Comment on Is it ethical for a parent to distribute inheritance based on the child(ren)'s mental capacity (aka refusing to give an inheritance to child(ren) with reduced mental capacity)?

• czech@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  To qualify for some benefits you can’t have any assets. The state forces you to sell your assets and pay for care before they will chip in.

  source

  • Tangent5280@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Hello boring dystopia

    source
  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    This isn’t what OP is talking about, however.

    OP’s parents are assholes.

    source
  • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Make sense in this nightmare we live in.

    source
• Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  No, he doesn’t have the capacity to take care of the basics to keep it. Playing the utilities, taxes, maintaining the property, etc.

  source

  • Maalus@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    You can still help him do those things even if the house is his… Like, if he doesn’t have the house in his name, you can kick him out if you are a dick and there is nothing protecting him. If the house is his, you cannot do that, “best” you could do is stop helping out with the bills and such.

    source

    • godot@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      A family in that sort of situation has considered many options. Willing the house to the brother is the easiest, so I’m sure the poster and their mother have reasons for opting against it. They’ve been living with this situation for decades, we’ve read five sentences.

      It’s dangerous to assume the brother would be safe from predation if he owned his home. This person apparently lacks the ability to pay taxes and ensure proper maintenance. Even just to help with that, the poster will need access to their brother’s banking and tax info. It would not be difficult for someone to take advantage of that situation.

      Alternately, using their legal ownership of the home the brother could potentially shut the poster out and might actively sabotage efforts to maintain and pay for the home. In that case the property could suffer substantial damage, become dangerous/uninhabitable, or even be lost despite the poster’s efforts. Many people have destructive tendencies.

      The more certain way to protect the house for the brother would be to place it in a trust, but that’s not a panacea. Setting up an ironclad trust to prevent selling the house is great until the brother can’t get up the stairs, or the whole family decides to move to Canada, or the brother goes into assisted living, or the property value skyrockets. A trust will also have tax implications and potential costs that need to be considered.

      I assume and hope the mother has been advised by a decent estate lawyer on their options. I am certain there are scenarios where willing a house to a sibling is the best course of action. I wish the poster luck and hope they’ll act in the interest of their brother for their entire lives.

      source

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        You hit the nail on the head.

        We want to keep him safe, and that person saying otherwise proves one of my points. On paper, it DOES look shady or unfair, but nobody knows the whole situation, and sorry, you’re not going to, because that’s his business, not yours.

        source