she alone was 'entitled'to the house in spite of my mother's wishes. This isn't so much about you as it is what your mom wanted. It was her house to do with as she pleased, and she did. Honor it.
My mother, who had been providing a home for my sister for decades, wanted her house sold, and spent a fair amount of money to make it known legally in a trust. Before she died she made me promise not to let my sister end up with the house, but that I did not have to use the same attorney she used to create the trust. I laughed because I really did not think it would be an issue, but my mom insisted. Boy was I wrong. In spite of a formal trust stating the house had to be sold with proceeds divided equally, I had to take my sister to court in order to enforce the trust. She believed she alone was 'entitled'to the house in spite of my mother's wishes. This isn't so much about you as it is what your mom wanted. It was her house to do with as she pleased, and she did. Honor it.
158
You have not heard the brothers' side of things. Don't assume that because it worked out a certain way in your family, that THIS family is the same.
What if the daughter pressured and manipulated the mother to "leave her everything"? What if the brothers are actually NOT affluent -- have health problems or sick children -- lost their jobs or pensions -- you have NO IDEA what the whole story might be like.
What if the daughter pressured and manipulated the mother to "leave her everything"? What if the brothers are actually NOT affluent -- have health problems or sick children -- lost their jobs or pensions -- you have NO IDEA what the whole story might be like.
2
I have a friend who was recently left out of their parent's will. This person was absolutely shattered and felt their relationship with their late parent had to be questioned due to the will.
It is tremendously sad that a relative with a decent estate would not have the courage to discuss a will's intent while he or she is still living. This discussion could be hurtful and disruptive, but now the whole family is turned on itself -- is this what you want when you craft a divisive will?
It is tremendously sad that a relative with a decent estate would not have the courage to discuss a will's intent while he or she is still living. This discussion could be hurtful and disruptive, but now the whole family is turned on itself -- is this what you want when you craft a divisive will?
46
My father was excluded from his fathers will, but his brothers and sisters (4) split their inheritance equally ($200,000 each) to be fair. I admired their generosity and fairness. Not learning anything, my father passed away from congested heart failure, dementia, and alzheimer's disease in 2006. My younger brother was left everything, leaving me (the middle son) and my older brother with nothing. I assisted in the dissolving of my fathers things and was given his car and later, after asking him to do the right thing, a check for $112,000 in the mail. There is still no accounting for the disposition of his estate nor any appraisal. I do know he had $200K from his parents, a recently sold condo in Flagstaff AZ, and a home in Sun City West, in addition to what he had invested and saved. I'm sure it was/is valued much greater than $375,000 (including the car x 3). As a consequence, I don't know if the oldest received anything from the estate, I know what I received, and have moved on. We don't converse or communicate. My father has created what he perpetuated in life, controversy, just like Donald Trump
7
"each" doesn't belong in quotes. It's not clear whether the hundreds of thousands was combined or singular. Even if it was several (3) each, that wouldn't necessarily put the estate north of $1M.
Marc: so sorry for your story, but it is valuable here in the sense that you are hurt and bitter for a lifetime after being excluded from a parent's will.
Unless an adult child is an absolute abusive monster....they should not be cut out of a will. It will do NOTHING fair, but simply perpetuate bad blood, anger and resentment for a lifetime -- if not generations. It simply is not worth it.
Using a will to "get even" with your adult children over petty slights is just a lousy thing to do.
Unless an adult child is an absolute abusive monster....they should not be cut out of a will. It will do NOTHING fair, but simply perpetuate bad blood, anger and resentment for a lifetime -- if not generations. It simply is not worth it.
Using a will to "get even" with your adult children over petty slights is just a lousy thing to do.
1
No peace offerings. No mediation. Your mother was of sound mind and knew what she was doing. Stop trying to appease these bullies. You owe them nothing.
214
He knows that. He is being disingenuous.
1
You do not know she was "of sound mind". She could have had early stage dementia, where people look and sound pretty normal, but are susceptible to influence.
Do the math. Three children, the sons are in their LATE 60s. The mother has to be at least 87-88 and likely over 90. There is no way that "nobody expected her to die" or "she could have lived 10 more years" -- very unlikely.
An elderly widow that age, perhaps with health issues -- a pushy greedy daughter could easily have influenced her. Look at her words here, about how "poor she is" because she "only earns $25K a year".
I have seen cases where a greedy child or caretaker will bring THEIR OWN attorney, to create a will -- and then push mom or dad to sign the will without reading it!!! believe me, people will do anything to get their hands on an estate. It doesn't even have to be blood relatives.
Do the math. Three children, the sons are in their LATE 60s. The mother has to be at least 87-88 and likely over 90. There is no way that "nobody expected her to die" or "she could have lived 10 more years" -- very unlikely.
An elderly widow that age, perhaps with health issues -- a pushy greedy daughter could easily have influenced her. Look at her words here, about how "poor she is" because she "only earns $25K a year".
I have seen cases where a greedy child or caretaker will bring THEIR OWN attorney, to create a will -- and then push mom or dad to sign the will without reading it!!! believe me, people will do anything to get their hands on an estate. It doesn't even have to be blood relatives.
4
Are you one of the brothers, perhaps? Or perhaps someone did this to you? (Gosh, that would be shocking.) Because as I scroll through these comments I see that you and your bird avatar have replied to at least ten of them.
You haven't been an editor, you don't know exactly what was written to the columnist, only what's been printed. Since he's been proven reliable, and you have not, I'm not sure why you're choosing to nit-pick against someone who you do not personally know. Sad.
You haven't been an editor, you don't know exactly what was written to the columnist, only what's been printed. Since he's been proven reliable, and you have not, I'm not sure why you're choosing to nit-pick against someone who you do not personally know. Sad.
18
The question about whether a student should address a possible health issue with a teacher he only communicates with remotely reminds me of the case of Tarek El-Moussa of HGTV's Flip or Flop. A nurse who watched the show noticed a lump on his throat that she thought could be a thyroid tumor, sent an email, El-Moussa was checked out and the tumor was removed. So yeah, if you see something, say something.
103
I'm glad Appiah didn't split the baby on the Mom Left Me the House question.
No Name Withheld you owe your sibs nothing.
You're situation reminds me of a probate client I had years ago who was the caretaker for her wealthy, elderly and spinster great aunt, from soup to nuts, just as you were with your mum.
Unfortunately the aunt died intestate (no will). Every state has laws governing how property of an intestate deceased will be handled, and in the state where my client and her aunt lived, priority went to a distant relative.
The relative barely knew the aunt and hadn't seen her in decades and, unlike you, had no moral issues with taking the whole estate. My client knew this was not the intent of her aunt, but she had no legal right to compel the relative to do what was "ethical" under the circumstances.
Consider yourself lucky that your mum had a will, and honor her wishes to repay you with some financial security for the years of unstinting love you gave her.
No Name Withheld you owe your sibs nothing.
You're situation reminds me of a probate client I had years ago who was the caretaker for her wealthy, elderly and spinster great aunt, from soup to nuts, just as you were with your mum.
Unfortunately the aunt died intestate (no will). Every state has laws governing how property of an intestate deceased will be handled, and in the state where my client and her aunt lived, priority went to a distant relative.
The relative barely knew the aunt and hadn't seen her in decades and, unlike you, had no moral issues with taking the whole estate. My client knew this was not the intent of her aunt, but she had no legal right to compel the relative to do what was "ethical" under the circumstances.
Consider yourself lucky that your mum had a will, and honor her wishes to repay you with some financial security for the years of unstinting love you gave her.
138
You have literally no way of knowing that the LW is telling the whole story or the truth here.
It is very possible to manipulate a frail elderly relative, especially if there is a lot of money or if they can make a new will, to benefit someone in particular.
Clearly this will was written later in life, and I doubt the mother left her sons out of her original will.
Yes, it is a bigger problem if people die intestate. This has happened in my own family, and I've seen it affect the custody of children, which can be a real tragedy -- forget about property or cash!
It is very possible to manipulate a frail elderly relative, especially if there is a lot of money or if they can make a new will, to benefit someone in particular.
Clearly this will was written later in life, and I doubt the mother left her sons out of her original will.
Yes, it is a bigger problem if people die intestate. This has happened in my own family, and I've seen it affect the custody of children, which can be a real tragedy -- forget about property or cash!
2
If your client had documentation for the care she provided she may be able to contest the will for unpaid wages. In essence she kept her aunt from requiring care elsewhere and preserved the estate by doing all of the caregiving, etc.
1
#LW1 - Keep your inheritance and realize your brothers are bad guys.
When my father died suddenly, my brother and I were in our 40s. My dad left most - but not all - of his estate to our 2 half-siblings who were teenagers to ensure they could go to college. My brother behaved horribly, demanding the car my dad gave our 16 yr old 1/2 sister for her birthday be sold and the profit from that be split between all of us. He was abusive to our stepmother. It was hard for me to watch my brother behave this way and I was in shock because my dad had died suddenly so it took me a long time to realize my brother is an incredible insensitive jerk who was dogging two teenagers who had just lost their father. My brother no longer has any contact with our 1/2 siblings 15 years later and he's still bitter about my dad's estate. I've realized my brother's an angry bitter man at his core and not to expect him to behave decently.
Maya Angelou - "When a person shows you who they are, believe them." Your brothers have shown you who they are. Their meanness is their problem, not yours. It's easy to intimidate people like yourself who are grieving and would welcome making peace at any cost during this difficult time.
Don't give in. Your brothers actions are shameful - bullying you while you are grieving to exploit you financially. You did right by your mother and she was grateful to you. End of story.
When my father died suddenly, my brother and I were in our 40s. My dad left most - but not all - of his estate to our 2 half-siblings who were teenagers to ensure they could go to college. My brother behaved horribly, demanding the car my dad gave our 16 yr old 1/2 sister for her birthday be sold and the profit from that be split between all of us. He was abusive to our stepmother. It was hard for me to watch my brother behave this way and I was in shock because my dad had died suddenly so it took me a long time to realize my brother is an incredible insensitive jerk who was dogging two teenagers who had just lost their father. My brother no longer has any contact with our 1/2 siblings 15 years later and he's still bitter about my dad's estate. I've realized my brother's an angry bitter man at his core and not to expect him to behave decently.
Maya Angelou - "When a person shows you who they are, believe them." Your brothers have shown you who they are. Their meanness is their problem, not yours. It's easy to intimidate people like yourself who are grieving and would welcome making peace at any cost during this difficult time.
Don't give in. Your brothers actions are shameful - bullying you while you are grieving to exploit you financially. You did right by your mother and she was grateful to you. End of story.
253
Maya Angelou is right. Fifty years ago I had a friend who bragged about how he cheated people. Next he tried to cheat me. End of friendship!
24
fast/furious: sorry, but your brother was right to be angry, and no surprise he is bitter.
Unless there are really extenuating circumstances -- an adult child with disability who needs special care -- parents should treat ALL THEIR CHILDREN EQUALLY.
Do anything other than "equal" and you will destroy the family you spent a lifetime building.
In this case, I strongly suspect the LW used undue influence on her frail elderly mother, to cut her brothers out of mom's will. Sorry, her story is not credible.
Unless there are really extenuating circumstances -- an adult child with disability who needs special care -- parents should treat ALL THEIR CHILDREN EQUALLY.
Do anything other than "equal" and you will destroy the family you spent a lifetime building.
In this case, I strongly suspect the LW used undue influence on her frail elderly mother, to cut her brothers out of mom's will. Sorry, her story is not credible.
2
LW #1 - Given what you were making it is hard to imagine that your brothers made less money in their careers. Is it possible that your Mother wrote her will as she did out of concern for your welfare, knowing that your brothers had more lucrative jobs and/or lived without regards to future savings?
I agree; this sounds like venting; an excuse to get mad at you instead of the target of their ire. Personally speaking - don't you dare!!
I agree; this sounds like venting; an excuse to get mad at you instead of the target of their ire. Personally speaking - don't you dare!!
58
What is missing from the first letter is the state of each sibling's relationship with the deceased mother. It sounds like the daughter (? - based on "widow" and not "widower") was reasonably close with the mother, and seems to have been the primary caregiver (probably for free). Not too much detail about the brothers, but it's possible the mother didn't think them worthy of an inheritance - be it due to their relationship with her or them simply not needing it. I think it would also be good to know when the will was written relative to the mother's death.
I do wonder about some things though. The daughter (?) said that she slowly began fixing the home, but then says that the mother put a lot of money into the home. Also, based on the magnitude of the brothers' demands, the daughter (?) would still have at least $150,000, which she did not have when she was living two miles away. So I challenge the claim that she would be "wiped out", unless she was wiped out/living in poverty before the mother died.
I do wonder about some things though. The daughter (?) said that she slowly began fixing the home, but then says that the mother put a lot of money into the home. Also, based on the magnitude of the brothers' demands, the daughter (?) would still have at least $150,000, which she did not have when she was living two miles away. So I challenge the claim that she would be "wiped out", unless she was wiped out/living in poverty before the mother died.
13
If you live in many metropolitan areas you could not buy a studio condo for $150K. Did you miss the part about her helping her mother every day? Her mother did know what she was doing. A parent doesn't have to suffer abuse before her death by telling her other children what she proposed to do. It was her money and she knew what she was doing. The brothers have probably asked an attorney and been told that they don't have a leg to stand on. Especially when the sister was the person taking care of the parent for years and years.
11
The mother made a decision. All your wondering is just that ;wondering and is of no consequence to the settlement of the estate. It has passed Probate and two attorneys have confirmed its validity. I agree with Kwame's analysis and conclusion.
3
To answer your questions: if the home was sold and the proceeds divided three ways the daughter would be out on the street without a residence. Presumably the brothers have residences. In many areas of the country $150,000 won't buy you a small doghouse. How fair is that? Is the woman supposed to give up her job and friends and move to rural trailer park?
17
Wow, that's an easy one. It seems your mother gave you the inheritance because your siblings are utter jerks. While they are your siblings and you may feel some need from them, the only question is how to move on with your life without the jerks. There's no going back from their words, they clearly deserve nothing and you would dishonor your mother's intentions by giving them something, anything.
83
When people behave like the brothers, I tend to think it's not really about the money. It may be that they are waking up to the fact that they weren't there for their mother and didn't behave honorably while she lived. So accepting that may be what's galling; the will validates that their sister showed up and they didn't.
3
I hope the LW reads this because I'm experiencing both sides of this issue. I recently talked to my financial advisor and removed the "ungrateful" child from all my assets. Everything is left to the "responsible" child who will have no problem telling ungrateful why name was removed!! We really need to stop letting the word "family" rule good decision making. Sounds like her mother knew who was there 24/7!!!!
Next my mother is in a nursing home doing poorly and the vultures are circling because my mother refuses to discuss the settlement from a lawsuit in which my teen sis was killed getting off a school bus. I could care less about money but I'm angry I don't know if my sis got justice!! This anger has me not wanting to go see my mother. We've been estranged over 15yrs due to her manipulation of my siblings! Sadly all those whom stayed away are successful and happy!! My mother's situation showed me how to get my affairs in order to ensure the responsible child "who knows my wishes" controls ALL decisions!!
Next my mother is in a nursing home doing poorly and the vultures are circling because my mother refuses to discuss the settlement from a lawsuit in which my teen sis was killed getting off a school bus. I could care less about money but I'm angry I don't know if my sis got justice!! This anger has me not wanting to go see my mother. We've been estranged over 15yrs due to her manipulation of my siblings! Sadly all those whom stayed away are successful and happy!! My mother's situation showed me how to get my affairs in order to ensure the responsible child "who knows my wishes" controls ALL decisions!!
21
Vet Mom, I think it is unwise to expect the "responsible child" to tell the neglectful child why she was disinherited. Instead, it would be better to mother to have her attorney write a letter on her behalf, to be signed by mother, and then given to the neglectful child after mother's death, explaining the mother's thinking. That would provide the reasons for mother's thinking "from the horse's mouth," might avoid some bad blood between the siblings, and would have evidentiary value if the neglectful sibling tries to overturn mother's estate plan.
12
You should tell the ungrateful child why s/he was removed now. It doesn't matter that you think the other child can handle telling that child why. You will should also explicitly state that you are not leaving anything to "ungrateful" child -- it removes the question.
Not telling people they aren't in the will is what causes problems. And dividing the estate equally is generally the best way to go, but there are times when a someone may feel differently (such as a child with special needs, disabilities, one who devoted a lot of time to care for parent, etc.)
Lastly, if your mother accepted the settlement, why do you not assume your sister got "justice"? Does the money bring your sister back? Does it replace her? It's really not your business.
Not telling people they aren't in the will is what causes problems. And dividing the estate equally is generally the best way to go, but there are times when a someone may feel differently (such as a child with special needs, disabilities, one who devoted a lot of time to care for parent, etc.)
Lastly, if your mother accepted the settlement, why do you not assume your sister got "justice"? Does the money bring your sister back? Does it replace her? It's really not your business.
21
For the love of God, do NOT put the "responsible" child in the position of telling the ungrateful one your wishes. Be very open and clear with both your children about what the will contains. The ungrateful one will probably be bitter and angry, but those emotions should be directed at you. It's horribly unfair to make the other child be the bearer of bad news after your passing. He/she will undoubtedly be the recipient of his/her sibling's wrath for decisions that YOU made.
69
If you legally get the house and not them keep it.
Most times (not all), when a parent leaves a home to only certain offspring, they are usually responding to neurotic needs ie, the kids getting the money put up with the parents abuse more than the others.
That is what happened in my house and in other cases I know. In my case my uncle (estate) abused my two sisters and not me and left me out of the will.
I had no problem with it.