Wills, etc.

[katelm]

I know, super depressing topic. But I want to make sure that in the unlikely event that something happens to my H & I that our baby goes to my sister and not my in-laws who I know would put up a major fight for her. The fact that my sister immediately went & got a repeat TDAP shot when asked while my in-laws have continued to argue & dispute the facts I've given them has just further solidified this in my mind.

So is legal zoom an ok option? Or should we hire an actual lawyer? What have you guys done if you already have kids.

[bocaburger]

Thanks for posting this. I've been procrastinating because I don't want to have the conversation with H about why I feel my parents are in a better position than his to care for our babies. But I really need to take care of this.

[elm1214]

My husband is a lawyer and we still haven't done ours (oops). We haven't been able to agree who to leave the girls to (I guess ours is a good problem because we have a lot of good options and it's hard to narrow down). I think we have finally decided and we just need to get it done.

So my husband will do ours, but I think his opinion of the legal zoom wills is that it's better than nothing, but for something so important as custody of kids, it's probably better to go to an actual attorney. Especially if there is the potential that someone will fight it (like your in-laws).

[dc2london]

Not depressing, responsible! Thank you for making sure that this is sorted, for your baby's sake and that of your other family members (I am in will hell right now bc of a relative).
Legalzoom is totally fine for this. Also, a lot of employers have EAPs that entitle workers to one free or very low cost consultation with an attorney each year.

[remylove1011]

Ugh, I really need to do this and really don't want to have this conversation with MH. I guess its good that we have a few options.

Previously MH has always said his older sister and her husband and I would really like our kids to go to my brother and his partner. There's no question that they'd get lots of love from both sets of people. So I'm having a rough time with it.

Those of you who've made the decision, how did you come to a conclusion and what was your ultimate reasoning?

[redhead610]

We did this a little over a year ago. We choose to use a lawyer - I think it was worth the money because she really talked about each aspect of the process with us. In addition to who would be taking care of the kids, we talked about medical decisions, financial, and others.

For us, the decision of who our kids to go to was pretty easy. We chose my sister and her family - we are very close and they know ds1 very well, we have similar parenting styles, and I know our children would be loved and taken care of. Plus DH's siblings are younger, and not at a point in their lives where they could take on a couple extra kids (just graduated college, etc).

[steph]

I guess DH and I should really talk about this, tho I'm pretty sure we're both on the same page. B and baby would go to my sister. His dad is a bit (a lot) crazy and his mom really isn't interested in our kids with the exception of SD- the golden child. My mom isn't really responsible enough and I wouldn't expect my dad to do it. My brother and his wife send their kid to my mom or sisters every night all week so they don't have to take care of her in the mornings so that's a no.

Not sure about what would happen w SD, his parents would definitely fight her mom for her.

[dc2london]

Our situation is a little bit different bc we live several hundred miles from all of our family members. Currently, my mother would step in. She could move here and into our house which would avoid the children having to be uprooted on top of losing their parents. She is aldo the care provider we would choose, based on the fact that she shares similar values and parenting style with us. IL's would do a wonderful job of caring for our children but are not as able to pick up and go. AFA siblings, there is one we would NOT consider, one is military, and the other would be a firm "maybe."

[elm1214]

Right now we are deciding between my parents and my younger sister. I was planning on my parents, they are in good health and have the financial ability to take care of them (although we have life insurance which should take care of them).

DH originally was pushing for his parents, but now he is thinking we should ask my younger sister. Right now she in unmarried and doesn't have any kids. She would be great with them, but she does want to get married and have a family and I feel like it's a lot to have her take on three kids. He is just worried about my parents health in like 15 years, and potentially having to uproot them again if my parents health goes downhill.

Regardless, there would be significant help and support from everyone in my family as well as my ILs so that makes me feel better about whoever we choose.

[bocaburger]

remylove1011, to me it's not about parenting style, and like you said I know they'd get lots of love from any of our options. So I'm thinking about:

- Health/longevity and physical ability to care for young kids
- How much of a burden it would be and what lifestyle changes they would have to make to accommodate
- Siblings' financial situations and plans for their own families

[gratefulgirl]

We have always wanted the girls to go to DH's brother. But he has 3 and is the appointed guardian for DH's sister's 2. My parents are physically reaching their limit on top of being pretty spacy. But they are local and so loving. We really need to do this and to bulk up the life insurance. Maybe DH can do that while he's not WFH but is lying around.

[hannahbear]

We hired a lawyer - in addition to wills, I also really wanted DH to have power of attorney. We ended up giving his parents power of attorney in case we are both incapacitated. The lawyer was great and walked us through each point to consider. Kind of pricy, but I feel good about it!

[coffeequeen14]

My kids would go to my mom. We have family that we love but no one I would really want to raise my kids in my absence. My parents would be the least disruptive to my kids lives and also have the most financial means to support them. My mom would quit her job to raise them if needed.

My Inlaws would be greatly hurt as would Hs siblings but to be honest, I worry any life insurance for me and H would be inappropriately utilized and not go 100% to my kids benefit.

My best friend would be ideal but I just couldn't so that to my mom. Our friends that would raise our kids the way we would like already have two kids and I'm not sure they have the capacity to take on ours. But my moms kinda nuts and wouldn't raise them the way I would. There is no great choice.

[spicysalmonroll]

I just texted my attorney (high school friend) and asked if I should have the will made before or after the baby is born and he said after. So I guess I'll wait, but I should probably have the conversation with my brother & his wife that we would want it to be them. My brother is already the second beneficiary on all my accounts after H.

[shanny]

I'm an attorney, but as different fields of law are very specialized, we hired a trust and estate attorney.

We created a trust to put assets into (and when we buy a house, hopefully someday soonish, haha, the house will be an asset), established executors, guardians, living wills, and health directives. It cost us $1200.

We can certainly change who the guardians and everything else are as things change. For instance, right now, my mom would be first guardian then my MIL.

[katelm]

Jul 13, 2016 10:45:05 GMT -5 spicysalmonroll said:

I just texted my attorney (high school friend) and asked if I should have the will made before or after the baby is born and he said after. So I guess I'll wait, but I should probably have the conversation with my brother & his wife that we would want it to be them. My brother is already the second beneficiary on all my accounts after H.

I wonder why after? Part of me feels the need to do it before the baby is here. In the .00001% chance we got in a car accident or something else terrible in the first few days or weeks of the baby's life & we don't survive & she does I do not want my in-laws somehow finding a way to get custody. I could see them big time fighting for it and they would be the worst. So I need to ensure this won't happen. I guess it's not such a big deal if you know you won't have family members fighting over it that would be a poor choice

[hummingbird125]

This is something that DH just doesn NOT want to talk about, but I need to make him. In my opinion - and I think he agrees, our child should go to DH's sister and BIL. They have the financial means to easily take on another child, right now they own their own business and both WFH, and they live near DH's parents (and where both DH & I and my mom and stepfather, plan to move within the next year). The ONLY thing that makes me second guess this decision is the fact that they have three young kids already (the youngest will be within a year of my LO). However, from what I've seen all their kids get a lot of love and both adults have the same general outlook as DH and I.

My sisters are both too young to consider, and as close as I am to my mother, I don't want my LO being raised by his grandmother.

I truly don't foresee a legal battle about custody of our child/children as long as our wishes are clear, so I think we'll probably use legal zoom for this.

[spicysalmonroll]

Jul 13, 2016 15:48:46 GMT -5 katelm said:

Jul 13, 2016 10:45:05 GMT -5 spicysalmonroll said:

I just texted my attorney (high school friend) and asked if I should have the will made before or after the baby is born and he said after. So I guess I'll wait, but I should probably have the conversation with my brother & his wife that we would want it to be them. My brother is already the second beneficiary on all my accounts after H.

I wonder why after? Part of me feels the need to do it before the baby is here. In the .00001% chance we got in a car accident or something else terrible in the first few days or weeks of the baby's life & we don't survive & she does I do not want my in-laws somehow finding a way to get custody. I could see them big time fighting for it and they would be the worst. So I need to ensure this won't happen. I guess it's not such a big deal if you know you won't have family members fighting over it that would be a poor choice

I'm guessing just the ease of only writing it once. Rather than writing "unborn baby" now and then having to go back and rewrite it all so it actually states the child's identity. But that's just a guess, I have no clue.

[remylove1011]

So I just brought this up while we were eating dinner and was shocked by MH's response. I listed all of our options and he went through a quick pro/con list. He actually came to the same conclusion that she should go to my brother and his partner. I told him I was really surprised at how quickly he got there and he said it just makes the most sense. So I guess we'll be working on putting together a will at some point and I need to talk to my brother about all of this.

[katelm]

Jul 13, 2016 16:23:34 GMT -5 spicysalmonroll said:

Jul 13, 2016 15:48:46 GMT -5 katelm said:

I wonder why after? Part of me feels the need to do it before the baby is here. In the .00001% chance we got in a car accident or something else terrible in the first few days or weeks of the baby's life & we don't survive & she does I do not want my in-laws somehow finding a way to get custody. I could see them big time fighting for it and they would be the worst. So I need to ensure this won't happen. I guess it's not such a big deal if you know you won't have family members fighting over it that would be a poor choice

I'm guessing just the ease of only writing it once. Rather than writing "unborn baby" now and then having to go back and rewrite it all so it actually states the child's identity. But that's just a guess, I have no clue.

Oh ok. I always assumed it was general and said "all children" or "all dependents" so that it didn't need to be re-done with each new child.

[shanny]

katelm, our T&E refers to just DD and the attorney will amend it when LO arrives to include his name. That being said, if you don't have any other children or people who could try to allege they are your children, I don't think it would invalidate your will by any means to not have them specifically named...it's just about covering your bases and not having any challenges to your will, should it need to be executed.

[frodabaggins]

bocaburger, same problem for me

We don't agree. I used to think it was a no-brainer that the kids would go to MY parents because they are better of financially, live in a nicer place, etc. But he thinks it should be HIS mom and step-dad, because he thinks they're more likely to respect our wishes that our kids continue to be raised Jewish in our absence. I finally had my official conversion on Monday! So I understand his point of view. My brothers I can't consider because they have their own kids and not the type of jobs that could support taking on two more. Ugh, it's not fun to talk about

[shanny]

Jul 13, 2016 19:01:37 GMT -5 frodabaggins said:

bocaburger, same problem for me

We don't agree. I used to think it was a no-brainer that the kids would go to MY parents because they are better of financially, live in a nicer place, etc. But he thinks it should be HIS mom and step-dad, because he thinks they're more likely to respect our wishes that our kids continue to be raised Jewish in our absence. I finally had my official conversion on Monday! So I understand his point of view. My brothers I can't consider because they have their own kids and not the type of jobs that could support taking on two more. Ugh, it's not fun to talk about

The funds that you guys have in bank accounts, other accounts, and life insurance should be used for the upbringing of your children, should they be cared for by guardians. It wouldn't just be up to the guardians' income.

[frodabaggins]

Jul 13, 2016 19:24:58 GMT -5 shanny said:

Jul 13, 2016 19:01:37 GMT -5 frodabaggins said:

bocaburger , same problem for me

We don't agree. I used to think it was a no-brainer that the kids would go to MY parents because they are better of financially, live in a nicer place, etc. But he thinks it should be HIS mom and step-dad, because he thinks they're more likely to respect our wishes that our kids continue to be raised Jewish in our absence. I finally had my official conversion on Monday! So I understand his point of view. My brothers I can't consider because they have their own kids and not the type of jobs that could support taking on two more. Ugh, it's not fun to talk about

The funds that you guys have in bank accounts, other accounts, and life insurance should be used for the upbringing of your children, should they be cared for by guardians. It wouldn't just be up to the guardians' income.

Thank you for this clarification

[shanny]

Jul 13, 2016 19:29:45 GMT -5 frodabaggins said:

Jul 13, 2016 19:24:58 GMT -5 shanny said:

The funds that you guys have in bank accounts, other accounts, and life insurance should be used for the upbringing of your children, should they be cared for by guardians. It wouldn't just be up to the guardians' income.

Thank you for this clarification

If you want to get really complex, the executors of the estate who make the financial decisions for the assets used on the children also can be different from the guardians such that there isn't concern that guardians are improperly using the funds. Great in theory if you know that many people you trust, haha. Also, you can set up that the kids can't have control over how assets are used until a certain age. So many things to think about for a happenstance no one hopes for.

[coffeequeen14]

Jul 13, 2016 21:03:08 GMT -5 shanny said:

Jul 13, 2016 19:29:45 GMT -5 frodabaggins said:

Thank you for this clarification

If you want to get really complex, the executors of the estate who make the financial decisions for the assets used on the children also can be different from the guardians such that there isn't concern that guardians are improperly using the funds. Great in theory if you know that many people you trust, haha. Also, you can set up that the kids can't have control over how assets are used until a certain age. So many things to think about for a happenstance no one hopes for.

My mom is our primary for both executed and guardianship. She has the financial means to raise them without our estate so I didn't feel it was a conflict of interest.

If my mom cannot, the secondary guardianship is different from the executor because I want to ensure the assets are used solely for the kids benefit. We have saved very aggressively and I want my kids to benefit from that. There are allowances and such for cars and housing so it isn't like we aren't intending to support the kids should something happen to us but I don't trust our secondary guardians to use that money for my kids benefit and not their own. My FIL would literally steal from his own kids. He doesn't see it as stealing because we are all family... I have a different opinion so set up our will to protect my kids in case he were to get involved in the finances. SIL is secondary to my mom for guardianship.

[joy]

@remylove - I think we agreed that this child will go to my sister. She lives a few miles from us and will see our child the most of any of out siblings. She also has three kids who will grow up with our kid.

If we have to die and disrupt our kid's life, I want him to go somewhere familiar and close to where he has lived all his life rather than far away to aunts/uncles he knows less.

[shanny]

coffeequeen14 same about my mom being both. It's so strange having to consider these scenarios and whether your hard earned money would be used appropriately in these cases.

[frodabaggins]

Jul 13, 2016 21:03:08 GMT -5 shanny said:

Jul 13, 2016 19:29:45 GMT -5 frodabaggins said:

Thank you for this clarification

If you want to get really complex, the executors of the estate who make the financial decisions for the assets used on the children also can be different from the guardians such that there isn't concern that guardians are improperly using the funds. Great in theory if you know that many people you trust, haha. Also, you can set up that the kids can't have control over how assets are used until a certain age. So many things to think about for a happenstance no one hopes for.

Holy crap! I can see how it gets so complicated and how easy it is to avoid thinking about it...