Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because I will not send the message to my kids that I valued one over the others. Throughout our lives, our children will do different things for us. Are we to keep score and decide which one was worth more in the end? That's what you're suggesting. I would not want my children thinking I cared more for one than the others so I won't send that message. If a child does choose to provide care then they'll all inherit a little more because of that child including that child.
Gifting your estate is just that. Gifting your estate. It's not something my kids earned anyway. It's my gift to them and I value them all equally. If a child feels the need to be paid for their services, I would expect them to ask to be paid.
I am sorry that you feel that giving more money to one child who did this work is sending a message that you value one child over another. As I said before, I would not, as a child of my parent, read it that way at all if I knew about the financial sacrifice of another to care for my parent. It is YOU who is keeping score. It is you who look as the inheritance as somehow meaning that one child is worth more to the parent than another. That is your interpretation but not how we all feel.
You call the OP "whining". I say he made a financial sacrifice in order to do a great kindness. The OP does not simply "want" money! The OP needs the money due to the financial sacrifice!!
And yes, there is a choice, which you so conveniently overlook. The choice is to do it themselves and provide a level of personal care that cannot be duplicated by a stranger, unless, of course, it is skilled care.
And what you would want is not what many parents would LOVE. To be cared for at home by an adult child. A blessing.
The OP, clearly, wants more money than her brother is given. She's asking for it to be in the form of an inheritance instead of paycheck. She should ask for it up front. That solves the entire issue. I'm kind of confused as to why she hasn't. It's clear she wants compensation. Otherwise, she wouldn't be complaining about being equal to her brother in her parents will.
The problem with the pay she wants being in the form of an inheritance is that an inheritance is a gift of something not owed to the child in the first place. It's a gift the parent chose to give. Giving one child more sends the message they are worth more. Inheritances aren't earned by performing duties. They're a gift. Paychecks are earned.
Whether a parent would love being cared for by their child is individual. My great grandfather, who used to throw feces around the room, clearly, did not like having his diaper changed by his daughter. Unfortunately, there was no money there to have someone else provide care. Personally, I'd like to live with my kids but I'm not sure I'd want them changing my diapers. I'm thinking it's time to hire a stranger if it comes to that.
My MIL is so adamant that none of her kids provide care for her that she moved into a senior complex and prepaid for nursing care when the time comes. She does not want her children caring for her. I know my grandmother hated having her diapers changed by a relative. It was humiliating enough when it was a stranger. I'm not sure I'd say parents would love to be cared for by a child. Some might but others won't.
I do agree that caring for the elderly is an act of love.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 05-05-2013 at 08:41 PM..
Um, no. I'm in that situation. It's not what you say. It's how you say it. I'm always amazed at how poorly people communicate.
My experience has been different. There are family members who simply will not hear, no matter how it is said to them. This has to do with history starting in the early childhood and how family dynamics were set to work, early in the life of that family.
I am sorry that you feel that giving more money to one child who did this work is sending a message that you value one child over another. As I said before, I would not, as a child of my parent, read it that way at all if I knew about the financial sacrifice of another to care for my parent. It is YOU who is keeping score. It is you who look as the inheritance as somehow meaning that one child is worth more to the parent than another. That is your interpretation but not how we all feel.
It does because an inheritance is a gift. If I feel a child needs to be paid for their services, I'll pay them. However what I gift to each of my children will not change.
No score keeping here. In fact, it's the opposite. I'm not going to hold anything they did or didn't do against any of my kids and decide their worth accordingly. If my child requires compensation for any service provided to me, she needs to ask for it if I haven't offered to pay her. Inheritances aren't about who did more or who is loved more. They are a final gift a parent gives. The reading of the will is not time to rank the children.
If compensation is in order, that should be taken care of before the reading of the will. Anything willed is a gift. Plain and simple.
And any inherited money is not taxed if the will is below a gazillion dollars......and payment is. So effectively the caregiver is employed, although chances are that it may be at a much lesser pay scale than what could be obtained in the real world, and they are also taxed.
I had a $100K/yr job I lost by virtue of medical transcription becoming a dinosaur shortly before Dad needed help...I was out of work, but could have easily found a job doing coding and probably made 75% of what I was making previously. I was on hiatus, lol, and taking a little time off after a lifetime of working. Dad needed, I was out of the job market for the time being, he had needs my sibling could not fulfill. It made sense at the time. In the subsequent time, when I've needed to return to work, guess what's happened? He's older...more frail...requiring more. He's also quite wealthy and is terrified of a stranger being in his home. NOW what makes sense? Yes, I could refuse to do any more and hire someone and throw him into a mental hell. I consider that way more selfish than asking for a little compensation, but we all see the world from a different window.
Should one of my children choose to care for me in later life, whether on the front end or back end I would make sure they were compensated to the best of my ability and within my means. My will would not be a statement of proportionate love - my will bequeathing that child that sacrificed for me and cared for me would be a tax-free acknowledgement of their time and effort. Each child would share equally in the lion's share of the estate, with a written statement as to why one might receive more than the other in the end. And it would be discussed with the other child prior to implementing the will. If he doesn't like it, well....<shrug>....I can't help that. But I've talked with them about every other aspect of the will, why not that one?
Whoever said women are more likely to be talked into being caregivers or feeling that is their duty was correct. When I talked about going back to work you'd have thought I talked about giving my father up for adoption. Am I going to ask for pay? NO. I still have some pride left. One thing you have to remember is that most older folks are WWII babies or slightly post war and post depression. They don't give up one damn dime if they don't have to. They've lived being frugal, they've lived in another era where multigenerational homes were the norm, and life has changed to some degree. But in most families there is one child who bears the brunt of care or visitation or whatever. While that child may receive also the most benefit and personal satisfaction from caring for the elder, satisfaction may not pay the bills and the relationship may not be there to have a frank talk about expectations or needs.
I'm glad it's so black and white in some people's worlds. A lot of us live in a very muddy universe.
I have a feeling that a lot of the people who are defending the equal distribution of assets in the will are the very people who didn't do squat for their parent while he/she was alive.
I have a feeling that a lot of the people who are defending the equal distribution of assets in the will are the very people who didn't do squat for their parent while he/she was alive.
I have a feeling that a lot of the people who are defending the equal distribution of assets in the will are the very people who didn't do squat for their parent while he/she was alive.
And any inherited money is not taxed if the will is below a gazillion dollars......and payment is. So effectively the caregiver is employed, although chances are that it may be at a much lesser pay scale than what could be obtained in the real world, and they are also taxed.
I had a $100K/yr job I lost by virtue of medical transcription becoming a dinosaur shortly before Dad needed help...I was out of work, but could have easily found a job doing coding and probably made 75% of what I was making previously. I was on hiatus, lol, and taking a little time off after a lifetime of working. Dad needed, I was out of the job market for the time being, he had needs my sibling could not fulfill. It made sense at the time. In the subsequent time, when I've needed to return to work, guess what's happened? He's older...more frail...requiring more. He's also quite wealthy and is terrified of a stranger being in his home. NOW what makes sense? Yes, I could refuse to do any more and hire someone and throw him into a mental hell. I consider that way more selfish than asking for a little compensation, but we all see the world from a different window.
Should one of my children choose to care for me in later life, whether on the front end or back end I would make sure they were compensated to the best of my ability and within my means. My will would not be a statement of proportionate love - my will bequeathing that child that sacrificed for me and cared for me would be a tax-free acknowledgement of their time and effort. Each child would share equally in the lion's share of the estate, with a written statement as to why one might receive more than the other in the end. And it would be discussed with the other child prior to implementing the will. If he doesn't like it, well....<shrug>....I can't help that. But I've talked with them about every other aspect of the will, why not that one?
Whoever said women are more likely to be talked into being caregivers or feeling that is their duty was correct. When I talked about going back to work you'd have thought I talked about giving my father up for adoption. Am I going to ask for pay? NO. I still have some pride left. One thing you have to remember is that most older folks are WWII babies or slightly post war and post depression. They don't give up one damn dime if they don't have to. They've lived being frugal, they've lived in another era where multigenerational homes were the norm, and life has changed to some degree. But in most families there is one child who bears the brunt of care or visitation or whatever. While that child may receive also the most benefit and personal satisfaction from caring for the elder, satisfaction may not pay the bills and the relationship may not be there to have a frank talk about expectations or needs.
I'm glad it's so black and white in some people's worlds. A lot of us live in a very muddy universe.
Very good points. Your father also had good reason to be "terrified" of having strangers come into his home.
Lots of retired elderly in my area, about once a month it is on the news or in the paper of a paid caregiver having ripped off an elderly person by cleaning out their savings account.
The scary thing is many of them come from home healthcare agencies(for example a CNA) who aren't even given a backgound check. They get the elder to get comfortable with them and start working for the elder directly. Next thing you know they have access to credit cards, checking, and savings accounts.
What's worse is when caught they get probation most of the time. In one case a woman scammed $70K from a senior and was ordered to pay it back $1,000 a month. Her victim was 82 yrs old, she won't see that money again.
If the sibling doing the care feels they should get reimbursed for the care, that should have been discussed in the beginning or at least brought up now. The person writing the will has every right to disburse any assets that are left after their death as they please so there is no "fair" about it. "Fair"? What do we know about life and anything about it being "fair"? There should have been an understanding before this all started between all parties involved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In one case a woman scammed $70K from a senior and was ordered to pay it back $1,000 a month. Her victim was 82 yrs old, she won't see that money again.
