Who to include in your will

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 3:02 PM GMT
    I am curious to find out your opinions on who to include in a will. If a person has been in a relationship for lets say 20 years and his partner had a 4 yr old child when they got together do you think there are any legal moral or ethical reasons why the child should be included in the will should something happen to the person who is not the father of the child.
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    Nov 18, 2009 3:04 PM GMT
    Depends on the relationship to the child.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 3:27 PM GMT
    Timberoo saidDepends on the relationship to the child.


    The relationship is good and she herself has come out as being lesbian and is now with her own partner.
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    Nov 18, 2009 3:30 PM GMT
    It's your will, you can leave money or property to whoever you want to within legal limits. I don't see why there would be any moral obligations to do something you don't want to do.
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 18, 2009 3:39 PM GMT
    Im not gonna have a will. Im gonna spend it all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 4:08 PM GMT
    Why a will? Get a Revocable Trust kit from: www.suzeorman.com
    YOU get to hold all your assets in trust for YOU. Then, when you 'pass' all of your assets that you have put into that trust become the sole property of your benificary (your partner, if you so designate) and without probate. No bank deposit boxes locked until the will is probated, no fussing over who gets what. Simple and legal in all states.

    {Sitting back and waiting for the blood-sucking lawyers to tell me how wrong I am.......}
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 4:38 PM GMT

    The deserving children at the orphanage, the nice nurse who gave me soup, the 20 year old trick who sucked on a limp noodle for hours.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 5:29 PM GMT
    My late partner wanted to include my 2 sons in his will, to inherit if I predeceased him, but nothing to their mother. He knew them all slightly.

    Stupidly, we procrastinated on having our wills drawn, and when he died following rapid onset of dementia, making him legally incompetent overnight, his old will was still in effect, which didn't mention me. But his estate was modest, not a great loss to me, and I did get to keep his personal effects.

    When my present partner & I got together we had our wills drawn up within weeks, motivated by my previous mistake of not acting promptly. This time, my partner chose to specifically exclude my sons while naming me his primary heir, making instead his family and his oldest friends to inherit if I die before him. I've assured him I'll offer most of his things to his family & friends anyway, especially photos and other personal mementos.

    In my will, he's my sole primary heir, while my sons only receive my personal effects if he predeceases me, everything else going to my partner's family. We also had other documents drawn to protect ourselves as a gay couple in Florida, which saved us much grief during a medical emergency not 4 weeks ago.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 5:47 PM GMT
    Should you provide for the child of a partner? I suppose that depends -- after 20 years, would you hypothetically have adopted the child? And if not, why not?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 7:38 PM GMT
    Children aren't in the past or future in any way, shape or form. That being said, the god-children get everything so long as I don't suffer some horrible unexplained accident, such as a pillow-case over my face in the night. Yeah, they know that clause, and it keeps them honest.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 18, 2009 8:45 PM GMT
    StudlyScrewRite said {Sitting back and waiting for the blood-sucking lawyers to tell me how wrong I am.......


    Yes, you're wrong, but if you want to know why, it's billable.icon_confused.gif
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Nov 18, 2009 8:47 PM GMT
    Let me say there isn't any "obligations" in a will. There isn't a "right" that a parent should leave a child anything. That said, morally......... another story.

    I think whether someone leaves his partner and/or the partner's child anything is strictly his own affair.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Nov 19, 2009 3:19 AM GMT
    Studlyscrewright,
    Some very good advice..
    However, it still doesn't avoid probate.
    ALL estates go through probate.

    Probate is the legal process of administering the estate of a deceased person by resolving all claims and distributing the deceased person's property under the valid will.

    The trust that you suggested is a part of that process.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 19, 2009 3:23 AM GMT
    My Dog....poor bitch will out live me I am sure. The food and care rivals mine...lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 19, 2009 9:40 PM GMT
    Webster666 saidStudlyscrewright,
    Some very good advice..
    However, it still doesn't avoid probate.
    ALL estates go through probate.

    Probate is the legal process of administering the estate of a deceased person by resolving all claims and distributing the deceased person's property under the valid will.

    The trust that you suggested is a part of that process.


    If you had read further (instead of just copying and pasting the first sentence) in your Wikipedia search you would have found this: {quote}Property held in a living trust also avoids probate. In these cases, the personal representative provides documentation to the court, and the property is prevented from entering probate.{end quote}
    And this:{quote} Avoiding probate

    Probate generally lasts several months, occasionally over a year before all the property is distributed, and incurs substantial court and attorney costs.
    One of the many ways to avoid probate is to execute a living trust. A settlor, or a creator of a trust, transfers ownership of his real property from himself to a trust which he controls and can revise (except in the case of an irrevocable trust.) Upon death, the persons named as beneficiaries in the trust acquire ownership of the property of the trust. Since a probate is a public process, a living trust shields private affairs of the deceased and the heirs from public scrutiny and helps the estate avoid estate tax.

    Probate can also be avoided by setting up P.O.D (paid on death) designations on bank accounts and T.O.D (transfer on death) on brokerage accounts, 401ks and IRAs that pass automatically to designated beneficiaries.

    As for real estate, a testator must add a named beneficiary to a deed by executing a life estate deed. The property can be passed several generations.

    The key to avoiding probate is having named beneficiaries on all assets, as is the case for life insurance. A common error in life insurance is naming the insured's estate as the contingent beneficiary. Doing so will place the proceeds from that policy into probate.

    Life insurance, savings accounts, and joint tenancies with the right of survivorship are testamentary substitutes to avoid probate.

    A Segregated fund is a specific type of investment vehicle that is held inside a life insurance company. While segregated funds are not life insurance policies, and thus do not have a death benefit, they can be valuable substitutes for mutual funds held at a bank or other financial institution, due to the ability within them to designate a beneficiary, and thus bypass the estate, and probate.

    Avoiding probate does not eliminate estate taxes. Under the federal estate tax law as modified, included in the definition of a taxable estate are property held in a living trust, life insurance, payable on death or transfer on death financial instruments, and other property a party receives upon decease of the decedent.

    Inter vivos trusts {EDIT: a "living will"} can reduce estate taxes if they are properly structured, but that is not related to the avoidance of probate. Generally, to avoid an estate tax, a person must give it away irrevocably or leave it to a qualified charity. However, the use of credit shelter trusts (AB trusts) can allow a married couple to preserve both unified credits, allowing up to twice the total estate to pass to heirs without estate tax. It may reduce or eliminate the tax.{end quote}
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 19, 2009 10:19 PM GMT
    My husband and I just revised our wills. I left everything to him, and I mean everything. I left nothing to my family b/c I don't want any legal loopholes to allow for my family to swoop in and try to steal what is rightfully my man's property.

    In the event that we were to die together, I left everything up to a mutually agreed upon executor.

    I kept things simple. I recommend you do the same.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2009 4:10 AM GMT
    the bulk of my money goes to my nephews and nieces, some still goes to my ex for certain reasons and another portion goes to a few charities, however, I have left personal things to certain people who I know will love what they are given, gawd knows they eye it off enough as it is hahaha

    all other assets are to be sold off by my lawyer and that goes to a foundation that needs it, to make things simple, I sat down my family (minus nephews and nieces) and showed them the will, with my lawyer there, they all agreed and where more then happy with my plans even though they don't really get much, but they are all financially comfortable and see no need to get anything besides the things that I want them to have.

    But then, in Australia it's much much much more difficult to contest a will then in other countries and my family would never think of doing anything of the like.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2009 4:43 AM GMT
    I am gonna change my will because I won't leave nothing for my half-sister and relativesicon_mad.gif
  • kinetic

    Posts: 1125

    Nov 20, 2009 4:58 AM GMT
    A will, me??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAicon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
  • Space_Cowboy_...

    Posts: 3738

    Nov 20, 2009 5:04 AM GMT
    Oprah.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2009 5:41 AM GMT
    I would only include the child if you wanted to not because of an expectation to provide.

    Personally, only those who took the time to sincerely appreciate me rather than what I could do for them would qualify.

    However, I am totally on my own in this world most often, so I have not drafted a will. I really could not care less since it seems I always have to slog along on my own, when once I would appreciate some reciprocation for my helping hands.