Inheritance money

[kwcllf]

3Boys:

kwcllf:

As you have mentioned, since there is NO specific instruction from the deceased, the state has enacted laws to determine how inheritence will be distributed. In this case, the husband has no right to DEMAND for the money.

Yes, I agree that a family should try to share good and bad. But this is idealistic to say the least. Many factors contributed to the matter and if you have read through the thread, you should not blame the wife for having reservation about parting with her inheritence money. Not the way the husband has been treating her and her kids.

I do not speak to specific cases but am speaking as a general principle, and even so with caveats. And I would be careful about making judgements about the husband as the OP has just had 2 posts and the husband is not here to air his side of the story.

A spouse does not have a legal right to DEMAND assistance from a partner in an illness either, does he? But what is the right thing to do? If you were seriously ill and your husband said, 'its your own business', how would you feel about that? I think you have the right, regardless of legal statutes, to DEMAND that he, as your spouse, ought to take care of you. What if your illness was a INHERITED genetic trait from your parents, a blood disorder perhaps, or early dementia? Can he say, 'oh, that's your father's fault, his genes, none of my business'?

So why is inherited assets dealt with differently?

What is marriage if not an ideal? If one cannot be idealistic about one's life partner then it's a sad day in the universe. Not for me or my kids.

Please do not lump illness into your argument becos it is two different matters and seriously, the comparison is flawed.

And of course, we can be idealistic in marriage and other matters. But ultimately, everyone has to face up to various problems down the road. Can anyone seriously say there are no problems at all in marriage?

Yes, be idealistic by all means, but have to temper it with what is realistic.

[Imp75]

just curious about 3boys, so do you open all your books to your spouse including money management>?

[Laura02]

We we were first married, dh & I had seperate saving accounts, and a joint account for family expenses. Over the years, the accounts have merged and even the investment portfolios have dovetailed.


I think money may just be a symptom of other underlying issues, like trust. I feel that if couples trust each other and are sure of the other party’s commitment to the family, both parties will not quibble about whose account money goes into.

[3Boys]

Imp75:

just curious about 3boys, so do you open all your books to your spouse including money management>?

Yes. Why should it be any other way? It is not to say we agree all the time, but what kind of marriage would we be having if we were hiding assets from each other?

[3Boys]

kwcllf:

3Boys:

[quote=\"kwcllf\"]
As you have mentioned, since there is NO specific instruction from the deceased, the state has enacted laws to determine how inheritence will be distributed. In this case, the husband has no right to DEMAND for the money.

Yes, I agree that a family should try to share good and bad. But this is idealistic to say the least. Many factors contributed to the matter and if you have read through the thread, you should not blame the wife for having reservation about parting with her inheritence money. Not the way the husband has been treating her and her kids.

I do not speak to specific cases but am speaking as a general principle, and even so with caveats. And I would be careful about making judgements about the husband as the OP has just had 2 posts and the husband is not here to air his side of the story.

A spouse does not have a legal right to DEMAND assistance from a partner in an illness either, does he? But what is the right thing to do? If you were seriously ill and your husband said, 'its your own business', how would you feel about that? I think you have the right, regardless of legal statutes, to DEMAND that he, as your spouse, ought to take care of you. What if your illness was a INHERITED genetic trait from your parents, a blood disorder perhaps, or early dementia? Can he say, 'oh, that's your father's fault, his genes, none of my business'?

So why is inherited assets dealt with differently?

What is marriage if not an ideal? If one cannot be idealistic about one's life partner then it's a sad day in the universe. Not for me or my kids.

Please do not lump illness into your argument becos it is two different matters and seriously, the comparison is flawed.

And of course, we can be idealistic in marriage and other matters. But ultimately, everyone has to face up to various problems down the road. Can anyone seriously say there are no problems at all in marriage?

Yes, be idealistic by all means, but have to temper it with what is realistic.[/quote]Why is the comparison flawed? 'To have and to hold, in sickness and in health, except where inheritance monies are concerned, whereby please refer subsection 6.3 of marriage agreement on divisibility of assets....'

You are in this together, all or nothing, assets, genes, warts and roses.

One can make a case on an individual basis that inheritance monies be held from the partner in the instance of irresponsibility or other egregious factors, but it is the 'default' line that is being taken here in this thread that is most disturbing to me. Withholding is NOT the default approach, it can only be the EXCEPTION.

As one cannot be said to be unreasonable that one DEMANDS that the spouse looks after oneself in an illness, likewise, I cannot see that it is unreasonable for a spouse to EXPECT inheritance monies to be shared. It is part of the deal of being married. If my DW came into an inheritance, and even if it were a quantum that were not meaningful to me, I would be MOST upset if she did not offer to share it to begin with, not that I would even take a cent of it.

[kwcllf]

You are confusing yourself with marriage agreement and inheritence. Also, we are not about talking about divorce and how the assets should be divided.


Even for inheritence, if it is between siblings and/or their father or mother, perhaps you argument hold true.

But this is between his wife and her family, that is, nothing to do with his side of the family.

[3Boys]

kwcllf:

You are confusing yourself with marriage agreement and inheritence. Also, we are not about talking about divorce and how the assets should be divided.


Even for inheritence, if it is between siblings and/or their father or mother, perhaps you argument hold true.

But this is between his wife and her family, that is, nothing to do with his side of the family.

In my view, completely wrong.

A question I asked previously. If your husband came into an inheritance of a house worth $2m, and said he would not share any of it with you, how would you feel?

Are such assets not meant to be shared?

[3Boys]

kwcllf:

You are confusing yourself with marriage agreement and inheritence. Also, we are not about talking about divorce and how the assets should be divided.


Even for inheritence, if it is between siblings and/or their father or mother, perhaps you argument hold true.

But this is between his wife and her family, that is, nothing to do with his side of the family.

In my view, completely wrong.

A question I asked previously. If your husband came into an inheritance of a house worth $2m, and said he would not share any of it with you, how would you feel?

Are such assets not meant to be shared?

[Coolkidsrock2]

For some families, in-laws are specifically excluded from inheritance.

[kwcllf]

Coolkidsrock2:

For some families, in-laws are specifically excluded from inheritance.

Precisely! In the eye of the law, it is very clear where the delineation is.

For someone who said inheritence must be shared with the spouse, it is between mutual agreement of the spouses. In this case, for the hubby to DEMAND a share of the inheritence, and when it is not given, he withdraw money not only to his spouse, but also his own children who are his own flash and blood, it is not difficult to understand why the wife has reservation in parting with the money to him.