The person that was there taking care of the parents, getting them to doctor appointments and taking time off work to provide for them while everyone else was absent physically and/or financially. Nobody else cared when they were alive, they dont get to care now that they are dead.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[+] Ilandar@lemmy.today -4 points 8 months ago (7 children)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 child)

Ignoring the morality of it, from a purely economical and financial perspective the cost of elder care for a couple is very expensive, usually averaging around the price of a home, or most of the inheritance. It's basically liquidate the house now to send them to a nursing home, or ask a family member and "pay" them later with the house.

Hence the typical silent agreements that the sibling who looked after the parents before death gets the majority of the inheritance.

Silent, verbal, or even legal agreements are messy though. Talk to family members with the help of a lawyer.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 4 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Which one has the greedy attitude if the parents decide "only one of our children gives a shit about me, the rest suck" and chooses to leave it to one child?

Are the greedy ones the other children who say "screw that, show me the money"?

Or is the greedy one the child that says "I sacrificed economically and personally to do unpaid domestic labour, now I'm getting paid back for my kindness"?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social -1 points 8 months ago

That latter is a dishonest shithead for sure.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social -1 points 8 months ago

The person that was there taking care of the parents, getting them to doctor appointments and taking time off work to provide for them while everyone else was absent physically and/or financially. Nobody else cared when they were alive, they dont get to care now that they are dead.

What ? that's bullshit, you're not an employee on a deferred share scheme. If you don't want to do the looking after, don't.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I have one sibling and as far as she’s concerned the world owes her. “Owes her what?” You may ask? Everything. I’m not looking forward to the inheritance dispute that’s inevitable when my parents pass.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social 2 points 8 months ago

I've had that discussion with my mother (father passed many years ago) precisely for that reason. She said we each get 1/3, which, surprised me as I'd assumed she'd leave whatever was left to her 2 grandkids (brothers kids)

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] SaneMartigan@aussie.zone 6 points 8 months ago

I stopped talking to my father because he didn't pass on a portion of the inheritance like my grandparents intended. He's a piece of shit in many ways that I was accustomed to but that broke the relationship for me.

permalink

fedilink

source

[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone [S] 2 points 8 months ago (8 children)

Hopefully when the time comes, my siblings and I can do an even split and everyone's happy.

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 6 points 8 months ago (7 children)

Get your parents to write an actual will.

Where things seem to get messiest is if someone gets an 'advance' on what they'll receive in the will, except it's not written into the will so there is disagreement on whether they should get a full share or not.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone [S] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

As the article mentioned, wills are often contested. The cases they presented were all from people with wills, but the surviving parties didn't accept what the got in the will.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 1 point 8 months ago

That's why a lot of wills add a clause that states anyone challenging the will automatically has their portion changed to $1.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

the will only gets so far. for example there have been cases where children of a family have completely abandoned their parent/s, and a 3rd part good samaritan came along to help said person for years before their eventual death, and the will gave the inheritance to the good Samaritan, which causes the blood children to object.

the only clearcut way is to have the parties in attendance while the will is being written so that any objections wpuld get aired out while said person is alive and can make the call

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone [S] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

Personally I've emailed my will to all interested parties so they have plenty of time to object.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

load more comments (1 reply)

[–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 1 point 8 months ago

....GOOD!

permalink

fedilink

source

[–] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 1 point 8 months ago

This is understandable when you accept that your options in Australia (and many parts of the world) these days are either generational wealth or lifelong poverty. Not saying it's ok, just to be expected.

permalink

fedilink

source

[+] etherphon@midwest.social -1 points 8 months ago (5 children)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone [S] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I agree in principle that inheritances perpetuate inequality, but it's very hard to implement. Many elderly people would "gift" their money to their children before their death to avoid an inheritance tax. They would argue it's their money, they should be able to decide what to do with it. Either that or elderly people would try to spend it down in their final years.