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.
Among my friends and relatives who I am aware of what type of inheritances they received or plan to give this was/is the general plan. Probably about 95% of the time their entire estate was divided equally between their adult children. In a few cases, there were small bequests to grandchildren, as an example, the adult children each received $200,000 and each grandchild received $10,000.
Of course, every family is different. In some families the grandparents are much older, and much wealthier and perhaps they already helped their children and grandchildren a lot financially. When my last parent passed away, their grandchildren ranged in age from preschoolers to college graduates (with great careers). Plus, their youngest son was young enough that he could easily have had more children. And, yes, some families may have a lot more children than other families.
In my case, my will divides everything equally between my adult children, and it is unlikely that I will change it in the future to include current granchildren.
Given we’re talking about $43K each its not enough money to be all bent out of shape over by any means. But I don’t get the concept of leaving money to grandkids, absolutely stupid if you ask me. Her money, though, her wishes.
Old lady has 2 adult daughters. Old lady has 300,000 at death.
One daughter has 4 kids. One daughter
...
My personal opinion is that this is unfair. Both daughters have good relationships with their mom and both daughters are solid middle class with household income a little more than $100,00 p/y.( not like the daughter with 1 kid is a millionaire and doesnt need the money.)
LOL. Sounds like a variant of "fair share" argument one step removed (behind the scenes) from the Socialist activists who somehow still have an audience in the USA.
To me, sounds like the ultimate fair distribution, end of story. No "to each according to his need" BS. But, there will always be complainers at estates. Always. No need to read any further.
That's what lawyers are for, too, to file suit against brothers, sisters, grandkids, etc. Most of whom want no part of it.
I was executor for a large estate and watched the rats scramble over the cheese. I shut down a few, hard, to my bemusement because they're all strangers to me anyway. End of the day, couple got their "fair share" anyway...one, nothing, another some antique furniture she wanted...so it worked out well enough. Haven't seen any of those bums since, and never will again God willing.
Grannie had 7 people that she loved, probably loved them equally. She wanted to gift each of them the same amount. What does it matter what "family" got more?
Old lady has 2 adult daughters. Old lady has 300,000 at death.
One daughter has 4 kids. One daughter has 1 kid.
Old lady leaves $43,000 to each grand kid and 43,000 to each daughter.
43,000 x 7= $301,000
Only thing is one daughter and her family got $215,000 essentially and one daughter and her family got only $86,000.
My personal opinion is that this is unfair. Both daughters have good relationships with their mom and both daughters are solid middle class with household income a little more than $100,00 p/y.( not like the daughter with 1 kid is a millionaire and doesnt need the money.)
Thoughts?
It's her money. If I had a kid I felt they thought they were entitled to mine in death, I'd probably give most of it to the other one(s) just as my final laugh.
We believed in helping people while we are alive and while they need it.
+1
Yes, I believe 100% in giving help to get started in life. Help with college costs, help with down payment on first house, for example. Beyond that, IMO what's "fair" is for the people who earned the money to spend it on themselves or donate it as they see fit.
Fights over inheritance and money can destroy otherwise good relationships among relatives.
Yes, I believe 100% in giving help to get started in life. Help with college costs, help with down payment on first house, for example.
And by giving the same amount to each grandchild, the grandmother in question has done just that. $43,000 is a nice chunk of change that each child can use to pay for education, a down payment on a house, seed money for a small business startup, or whatever. That's why I have little sympathy for the OP's claims of unfairness. Grandma decided she wanted to give her grandkids as well as her kids an inheritance, and so decided to divide the estate into seven equal pieces so each person named in the will got an identical share. How is that unfair? Sure, Grandma could have decided to only give her children an inheritance and split the money 50:50, but she didn't - and in any case it was her money to give away as she saw fit. (I wonder what the OP would have had to say if Grandma had decided to give her money ONLY to the grandkids, on the grounds that being younger they'd benefit from it more than her already-established-in-life adult children would, or had decided to donate 100% of it to charity? Those would have been equally reasonable decisions, although I doubt the OP would have approved of either of them.)
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.
Sounds like a variant of "fair share" argument one step removed (behind the scenes) from the Socialist activists who somehow still have an audience in the USA.
