This topic is obviously very personal: everyone will have their own opinion. I have many friends who helped their elderly parents alone for years, while their siblings did nothing. My opinion is that the helping adult child should inherit more, so they’re not financially ruined after spending so much time, energy & stress, helping.
It makes more sense for the will to reflect the whole life, and for the care to be paid for as long as it happens.
My husband took care of his parents, while being single father and building his business, he even bought them place to live nearby.
His brother who did nothing inherited nice house in one of most expensive cities, worth millions probably.
They wanted to protect child with no success, my husband as educated at best universities and successful got nothing.
I also think if you are caring for them in your house, they should pay their share of expenses.
Too many people think they will be compensated when it comes time for inheritance and that rarely happens. Most wills are written to divide assets equally.
If a sibling refuses to pay for your caregiving, don't do it. Caregiving is to hard, emotionally, physically, financially and mentally not to get paid.
But I’ve seen people (especially daughters) being used by their own parents. Used, abused, and then left in financial ruins. Often it’s the mother who refuses to give what’s fair towards her helping daughter.
I brought my now 92yo mother out from AL to live with me in July 2020 because of COVID. She lives with Alzheimer’s so I am her full time caregiver.
I proposed to my 3 brothers, who were relieved I’ve taken on this responsibility, that Mom pay me a set amount every month and if her share of expenses was less than that, the excess would go to me as taxable income. She would deduct the excess as caregiving expense (as recommended by an accountant).
I estimated what her half of the expenses would be (including property taxes, insurance, food, utilities, car, property maintenance, etc.) and my brothers and I discussed and agreed on what would be a reasonable amount for her to pay. As it turns out, the amount she pays is half of what she paid in AL.
The financial benefit for me is my living expenses are almost halved and I have been able to hold off from withdrawing money out of my retirement account, saving money for me in MY old age.
The result is that my mother’s will remains the same: her estate is divided equally between the four of us. I am being compensated, at least to some degree, for the caregiving, in current time rather than waiting for her death. Caregiving is still difficult but it isn’t accompanied by financial resentment.
I realize I am very fortunate that my brothers and I get along and they are happy to support me in this difficult work. I also realize that this arrangement, particularly declaring income and claiming tax deductions, might not work where some of you live. But I think that there is no need to report to the tax authorities a private expense-sharing arrangement between family members. I just chose to report it because, well, I’m just that kind of idiot! 😃
My mother has a sister (younger) who is in her mid-eighties with physical mobility problems, the foremost of which are back issues from her years as a nurse. She is currently living alone. She has 2 children.
Her oldest child, my cousin, has never had a career, just a series of minimum wage type jobs. Her husband works (intermittently) in construction. They have 3 children. They do not own their own home.
My cousin has made the offer repeatedly to my aunt: if my aunt will buy my cousin a house, big enough for my cousin, her family AND my aunt and put said house in my cousin's name, my cousin will give up her "career" and become my aunt's caregiver.
They live outside of Washington D.C., where home prices are quite high.
If my aunt were to take my cousin up on this offer, do you think, in this case, her other child should get a reduced portion of any inheritence that's left? Because I would think the purchase of a home would more than repay any caregiving.
It's scenarios like this that make me reluctant to make a blanket statement that the caregiving child should receive/ a larger portion - or the entirety - of an inheritence.
If that is a consideration, that if a person leaves a job to take care of an elderly LO which will leave them with limited financial options in the future, then caregiving by that person must NOT be a consideration.
Most of the answers here are less about financial hardship after caregiving, and more about "what's fair is fair" - it's "fair" that I get a bigger slice of the inheritence pie than any other beneficiaries because I was the person with "boots on the ground" in the caregiving department.
So if we go along with that thinking - and mind you, I'm not saying it's always the wrong way of thinking - then does it stand to reason that the other potential beneficiaries to the estate be made aware of this division of assets, and given equal opportunity to help out in order to increase their share of the "pie"? Otherwise, I see this being a really awesome different way for elderly people to try to control their children, using future inheritence as a lure to have their children become their caregivers, and thus avoid the AL/NH/MC route as they age.
Are you really telling me there aren't any of you who could see your own parent(s) doing something like this? All I see here all day long are stories of manipulative, NPD parents using every arrow in their quiver to try and control their kids. Parents who enjoy pitting their kids against one another if for no other reason than they're bored and it's good entertainment.
If you think you deserve to be compensated for your caregiving, and I think everyone deserves to be compensated in some way or another, then get it WHILE you're doing the caregiving. What you're taking about is tantamount to working for a company for years without pay, in the hopes that once the business is sold, you get a tidy chunk of the proceeds. It makes no sense.
i think you have an excellent point.
I see friends who helped for only a few months, who felt totally OK with things being split equally.
I see friends who helped for years alone with destroyed careers, while their siblings’ careers soared upwards. These friends feel they should receive more. I agree they should.
Do you also, in the interest of fairness, think *if* the caregiving child is to receive a larger portion of the estate, then the current owner of the estate (aka: the person(s) needing care) should inform the other heirs of this arrangement, and give them a chance to become a "co-caregiver"? And if the other heirs decide to help out to keep their share of the inheritence intact, so to speak, how do you see that arrangement working out, logistically speaking, between caregivers?
I ask this as 1) the primary caregiving child of my mother and
2) the trustee of mom's estate after she passed away.
And no, I did not give myself a larger portion of the estate than I was bequeathed.
i think some scenarios/situations are very complex, tricky.
then, to the best of your ability, you try to see what’s fair depending on the situation - or changes in the situation.
indeed a fair, kind helping child (let’s say non-helpers suddenly help more, even just with phone calls, organizing things, i don’t mean hands-on)…the fair, kind child, in case the will is unequal in favor of the helping-child, might make it more equal in favor of the new-helpers, by renouncing their extra share.
there are always ways of trying to make things fair.
Would all of these people write these messages about choosing unhappiness while striving for greed and money under the auspices of loving caretaking if their identities were revealed? Some posts indicate they feel they do not want to be taken advantage of while they are themselves taking advantage of and scheming someone else, someone who is disadvantaged by age and infirmity.
The irony is there is no true anonymity. People see through you.
hug!
i haven’t read all messages. i have a totally different interpretation from you, regarding the messages i have read.
my interpretation:
nothing scheming on the part of the helping child.
it’s simply a FACT:
caring for years will affect you financially, in particular depending on your age.
just an example (not me). friend of mine:
helping daughter is 35, in the middle of career. elderly parents need help. she has a sister who does nothing to help. elderly parents had many problems, not just medical. admin problems too. someone must deal with these problems. some problems you can delegate, hire people, but not all problems.
i see my friend’s career suffering. she’s getting poor. she’s kind, not scheming.
——
my personal opinion:
her parents should ensure she’s not financially ruined, after all those years of helping and balancing with her career. her parents are in a facility, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t problems to solve. my friend helps a lot.
in her case, her parents are in full agreement that she should receive more.
——
my personal opinion is that indeed, the helping one should receive more.
some people who help are financially ok, so this isn’t so important. they spent time, energy, stress - but didn’t take any financial hit. maybe the helping one is married, hence financially secure, retired, etc. for whatever reason, helping hasn’t really affected them financially.
but:
how about the helping ones who take a big financial hit by helping? in the middle of their career, but lose money because of hours spent lovingly helping?…
If there aren’t sufficient funds how else would the parent have care? If the adult children don’t want to or can’t provide caregiving, there’s no free caregiver service
For my parents I was paid at the time I did the caretaking. I was paid monthly and taxes, SS were withheld. Their wills dealt with each of their three children unequally based on what funds and gifts were given while they were living. One of my brothers tried to dispute my dad's will and ended up with a minimal amount of money.
It is a very tough topic, however, if there is a trust or will involved ,
we have to adhere to what's stated in the document.
I have a situation that could potentially be very messy.
I am caring for my Aunt. As POA. I have complete control over her money. My brother is the executor of my deceased Uncle's trust that includes caring for my Aunt.
When she passes, the money (if any) is to be split between myself and my two brothers.
One brother has done absolutely nothing!! My other brother has done some, but I have shouldered the majority. Of course I feel like I deserve more, but I think an estate attorney is going to be essential!!
Best wishes!!
Considering caregiver to parent(s) who left her job at age 50 plus, she would earn so much for next 10-15 years plus contribute to pension plan. I am referring to caregiver as she, as it is more often female. And they often expect to do it for free.
The best solution will be to pay monthly as taxes are progressive both in Canada and USA, and by contributing to RRSP or 401k will be beneficial as there will be compounded interest. There is tangible and intangibles here, as lost income and perhaps marriage break up, stress of caregiving considering average disease of 10 years, caregiver over 60 cannot easily recuperate or gain financially.
This is reality if parents of silent generation are stuck in some belief that all children deserve equally, I think it is time to adjust to reality.
Inheritance is totally separate and should be split equally between who ever the will states should receive it. Why do we as children feel we should get any thing from our parents when they finally meet their end? They are the ones who worked their selves to death and earned it. It should all be spent on the best care possible when they need it!
After paying for care of a parent/loved one there might not be that much left, now a day anyway. Again...just my personal opinion!
even if in the end it’s only $5 (total inheritance), it still matters how it’s split.
even if there’s nothing, it still matters how it’s split. the intention matters: how the parents wanted to split it.
as for compensating the helping adult child in real time (as opposed to inheritance), i can see advantages/disadvantages.
my opinion is the helping adult child should receive more - whatever way it’s done.
The only catch so far — and it’s a doozy — is that the years of caregiving before the elder’s power is transferred to the POA (and that clause is invoked) isn’t eligible.
I would assume a will could have a statement that the caregiver is to be given [insert amount] for every year of care giving.
The Parable of the Prodigal Son is one of the parables of Jesus in the Bible, appearing in Luke 15:11–32. Jesus shares the parable with his disciples, the Pharisees and others.
In the story, a father has two sons. The younger son asks for his portion of inheritance from his father, who grants his son's request. This son, however, is prodigal (i.e., wasteful and extravagant), thus squandering his fortune and eventually becoming destitute. As consequence, he now must return home empty-handed and intend to beg his father to accept him back as a servant. To the son's surprise, he is not scorned by his father but is welcomed back with celebration and a welcoming party. Envious, the older son refuses to participate in the festivities. The father tells the older son: "you are ever with me, and all that I have is yours, but thy younger brother was lost and now he is found."
The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard
20 “For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 Now when he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 4 and said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went. 5 Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. 6 And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing [a]idle, and said to them, ‘Why have you been standing here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, [b]and whatever is right you will receive.’
8 “So when evening had come, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, ‘Call the laborers and give them their wages, beginning with the last to the first.’ 9 And when those came who were hired about the eleventh hour, they each received a denarius. 10 But when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received each a denarius. 11 And when they had received it, they [c]complained against the landowner, 12 saying, ‘These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.’ 13 But he answered one of them and said, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? 14 Take what is yours and go your way. I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. 15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?’ 16 So the last will be first, and the first last. For[d] many are called, but few chosen.”
God Bless all caregivers who gave and sacrificed beyond earthly meanings...
Tim failed to launch, so he stayed with his mom saying he was helping out so he couldn’t work. Tim had plenty of time to fish, and more time to indulge his multiple drug addictions, but Tim’s mom was comfy and as she didn’t have dementia, Tim’s sister Toni chose to honor her wishes while observing from a distance.
Tims mom died at 91. Toni as executor made Tim leave, then split the estate as directed. Tim found religion, found na, and finally bought a house with this money.
Should Toni have gotten nothing?
my own opinion:
some scenarios are very difficult to figure out exactly what would be fair. and yet, in your imaginary example, i bet toni was jumping with joy that she wasn’t “it”.
(jumping with joy that she didn’t do any caregiving).
i think some scenarios are very complex, and even someone with great morality will have difficulty figuring out what’s the fairest way of splitting things. when a case is difficult, you do your best to try to guess what would be fair.
on the contrary, some cases are much more simple - and if you did a survey on the forum for example, you’d get a pretty unanimous opinion on what’s fair.