Parenting Grown Children: What Dr. Spock Forgot to Tell Us

Leaving a Legacy: Making a list (checking it twice) for who gets what treasures

They have a will that tells their grown children how the major assets in their estate will be shared. But a few weeks ago, Jane and Lester took an additional step. They made out two lists. One they shared with their children as soon as it was complete. Jane calls it the "asset locator." It tells the couple's two grown children--a son and daughter--where the assets are. "Everything is in there that they will need to know: Where we have our safe deposit box and where the key is; where our bank and stock broker accounts are. Who to call. Everything."

Jane and Lester want to make things easy and dissension-free for their children to handle all things having to do with the estate. They've even laid out their funeral plans--where they want to be buried, what the tombstones should say, which funeral home to use. "If I go last," Jane says, "I've even told them what kind of food platters to have after the funeral service and where to order them." She is leaving little to chance--or sibling dispute.

What  her children don't have a copy of is the second list. Jane calls this the "distribution list." One of the first things she did when she retired a few months ago was to walk through the house and list everything of value: her grandmother's hand-carved chair, the antiques she and Lester have purchased or inherited, the sofa, the Persian rug, Jane's jewelry. The list tells her kids who should get what. She and Lester haven't made all those decisions yet. But Jane has talked to her kids from time to time about what they would want. "Some of the stuff I know one of them wants and I will give it to them. Some stuff this one doesn't like and that one does." And some stuff no one has spoken for. She may eventually sell some of those items--rather than leave it to them to dump her father's paintings or her grandmother's chair.

There are complications, especially with the jewelry. Jane's engagement ring is made up of two small diamonds, setting off a Sapphire center. She wants to make sure it stays in the family for generations to come. It's a ring her daughter has always loved. She is going to leave it to her--with some instructions: When her daughter's four-year-old twins (both boys) come of age--twenty or thirty years hence--and meet the loves of their life, she wants her daughter to give each one a diamond from the ring to use as an engagement gift.

The point of the list, Jane says, is not to control where things go--although clearly there's a little of that in it--but to avoid any legacy disputes between her kids. "I've designated who gets what," Jane says. "because I don't want there to be a fight."

That may be the most important and long-lasting legacy of all.

Leaving a Legacy: Letting your grown kids know what you are willing their way.

Estate planning is a funny thing: We don't give it much thought--until we do. When we're leading active, vigorous lives, who can be bothered--who wants to be bothered--by thoughts of mortality? As we get older and more isolated, we may start seeing those wills and estates as a 'pay back' device. And we do so at our peril.

I was reminded of this by hearing Hendrik Hartog  talk about his book, "Someday All  of This Will be Yours," on the Diane Rehm show.  Hartog catalogues a century's worth of emotional perils and legal pitfalls that come with leaving an inheritance that is seen as unfair to  one or all of your children. As he explained on air, his aim in presenting a history of cases between 1850 and 1950 was to look at what they show about parent-child relations and how, in a time before pensions and Social Security, people used the promise of inheritance to secure care for themselves in old age--a grown child was often called upon to stay home and care for an aged parent-.

But Hartog made an important point beyond legal and cultural history. Even though the cases he discusses come from a different time and era, some things never change. People he talks to today tell him similar stories of inheritance plans gone bad in terms of family harmony and unity.

All of this is just another way of saying, it doesn't have to be so, that we can clear the air so that our grown children not only know what's in our estate but what our guiding principles are in dividing up those worldly goods between them and others. Great movie scenes though they make, the reading of the will ought to have no unpleasant surprises--in fact, no surprises at all. The more our grown children know what we're thinking and where and how we saw fairness in drawing up our will, the fewer sources of disharmony we'll leave behind.

The will isn't pay back time. We do want to be remembered fondly, don't we?

 

Grandparenting: Are we willing to share the wealth with our Grands?

A few days ago, I wrote about a 2011 MetLife survey on boomer parent's spending habits vis a vis their grown children. (Long story short: Most of us want to help our adult children with college tuition; fewer want to help them buy a house.)

There's also a 2009 MetLife survey on how grandparents feel about spending money on their grandchildren. The 2011 survey already covered the college tuition question for grandchildren--most of us say, 'no way.' But this survey has more specific questions.

How do we feel about financial assistance or monetary gifts for grandchildren? Two out of three of us give our grandchildren money; The average amount in the five years leading up to 2009: $8,700.

Why did we do it? The reasons most cited were general financial support, education, and major life events.

Do we want to give them gifts while we're still here or leave them a lump-sum legacy once we're gone? Nearly 80 percent of us would rather distribute smaller gifts. Nothing beats seeing them enjoy an indulgence or appreciate real-world help.

Has the Great Recession and its aftermath made us more generous toward our Grandkin? One in four of us report we are providing more assistance than in the past, due to the current economy.

Do we give advice along with the money? Not so much. More than two-thirds of grandparents report that they are not providing any financial advice or guidance to their grandchildren. Among those who are talking to their grandchildren about financial issues, the most common advice is “start saving early in life,” and “don’t get into too much debt.”

Isn't that what our grandparents told us?

Money Matters: What are we willing to pay for when our grown children are grown up?

There's a new survey out on how generous--or not--we are with our adult children. Overall, the 2011 MetLife survey found that four out of five us are willing to help out in a variety of ways. But we have our limits. 

Topping the list in priorities is college education. Nine out of 10 of us believe we, as parents, have some responsibility to pay for some of their higher education, with half of us seeing this as a strong or absolute responsibility. The survey even put some numbers on that assistance: More than half of us  would contribute 10,000 a year or more to the tab for our child's higher education.

In terms of percentages, we're more generous than our parents. According to the survey, only 35 percent of baby boomer parents helped with the college bills. As to helping our grandchildren with their college bills, two-thirds of us don't think we have any responsibility in that regard--love those kiddies though we do. Only only 15% of us report that we have contributed toward the costs of a grandchild’s education. 

We don't see helping our grown kids buy a house as nearly as compelling a responsibility as a college education. Half of us suggested that we had no responsibility at all to contribute to the down payment on a house. Among those 23 percent of us who felt we had at least a moderate responsibility to help, half of us said we would contribute under $10,000 for that purpose.

The survey also looked at how much responsibility we felt in helping out a grown child whose fortunes were flagging--who had lost jobs, were going through a divorce or meeting some other financial setback. More than four in 10 of us reported that, in such cases, we feel a strong or absolute responsibility to help out--if the setback was not of their own making.

Woe betide the grown child who spends recklessly and causes his or her own financial debacle. We are not as forgiving--at least our purses are not. Only 11 percent of us feel the need to bail out a child when the debt is due to overspending. We draw the line at those closets full of Jimmy Choo shoes, crazy weekends in Vegas or a drug habit. But even  here, the MetLife survey puts a number on how much we'd be willing to spend to help out--if we were willing at all. And it's not $10,000. It's half of that.

What about leaving them a legacy? Half of us in the Baby Boomer generation feel little or no responsibility to leave something behind for our heirs. For those of us who do, MetLife has some numbers: Those of us who would leave something behind see the appropriate amount as somewhere between $20,000 and $50,000. 

They survey also looked at what obligations our children feel toward us. Take a deep breath and read on: (all percents are for feeling a strong or absolute responsibility):

62% feel called upon to call us at least once a week to see how we're doing

58% would have us live with them if we weren't healthy enough to live on our own

50% would take us in if were financial destitute

46% would provide financial support in our later years if we were having financial reverses.

Not that we'd want that. 42% claim we wouldn't take the help.

Does this make you want to rethink those contributions to their financial health, education and housing?

 

Leaving a Legacy: A place defines a family's values for generations to come.

I've been thinking a lot lately about my legacy to my grown children. By that I don't mean how much money Paterfamilias and I will leave them--who knows what will be left to leave should PF or I hit a serious-illness streak. I'm thinking more about what I'll leave that lets my grown children and their children know who I was and what was important to me, that little (or big) something that underscores my values, whatever wisdom I have to impart, a sense of the life I've lived.

Being a writer, I've always thought of the written word as my road to legacy. But a recent New York Times story ("In a Maine House, No Room to Waste"), held out a whole other notion. A couple in their 60s--each having grown children from previous marriages--love spending weekends on Mt. Desert Island in Maine, a place where kingfish and heron patrol the mudflats and marshes and development is sparse. When they cross the bridge onto the island and can smell the ocean, the couple said, they "roll down the windows and holler, “Yay!”   They eventually went from transient visitors to homeowners: buying and renovating a second home there, being very careful not to enlarge the home's footprint or leave any additional marks of man on the mudflats. It meant a very expensive commitment--to a home, a way of life and the marshy wilderness. They see the house as a way of leaving a legacy. They bought the house, the couple reported, "because we loved this island and we wanted to provide a way for us and our family and the other people we love to live together on this most gorgeous place on earth.”

A living legacy that says a lot about one family's values.

 

 

Leaving a Legacy: Letting grownchildren in on the plan for your worldly goods.

In the French movie, Summer Hours, three forty-something siblings grow apart over how to dispose of a beloved summer home and the valuable items inside it. When their mother died, she left no specific instructions--just the hope that the place would be kept going for the next generation. I'm not giving the ending away to say that the mother's wishes go unfulfilled and that the relationship among the siblings deteriorates.

King Lear also fumbled his estate planning. He let his children know  who would get what--but not in quite the best way.

Movies and literature are filled with sad tales that surround the making or not making of plans for worldly goods. Estate planning runs amok or doesn't take place at all. While some of us have been orderly about the process--made out wills, told our children where accounts can be found. We may have skipped one important step: talking with our children about the disposal and dispersal of the lesser items.

Not that I've taken this advice myself, but I'm reminded of the need to make such arrangements--to ask my grown children who wants the piano and who would enjoy the Phyllis Plattner watercolor that hangs in the living room? Would anyone like my collection of wood, porcelain and tin cats? And what of the other things in our house--items paterfamilias and I might not prize but that may carry great sentimental value for one of them. I should gather our grown children together and do a walk-through. It needn't be gruesome. It doesn't mean we're about to leave this world. It's just a chance to put a plan in place that everybody is happy with--and avoid a post-mortem blow-up. Of course, we wouldn't be there to see the latter, but still....

In a Washington Post article, Adolf Gundersen wrote about his experience in doing just such planning with his 80-year-old parents and his siblings. The evening--his wife dubbed it a "pre-mortem"--of putting on paper what would happen when his parents were gone "combined the gravitas of a memorial service with the easy sharing of a holiday dinner. And the best part of it was that my parents were there to enjoy being the center of attention." The author and his four brothers decided what would happen to a cabin in the woods that they all loved but didn't want to manage.The get-together also touched on discussions about financial and health care planning that his parents admitted they were "weary of dealing with on their own."

Gundersen writes about some of the reasons why he, his brothers and parents waited so long to have this conversation. "Getting us kids actively and directly involved in so many facets of their lives would mean a huge role reversal....For a long time neither of them had seemed psychologically ready for such a gathering."

Depending on where we are in our life cycle, we don't necessarily have to invite our children into a full "pre-mortem" discussion. (One friend admits that her mother has a dispersal discussion with him and with each of his brothers whenever they visit. Her agenda: to find a home for her clown collection--something none of the children admire or desire.) But it wouldn't be a role-reversal for us to invite our grown children over to tell us which of our possessions they'd like to have once we no longer need them. Not that I need them to assure me that someone will keep my cat collection together.

Money Matters: Sharing the wealth in a rational way

She's a doctor; he's a lawyer. They've both done very well--financially and otherwise. Their only child--a son--has taken a different road. He's living his dream career: he's a firefighter, studying to be an emergency medical technician.

I've never heard the parents complain about his life choice--except when their son was called up during the war in Iraq. Since they've got more money then they need to live on--and to finance retirement--they've been giving their son a portion of his inheritance every year--the maximum they can give without incurring tax penalties under gift tax laws. Currently, that's $12,000 from her; $12,000 from him. 

"He relies on that $24,000. He factors it into his budget," she says. They don't give it to him in one lump sum at any particular time. They send checks and he keeps tabs on what's come in. And when he needs money for something--he lives on a farm and recently wanted money to build a small auxiliary barn--he can call up and tell his parents what he wants or needs and why he'd like an advance.

Apart from the requests, do they keep an eye on how he's using the money. Not really but sort of. "I wouldn't want him to use it for something frivolous--in his case, another antique gun for his collection. But he pretty much spends it on legitimate living expenses."

Her point is not to approve or disapprove of his spending. Rather, she wants him to know how much he can depend on so he can plan and budget for it. She'd rather do it that way then just send the odd gift here and there--as many of us do. This lets him make rational decisions about his personal budget. And it gives the parents the pleasure of knowing they're providing a cushion that let's him pursue the livelihood that makes him happy--regardless of how much it pays.

 

Money Matters: The bonus when you let a light shine on your financials

A little while ago, I blogged about a friend whose college-age daughter needed a summer job. He gave her one. One of her chores was to put the family financials into a software program. Not only did this get a time-consuming job off his hands, but it also served as a Baedeker for his daughter: Now she knows what her self-employed parents earn, what savings they have, where their investments are--in short, how they handle their money. And that has come back not to bite them but to provide a bonus.

The dad reports that, since he and his wife are in business together, they have a corporate American Express credit card, and having a corporate card means they can get extra cards. So when his children went off to college, they gave them Amex corporate cards to use in an emergency. "When they called home and needed something, the easiest thing to say was, use the American Express card," the dad says. "But that meant that when we had to figure out our taxes, we had to go through the Amex statement and subtract out the charges they had made." The latter was part of what his daughter did this summer. So when she called the other day in need of money for a legitimate online purchase, the dad told her, as he usually did, to use the Amex card.  "But she didn't want to do it," he says. "She told me it makes a mess of the financial books. She asked for another card number."

She has, this dad concludes, "become the guardian of our trusts." That's a pretty good result from sharing the details of your financial data with your grown-up children.

 

Share the Wealth: To help our children now or to leave a legacy later?

Paterfamilias and I have been incredibly lucky. We've had good jobs and rewarding careers--to the point where we have been able to set aside enough padding for our retirement--and a little bit more. It's that "little bit more" than wiggles and jiggles inside my brain and bank account.

If we have "a little bit more," why not share it with our grown children in the here and now? Not to spoil them but to step in when there's a crisis or a need. And to let hem know in advance that should they need help, we've got their back. If we can afford it. We see nothing wrong in that. But recently, I've been doing some research on the question and that has raised some doubts about how good a practice this is.

One book by a psychologist suggests that to keep on offering money both spoils grown children and infantilizes them. It's a way to control the kids by keeping the apron strings tied to money. He suggests we who offer cash are suffering from affluenza, that our financial parenting has run amok.

I took all that to heart, but then i read an online story that interviewed several psychologists who all tsk-tasked the idea of helping kids out with money. When questioned about their own personal practices, however, all admitted to being guilty of helping out or indulging their grown children.

is this a case where common sense and best psychiatric advice differ?

And does it all come down to what we're comfortable with, what makes sense for our particular children and their behavior. If they aren't dependent and don't make constant demands and suggest they expect your help indefinitely, then why not help out on an as-needed basis? Isn't this a case of no harm no foul?

Money Matters: Letting Your Kids Know What Their Legacy Will Be

Heartache and heartburn lie ahead for grown kids whose parent's don't let them know how they plan to disburse their assets. That's what the estate-planning experts say and they may not be exaggerating.  Of course, right or wrong, you won't be there to see it. But still.

The misunderstandings that can arise range from hurt feelings over who the executor of the will is to why one sibling was chosen to inherit the house and another got the jewelry--when the kids would have preferred it the other way around.

Yes, it's time to have a conversation with your grown children about your estate plan. Not necessarily how much you'll be leaving them but why you're doing what. One set of parents with a financially successful son and a do-good-works but much poorer daughter, sat their son down to explain why the daughter would inherit more of their money than he would. Having the information come directly from mom and dad and the reason behind it meant a lot to the son, who said he might have felt that somehow he had disappointed his parents--rather than that they felt so good about his success that they didn't feel he needed further backing. He also felt that if had disagreed with their reasoning he would have had a chance to argue against it. And he was able to tell them what items of theirs had sentimental value for him.

Such a nice story. And you're probably saying, as I am, I'm going to do it, I'm going to have a conversation with my kids about my estate--however big or small that estate may be. Besides, sentimental value can't be overestimated. And yet we don't do it. I haven't done it yet. Is it the confrontation with mortality? The discomfort of talking about money? Of appearing to play favorites? Of re-stoking sibling rivalries?

Time to come to terms with those emotions. If you need a little rational support, this New York Times story may be just the ticket.