As we get all of Mom's affairs in order, the topic was raised how to split her estate when she passes. Siblings that do nothing want an equal share while the main caregiver would rather base it on the amount of participation with Mom's care. How do we have an equitable talk w/o arguing or hating one another? It seems a bit selfish to split evenly when the majority of her care is primarily w/one child. (Our Elder Law Atty says it's up to us to agree so no real help there.) Thank to everyone that answers or offers input.
The testator, who to be fair was probably a bit of a handful by the sound of her, couldn't have been much clearer about her wishes. She had fallen out with her daughter big time, and stated explicitly in her will that she did not want her to inherit. Well, here we are - this is the report from The Guardian (respectable left wing broadsheet - not my daily read but good for law reports):
***
After a decade-long legal fight with three animal welfare charities over her mother’s decision to cut her out of any inheritance, a poverty-stricken daughter has finally been awarded £164,000 by senior judges.
The ruling by the court of appeal is further evidence that wills deemed to be unreasonable can be overturned or varied by the courts.
The court of appeal defied Melita Jackson’s final wishes to give all she had to animal charities and saved her only child, Heather Ilott, from a life of financial desperation.
Jackson, who died aged 70 in 2004, never forgave her daughter, 54, for eloping with her boyfriend when she was only 17, the court in London heard. She left her daughter nothing, bequeathing instead her estate, worth nearly £500,000, to three charities: The Blue Cross, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
In 2007, the county court first awarded Ilott £50,000 on the grounds that her mother had acted in an “unreasonable, capricious and harsh” way to her daughter.
In 2011, the court of appeal decided that sum was insufficient. Judges then warned that further costly litigation would eat into the value of the estate. The delays are reminiscent of Charles Dickens’ notorious case of the disputed will of Jarndyce vs Jarndyce in the novel Bleak House.
This week’s ruling increased Ilott’s entitlement to £164,000. Most of thatwill be used by Ilott, a mother of five to buy her housing association home, in Ware, Hertfordshire, with £20,000 left over to supplement her benefits.
Ilott never met her father as she was only born two months after Thomas Jackson was killed in an industrial accident in 1960. Jackson and Ilott fell out when Ilott ran away with her teenage boyfriend, Nicholas – who is still her partner.
However, the family are now living on the breadline, her barrister, Brie Stevens-Hoare QC, told the court. As well as being kept off the housing ladder, she said Ilott is so poor that she had “never had a holiday”.
“She had difficulty affording clothes for her family, was limited in the food she could buy and much of what she had was old or second hand,” said the QC.
Lord Justice Ryder and Sir Colin Rimer agreed that the award to Ilott was fair in light of her straitened circumstances and basic human needs.
Stevens-Hoare argued that Ilott’s father would have turned in his grave at his widow’s meanness. Much of Jackson’s wealth derived from assets Jackson paid for from his wages and compensation money awarded after his death.
It was not Ilott’s fault that her mother took against her, said the QC. “Heather had an unreasonable, capricious and harsh mother. Mrs Jackson took offence at Heather’s choices although they were choices she was entitled to make and it was reasonable to expect her mother to accept.
“Instead her mother consistently undermined reconciliation attempts. Although Heather was at some fault, her mother was the dominant cause.”
In a press release, James Aspden, solicitor for the three charities said they were “surprised and disappointed” by the court’s decision.
Nearly £2bn a year goes to charity through legacies and the lawyer said the ruling had “major implications for the work of the whole charity sector”.
***
Moral of the story? I suppose, if you want to be absolutely on the safe side and you really can't stand your children, you'd better give your money away to charities while you're alive. Or take it out of the bank and burn it. Interestingly, none of the reports that I have seen discuss the legal principles of the case; and given the cost to the public purse of supporting the claimant and her family I guess this is a public interest judgement if ever there was one.
So look out for developments - because precedents creep across boundaries these days.
....it doesnt' matter what the kids want, or think. All that matters is what the senior wants. When it comes to their Will, or POA, or beneficiary designations, as long as the senior is competent, they can choose to write their children (one, several, or even all of them!) out of their Will, and to designate a all their assets to go to a charity, or even a non-family member. Spouses cannot be completely written out of Wills. But children, they can be given as much, or as little, as mom or dad decides. If mom or dad wants one of their kids to receive "more" because they were always there in a caregiving capacity, that is definitely a valid choice, and the courts will uphold that choice if it is written into the Will.
"You maintain their dignity by keeping quiet." Sorry if there was any inferred criticism.
I do understand that it's impossible to control someone else's actions; and I know that's more than frustrating. Some people just don't listen and are going to do what they want, especially if they're convinced they know better than we do. I see that a lot with meddlers.
If I have to, I'll easily become aggressive and "in your face" and just did it twice with meddlers who thought they could make assumptions for my father.
My sister & I are co-executors. Personally, I wouldn't care if Dad spent every dime he had on HIMSELF before he leaves this planet & we had to bury him in a cardboard box - as long as he enjoys himself & denies himself nothing. But because it is what my folks wanted, I will see to it that everyone gets their equal share - and I hope it makes them happy, as sometimes it seems like that's all their waiting for.
My compensation for looking after my folks for the last 10 years and Dad's moving in with me after Mom's passing? I am at peace knowing that I did my best to be a good, loving daughter to my parents and that my father's last days on earth will be filled with peace and comfort with me by his side throughout. No amount of money will buy that kind of peace.
I also appreciate having more insight into your perspectives; it helps me understand more why you see some issues as you do.
There are others here who would agree that planning could be better managed; I don't disagree with that, only with the fact that there are often so many financial limitations affecting these dynamics.
There is an issue to be argued though that education of long term parental care might be something to even be added in educational curricula, but I suspect that people in the teens and 20's don't see these issues as we older folks do. And of course they need to focus on an educational curriculum that will help them in finding a decent job.
One other money point - it just seems it would be helpful for family support professionals - to build a complete list of likely expense areas around family support roles. For when I was caregiver, and worried about my role - I tended to undervalue the role my older brother played, in arranging funerals for parents and also for my eldest brother and older sister. So that older brother also manages estate left for disabled brother - he has areas of blindness and prejudice and fear of me and my anger ... and also, he did show up when needed, to take the lead on funeral planning, which does take lots of detailed work. All those expenses, including long term care supports, should be taught as percentage of money required in old age - so that parents can be aware, that it's not all about good feelings or health and care - and that if they have a list of issues, whether or not they have the money or all issues are used - all family members can learn what's involved - as a younger sib, I learned nothing! And ended up taking on the largest, longest, chunk of "family responsibility"!
As to a caregiver getting a larger share, I personally, for what it's worth, don't agree. I'm pretty sure mom wouldn't want to slight her children by treating some as if they were her favorites.
I likely sound academic, and I may have distanced myself a bit by now, after providing 40 years of direct care for my disabled brother - I had to go through many battles around the care, often felt overwhelmed and I was actually removed from my family of origin, and never involved them, until I had done care by then, almost 30 years. Some hardening of my arteries, I think! When I finally lost the support of my long term boyfriend, and turned to family of origin over the phone, assuming that by now they'd be glad that I had pitched in and relieved them of so much responsibility for so long - and I discovered to my astonishment that they were stuck in an ancient, never examined time warp of interpretation and had paid no attention whatever to my ups and downs - I went through my years of being prostrate with grief, anger, resentment, despair - I've EARNED my present academic status! But ironically, because it was so important, I also learned how to fight, and I needed their support, because I was standing alone in this country with care for a multi disabled brother on my hands, and I wanted emotional support and attention, as well as money.
So - that accounts for the dryness of my summary, I don't intend that at all. I just came to see that from siblings point of view, they are only responsible for the needs of the frail member - they are suspicious of any other sibling claiming any expectation from them. I believe they are wrong, of course. And I support new conversations about how sharing care, effort etc, is healthy for all - and draining on all. I was just focusing in my piece on estate planning - not as it is currently done, but how it needs to be planned ahead of time, so that all family members can come to realize that every care task is work, and needs to be put into a plan. If caregivers don't have time or inclination to report regularly, family can hire someone to help, for without information that they often cannot even hear from emotional siblings - they are left with no consequences of their denial and no information. I believe information helps ground conversations, as does money, and looking through those lens actually Supports the goals of caregivers. I noted the idea of building the addition house - and realized, that is the kind of expense that should be planned to partly come out of parents' estates - not just be left to any sibling to construct that for their parent's care!
Many complications - but lawyers and eldercare mediators and caregivers need to get together and put all pieces into the pot, for the issues seem often too big, especially planning for changes through time - too big for any group of siblings to manage just through feelings and rights.
Thanks! Maybe will spend time on this next week - for now I'm working on a huge project, one I set aside for so many years, as I focused on my brother's care. I need good wishes from all on my own projects now, as I'm rusty!
Cassie
1. Attorneys generally do participate in continuing ed, although it's been awhile since I was knowledgeable on the requirements. Law firms for which I worked had continuing ed lunch programs for attorneys and paralegals. I also attended reasonably priced programs in my particular practice area. Some firms also provide community education programs for the general public, and publish newsletters on related practice area topics as well.
Attorneys and other professionals focus on the legal aspects with knowledge of ancillary issues. It's not always realistic for them to provide advice, at an attorney's billable rate, for something that can be researched by individuals. Legal advice cannot, though; it requires the benefit of legal education.
2. The need for care can often arise suddenly, before a family has had a chance to plan financially. And some families will never have the resources to plan regardless of how long a look-forward period exists. The funds just aren't there and never will be.
3. Many families or single children need to support themselves. Some of us here are in that situation. The option of quitting work to care for someone full time is not realistic.
4. The concept of sharing progress, etc. with other siblings is laudable, but if you spend some time to read some of the posts on family friction, especially between siblings, as well as factor in the knowledge that some siblings may be providing care entirely on their own w/o any other sibling or outside help, it will become apparent that some of us neither have the time for reporting, nor are other siblings always interested in that level of information. Let me ask also why I should bother to maintain reporting standards and activities to provide to someone who is not going to help? Frankly, that's a waste of my time.
5. You stated:
"Many adult children would be glad to help out, put in their bit, from time to time - or they believe they would do so, even if they may find it hard in reality to allocate time when needed for the care situation."
I would have to view that as a laudable but inaccurate assumption. Many siblings in fact do not want to participate, and won't.
6. You also wrote:
"So, it can seems to work out sometimes that a nearby child can benefit from putting on an addition to their home where mom can live and be close to family."
Where, pray tell, are these adult children going to get the money to add to their homes? I subsist on SS alone and can't even afford to buy a new car, let alone put an addition on my house. That particular suggestion really doesn't reflect a reality for many of us.
And that doesn't even address zoning and permitting issues, including whether or not there's even room on the lot to add an addition.
7. Another suggestion of yours makes me scratch my head and wonder:
"The needs here are those of the elder, not the child - some overlap may be good for both, but the benefits to the frail person need to be reported regularly, maybe monthly reports - maybe validated by community people - now we can track lots online, format reports and see they are shared with all other involved parties."
The needs are not JUST of the elder, they're of both! I'm not a martyr, and neither is anyone I know who's caring for a parent or parents.
We caregivers are still humans and have our needs, including maintaining our own health so that we can care for our parents. I honestly can't believe anyone could conceive something so naïve.
And reports, monthly posted online? For what purpose? Are you unaware of how personal information is commoditized these days? Are you unaware of privacy issues? I can't imagine even considering posting updates on my parent's care on some online reporting site available to "community" or whatever.
I could add more but I'm not sure there's a reason to. Although you seem to have experienced the sole caregiver phenomenon yourself, I can't help thinking that your approach is very academic, as if viewing the caregiving situation from a perspective not of those people on the ground and in the trenches doing the majority of the caregiving without help from siblings.
My point is not specifically to criticize, but rather to help bring the suggestions you make to a meeting with reality, with practicality, and especially of the recognition that these caregiving journeys are often sole ventures, completely without support from siblings, regardless of how much we might try or even plead for that kind of help, as well as the fact that a lot of your suggestions seem like governmental approaches - create more paperwork, more interface, more reporting, etc., but how does this REALLY help the elder and his/her caregiver?
Again, I'm not trying to challenge you, just point out some need for realism. You obviously are a good analyst and can see the situation from an analytical perspective. Blend the suggestions with practical applications and you can write your book then.
Seems to me that more professional education needs to be given to lawyers who draw up trusts - education that is current on the possible costs of long term care, and arrange for some significant benefit to be planned to spend on care. Family need to factor in this possible expense, to their long term and inheritance expectations, instead of just hiding heads in the sand and hoping a parent doesn't need all their legacy before they die.
A child will not be paid as much as professional services, but a respectable amount per year needs to be proposed along with tracking expenses, sharing those regularly, and sharing reports of issues and progress - those things are expected of professionals, and if it is one of the children who takes in the parent, or lives nearby and becomes the coordinator and onsite helper, they need to start out at the outset with formats for tracking and sharing progress, so it becomes routine, and all stay aware.
Currently there are mostly fears and prejudices and lack of financial planning and understanding - there is an old legacy that suggests that a child who moves back home to care for an elder parent, is a freeloader, seeking free rent and lack of need to get a job, and most other siblings fear having not one fragile person but two, draining on family resources. This prejudice needs the light of day to clarify the real costs to any caregiver, who makes time to give family care.
Some fuzzy lines may be true, but especially in today's fragmented world with family often too busy or far away, doing the bulk of care for a parent - is a job!
Many adult children would be glad to help out, put in their bit, from time to time - or they believe they would do so, even if they may find it hard in reality to allocate time when needed for the care situation. So, it can seems to work out sometimes that a nearby child can benefit from putting on an addition to their home where mom can live and be close to family.
The trick as I see it it, is to become educated and connected to others in community around the quality of care, have local signals of things going well, not only depend on distant family to evaluate. The needs here are those of the elder, not the child - some overlap may be good for both, but the benefits to the frail person need to be reported regularly, maybe monthly reports - maybe validated by community people - now we can track lots online, format reports and see they are shared with all other involved parties.
This is really important, not just as a check and balance on a caregiver who benefits somewhat by sharing financial resources with an elder - but also because emergencies and new contingencies come up repeatedly as years pass, and it can take that same child caregiver - vast amounts of time to sort out and make arrangements for new situations - maybe time spent researching a new insurance company, visits with doctors, time to educate in home care help - who all change over time.
That backup support time is invisible to distant siblings, who are often caught in a time warp with past impressions of sibling roles, suspicious of anyone who suggests the roles need changing. And, distant family members easily underestimate the impact of new disabilities on a parent's confidence and ability to participate - hearing of issues, they treat upsets or falls as one-off occurrences, where the close at hand caregiver sees each episode as a possible signal of deterioration that can be ameliorated with accomodations - but the art of finding and installing and helping a fragile person to safely use new accomodations - takes time in and of itself - that time needs tracking.
Many adult children are willing to accept changes requested by the parent directly - but the problem there is that many parents would rather endure suffering for themselves or for the caregiver - in order to avoid upsetting long established family roles. Many don't realize that their needs have grown, so what feels like a continuing family home with the caregiver living there - is not any more the same home they established - if pushed that adult caregiver would need to find ways to interact with the larger world,find some way to make money - and - my pet peeve - any job or arrangement should set up a retirement fund - so that a longstanding family care provider, does not suddenly find themselves destitute once the parent is gone - with no accumulated retirement plan, except to have the home that the other children were also expecting as their legacy.
I realize I need to write a book or manual on this subject. Get rich by my hard knocks knowledge, as I was surprised at the gaps in information that existed between me and my other relatives, when I did the care for my disabled brother, from a different country. We were best valued as "out of sight, out of mind" - and while my work was used and appreciated by the other brothers who did not then need to worry or devote their time - they still can follow the family format and worry about the care recipient, and find it self serving of me to wish for their attention to my life path, not just the needs that family defined as risky, the needs of the fragile members.
Caregivers need better plans, not free rein, for it matters to have good relationships among siblings who often remain after parents have died. The old ways of assuming that elders will be cared for "somehow" might have had application when village life was stable - in today's world, we have no plan that really works - and it is not fair to take advantage of a generous moment or time that one child offers "to help". Making sure that all elder estates budget high and low options for long term care, and those estimates are shared with the whole family - can add a basis of reality to discussions or arguments that will arise, but can become ways that adult siblings learn of each other's talents in adult life - if they are not seen suspiciously as secret arrangements.
I took care of my dad without any help from any family members even when I begged for help. Before he got really ill with Dementia he changed his living trust so I would get all his assets when he died. He needed a lot of professional care so most his assets were gone when he died. When he died I was required to send all his potential beneficiaries a copy of his trust within 60 days. Needless to say, I think my siblings were very hurt to see in writing that our father made these changes and they were completely left out. One sibling has never spoke to me again.