Follow
Share
Read More
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Find Care & Housing
1 2 3 4
I believe the parent should pay room and board and more for care while they are alive. Not wait until death, when most the funds may be used up.
Helpful Answer (10)
Report
Frebrowser Aug 2022
I agree. It is much cleaner to compensate the caregiver in real time. It may also make it easier to accept that there is no benefit to refusing to delegate tasks to paid providers or to substitute convenience products for those that require more labor.

Putting it off and calling it an inheritance leaves so much room for something to go wrong:

The care recipient promises and intends to leave an extra inheritance but fails to follow through, assuming there is plenty of time, and then it is too late.

The presumed inheritance is all gone because of end of life expenses when care became too much for one caregiver to handle (e.g., Medicaid spend down).

If extra inheritance makes it to the caregiver as an inheritance, the other assumed heirs resent it and it builds into a schism.

The caregiver child has to deal with their grief, the loss of their routine, and the resentment of the other assumed heirs all at the same time.

I also believe it is best to distribute photographs and other heirlooms as much as is practical before death, so the recipients can have a chance to get the stories that go with the items.
(9)
Report
See 1 more reply
The helping caregiver should be compensated all along for duties performed.
Helpful Answer (9)
Report

I think there are two issues here:

(1) in your opinion, should the helping adult child receive more inheritance than the non-helping adult children?

(2) in your opinion, what’s the best way to “compensate” the helping adult child? Through more inheritance? Through an employment contract? (but that can lead to uncomfortable “employee” feelings)… Through some other method? A combination of methods?
Helpful Answer (2)
Report

This is a bit confusing. If you understand the law and don’t think it should be different, plus you think it’s a good thing that it’s up to the testator, what is your post all about? Your opinion is that you ‘think the helping adult child should receive more’. What do you think ought to change? Or do you just want to tell us your opinion? Is this part of you being 'very stressed'?
Helpful Answer (1)
Report
verystressedout Aug 2022
I don’t think anything should be changed in the law.

I posted the question: Do you think the helping adult child should receive more inheritance?

I know of some people who think children should inherit in equal parts, even if only one adult child helped.
(4)
Report
Yes, the helping child should receive something for all that they do.

I believe an inheritance is a gift and not an entitlement. So putting the compensation for the care as part of the inheritance makes it an entitlement and that isn't the best plan. Being paid to provide services, as they are needed, keeps inheritance as a gift and usually stops parents from taking advantage of their caring off-spring.

I, also, believe that parents SHOULD NOT place or expect the burden of care to be on any of their adult children. They SHOULD pay for the help they need and make plans for their 24/7 care, if it comes to that.
Helpful Answer (11)
Report
verystressedout Aug 2022
I see what you mean about the differences between gift, entitlement, compensation…
(6)
Report
See 1 more reply
What about the second spouse that cares for her husband for years, gives up her job to do so, empties the urinals, drives to doctor appointments and has loss of social contact? And the husband refuses to change his will because he wants to leave everything to his adult kids? Happens more than you think.
Helpful Answer (5)
Report
verystressedout Aug 2022
I understand what you say.

My comment was only about the helping adult child vs. the non-helping adult children.

In the cases I know, the testator is leaving everything to the surviving spouse -

The issue here is: what happens after both testator and spouse die? My personal opinion is that the helping adult child should inherit more than the non-helping adult children.
(3)
Report
OP, think again about “In my opinion, that decision has nothing to do with the non-helping siblings (it’s none of their business) (no negotiation is needed)”. The decision would be best coming from the testator, if legally competent. However the non-helping siblings can enter into a contract with the one who is doing all the work, to pay over some of their own eventual inheritance.

Your view that ‘it’s none of their business’ probably means that they wouldn’t agree. If that is the case, then it is solely up to the testator. You might think that the law should be different, but it isn’t.
Helpful Answer (1)
Report
verystressedout Aug 2022
I don’t think the law should be different.

It’s up to the testator, and I think that’s a good thing.

I’m stating my opinion: I think the helping adult child should receive more.
(1)
Report
See 1 more reply
The adult helping should be paid for their services. It is hard work and they should be paid for their commitment. This needs to be documented and should not be part of the inheritance. If there is no other option than to be paid as part of inheritance, it should be documented in the will.

If not documented, it means nothing. The helping adult child will give their time and energy while enduring all the stress without any financial recompense. Too many adult children ruin their lives, financially, emotionally and even physically with a belief they are due/owed more inheritance. It never happens unless it is in the will or you are paid for your services. Don't ruin your life, get it in writing or get paid. If not, walk away and find another solution.
Helpful Answer (6)
Report
lealonnie1 Aug 2022
Exactly.
(4)
Report
See 1 more reply
Yes, of course, the helping child should receive more of an inheritance. But things don't always work out the way they should. Which means that the helping child should have a contract in place, even if it makes them feel like an employee, b/c to some degree, they ARE, so they can get paid in real time while doing all the caregiving. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Waiting for 'someday' means that the helping child can pass away before the inheritance comes around, God forbid, so that's another reason why getting paid in real time makes much more sense.
Helpful Answer (7)
Report

I agree but if the parent doesnt make a will to do that then that sibling is out of luck.
Helpful Answer (9)
Report

It’s not really personal. The law is that the testator makes the decisions about who gets what. The person who does more ‘helping’ should negotiate remuneration before death, either with the (legally competent) patient or with the siblings who are relying on them to carry the load. It can be paid as a charge on the estate if payment up front is difficult, but it has to be negotiated in advance.
Helpful Answer (7)
Report
verystressedout Aug 2022
In some cases I know of, the helping adult child doesn’t want a contract (then they would feel like an employee, and they don’t want to feel like that), but would like to receive a bigger share of the inheritance. In my opinion, that decision has nothing to do with the non-helping siblings (it’s none of their business) (no negotiation is needed) - it’s a decision that’s entirely up to the testator. My own opinion is that the helping adult child should receive more.
(4)
Report
See 1 more reply
1 2 3 4
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Ask a Question
Subscribe to
Our Newsletter