I think you'll be happier in the long run if you are all treated as equals in your mother's will.
You will make your own way in life and find your own fortune, big or small, but the legacy she leaves you with this is that you are all equal in love in her eyes. What parents want most is to believe that their children will continue the family bond and not be divided by issues such as inheritance. Maybe you are not close to your siblings, and maybe you never will be, but you can believe in your mother's heart of hearts she wishes you would be.
Find peace with the situation however you can.
2007-03-27 20:14:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Denise T 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yeah ... the daddy has identical rights. My motive for now not doing it to our son was once, my rights, his rights ... what approximately our SON's rights? I am keen on the anti-circ arguments, however I do not think it is a tremendous deal ... if I might recognise forward that my son could opt for anything his father desired, then I could have given my husband ALL the rights to come to a decision. But we are not able to recognise that, of path. In my importance approach, doing irreversible non-obligatory surgical procedure (that doesn't have confirmed advantage outweighing the threat) on a man or woman with out their consent is mistaken. So it was once only a easy moral resolution. My husband agreed with that. But we're lucky that we proportion those values. I consider if now not for that, we would have had an issue (my husband is finished, and does not - refuses to? - see the disadvantage). If the father and mother have a clash, I consider one *has* to err at the part of the man or woman who's towards, without problems seeing that the surgical procedure is irreversible! He can consistently get reduce later if he fairly wishes it and is familiar with the dangers. I simply consider it is way more of an ethical burden to reduce off a frame facet, than it's to give an explanation for to Boy why he does not seem identical to Dad. Others will have one other tackle it, and I do not pass judgement on -- it is a personal, household challenge, and I realise that those selections are soft and handiest mum and dad can lead them to. The drawback of circ and noncirc are very subjective. Opinions, peculiarly of persons who do not need youngsters, are mostly very powerful both manner, seeing that persons simply don't realise what an agonizing resolution it may be. Anyway those are my ideas.
2016-09-05 18:37:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
you should all get the same amount. I can only imagine how horrible it would have been had your other siblings only found out they got less after your mother passed away. It doesn't matter who is better off-- besides- your mother could pass away in 30 years and A LOT can happen in 30 years... you may be well better off than ALL of them put together- and they could all be bankrupt or having their houses forclosed on- who knows-- So I think it's best your mom changed it and you all get an equal amount. that's how it should be. Besides- its your mothers will. She can change it and do what she wants with what- and that's just it- it is HER will.... not what you all think is fair- but what she thinks is fair.
2007-03-27 20:11:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You were right to tell your mom she has the right to do whatever she wants with her money.
It's sad that money can cause this kind of problem in a family.
EDIT:
Suggestion: Why don't you suggest that your mom spend as much of her money enjoying herself in the time she has left. Like vacations to exotic places, month long cruises, luxury spa visits, perhaps a live in masseuse. It's HER money. She should enjoy it. And she might rest a little easier after she goes if she knows her beloved children aren't fighting over her money.
2007-03-27 20:07:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by John L 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, you and your siblings have a right to read your Mothers will unless you sneak and cheat to do so...now that your brother read that and strong armed your mother into changing what can you do? Your Mother can give it all to the humane society if she wishes....but there are those who think you should all share the wealth and then there are those who are going to hate your brother. It is a sorry day about greed....sorry sorry day.
2007-03-27 20:13:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by missellie 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think everyone should get a fair share. It would seem like she was showing favoritism if she didn't give each one of you the same. It's better to keep good will in the family then to cause strife.
2007-03-27 20:38:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Shrew 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I say it would depend on who is closer to your mother. If you stay and take care of her and your siblings don't then you should get more but if all three are basically the same don't worry about it. Make your brother pay for her funeral if he's so rich.
2007-03-27 20:14:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by tootsie 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yea it is her right to do with her money what she wants. And she is doing it to avoid any legal action after she dies. Your brother should be ashamed of himself however. Perhaps there is a way for you mom to give you some of your inheritence before she dies. Perhaps put it away in a special account in your name.
2007-03-27 20:10:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by exe 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
i honestly feel everyone should get an equal share, your brother must have worked hard on their own to make money for themselves... not that you didn't work hard enough - but still - i feel you all should get an equal amount - irrespective of how much money you already have.
2007-03-27 20:07:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
To avoid bitter fighting over her will I think she did the best thing splitting the assets evenly between the children.
2007-03-27 20:19:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by already_enuff_spice_in_this 5
·
1⤊
1⤋