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.
Is there no will? Maybe she should make one.
I agree with the primary care giver. They get what they get based on what they've done and contributed. They haven't done anything? They don't get anything. I know full well what kind of work and brutal hours goes into taking care of the elderly. That primary care giver, as far as I'm concerned, deserves it all...or damn sure most of it.
At each later stage (harvest, threshing, milling the wheat into flour, and baking the flour into bread), the hen again asks for help from the other animals, but again she gets no assistance.
Finally, the hen has completed her task, and asks who will help her eat the bread. This time, all the previous non-participants eagerly volunteer. But she declines their help, stating that no one aided her in the preparation work, and eats it with her chicks, leaving none for anyone else.
The moral of this story is that those who show no willingness to contribute to a product do not deserve to enjoy the product: "if any man will not work, never let him eat."
Yup. Love that story. Nice and simple, isn't it?
Her wishes are what they are today, but they are clueless to the amount of money, mental and physical work goes into their care giving..
If the POA is not benefitting from the estate, sometime they can draw up the codicil for mom to sign off on & have notarized. But that really should be a legal determination if it is feasible for your mom's cognitive ability. I'm my mom's executrix but I do not at all benefit from her estate as a person inheriting from her, so this takes me out of anyone claiming I am doing it for me. If whomever is indicated as executor is like my situation, they can really hard-ball on administering the estate.
This is likely going to be ugly and ill will for years to come. There are still people pi$$ed off about my aunts estate I was executrix for and that was 2 decades ago.
Perchance, who in this group is indicated as executor / executrix of mom's estate? They as administrator have a good bit of determining value on mom's estate. If there are a couple of family (or more likely those who married into the family) who are making all the noise on $, the executor can really s....l.....o....w down the probate process.For my executrix terms (2 different aunts), 1 I ran out to the full 4 years allowed and that gives you a ton of time to either wear folks down or negotiate. You can pay to have licensed appraisals done on things, a forensic accountant to review all banking and other costs, all kinds of things that will cost, time & money.
BTW if sibling who has done the caregiving wanted to, they can file a claim against the estate for their costs to caregiving. Now they probably can;t successful file to get paid for their time (that is usually viewed as done as a familial duty & for free) but they can file for mileage at the federal rate, parking costs, and for anything they paid for to others (like a cleaning lady or yard guy or a sitter). All that would be likely a class 1 claim against the estate in probate court and paid first & foremost before the rest is divvied out. Probate judges are pretty good about recognizing who in the family did the work and will try to compensate them for their expenses. BUT you have to file a claim with documentation to get this done.
good luck.
One gal sued her mom's estate for the tune of $250 a day for the 24/7 care she gave her mom when she realized that her SIBLING, who hadn't done anything, was in the will, and SHE wasn't! I mean...what? She was awarded $150 a day...for 3 years, 24/7. Yes indeed.
Yes, we're all good people. No, we aren't greedy blood suckers that are taking advantage of our parents. Yes, while we do what we do out of the goodness of our hearts, we shouldn't be stupid either. Or feel guilty because well, yes, we actually do need to eat and live, too, when the care giving journey has ended.
Who lied and said we had to be martyrs? I'm all for giving, but I don't want to give so much to someone else that looking at the street as home becomes my reality. Yes, we really should look to our own futures. Imagine that!
The elderly person should always have what they need, first, out of their own assets. I agree totally. Their assets are to care for them...but part of their well being is HAVING someone care for them, and, well, somebody has to get paid. Might as well be us since we're the ones doing the job...and it's the hardest...and sometimes most revolting...job we'll ever do.
Yes, my mom should pay me well for cleaning her messes...and her....and all the other endless duties involved that kept me running all day and half the night.... yes, indeed...
I'm neither saint nor martyr. I'm just looking at reality. I wasn't self sacrificing when I came in here. I fully expect to walk away after all these years with some kind of nest egg that's going to keep me off the street, thanks.
I don't think it should be either/or, dividing equally or all to a caregiver. Many men feel they have contributed most of their income to provide stability for a family already, so they believe that all children regularly give some contribution to family, women give time, men give money. Many parents write their wills based on these past assumptions, not planning for a period of many years in some cases, where one child will provide the lion's share of their care, depleting their own involvement in society and the workplace where they might be building retirement money for themselves.
So many parents are in denial about the amount of care they will need, for they are slow to realize they will need care over time. It makes sense to me, to give something to every child, yes. Maybe with half the estate. The rest should be flexible, with varied reasons. Including an expandable caregiver allotment that explicitly considers not just physical expenses but time.
Who deserves it then?
There are so many different situations and different relationships. I personally hope my mother spends every last penny on herself. Hell, she never spent a penny on her children. Why change at the end?
But - but for the furniture, it was unexpectedly a very cool process. We all assembled, except for the oldest brother who stayed away, fearing endless arguments, and my older disabled sister - but at least she left a list of what she wanted, and we all made sure to try to respect her wishes. What worked was our process, which I was pleased to help set up. My brothers wanted to divide stuff mathematically, by value and by turn taking.
I said no, that process is incomplete and likely will create bad feelings, for it leaves us in the dark about what each other wants. I wanted a piece of antique furniture, but it could be one piece or another - but I heard my sister in law say that she was very eager for the dining room table, which would fit into their new condo. I realized that if I knew in advance what she wanted, I'd choose any other antique piece, if my choice came up first. So my younger brother, clever fellow, came up with a process that included both communication and boundaries. For one hour beforehand, we each went around the house, and make a list of what we hoped to receive. Then we gathered in the living room together, and each person read their list - with NO discussion.
Once we heard each list, we moved into the mathematical process, each person drawing a number and making a choice. What we all found fascinating, was that we found ourselves not just rooting for our individual wants, but also trying to choose so that the wishes of the others were met too. So, when my choice preceded my sister in law's, I chose the armoire, happy to have any of the nice antiques. I might have chosen the table - but knowing my sister in law's wishes, I chose an armoire instead.
Each list had been surprisingly different in emphasis. One brother who kept the house, wanted all the outside furniture - my sister in law also hoped for jewelry for her daughters, where I had no use for that, I just wanted some furniture. Hearing the different interests, helped us learn more about each other in our different adult lives, as we each read our lists, we supported each other in the process - all finished up in 2 hours, went out happily to eat, surprising everyone, especially oldest brother who did not come.
Later, turned out he DID have a key wish, which he had not shared - and it turned out to be the same armoire that I had chosen - he had actually bought it for my mother, and helped to refinish it. So I sold it to him later, disappointed, for I can tend to jump into care-taking anyone except myself - but that is my risk to solve. Overall I was proud of how the process had gone, and happy with most of the things, and my house was a small one, and was OK without the tall armoire - I ended up with a couple of smaller extra pieces that I love.
We set up my mom’s trust so that all 9 living siblings will divide up her assets when she passes away. It will be very interesting when all of this goes down. Sometimes I would like to just say, put everything in a warehouse (her stuff is in storage) and take what you want. But, since my sister and I are executors of the trust I can’t very well do that. It would be nice though.
By the time she passes there won’t be any cash to argue over, but there will be a household full of antique furniture and collectibles. All of which everyone has their eyes on. I really don’t want to be a part of it but feel that if I am not then I will be the one that they come after if they have issue with anything. It’s a no-win situation for me.
I do guarantee that once my mom passes, and everything is divided up, I won’t be seeing any of them again.
I want my life back.