March 8, 2024 at 7:38 pm

His Mother-In-Law Only Left One Grandchild An Inheritance, And Now He Thinks They Should Share To Make It Fair

by Trisha Leigh

Source: Reddit/AITA/Shutterstock

It’s a sad truth that inheritance is a thing that can really rip families apart instead of bringing them together.

You’d like to think that the person who passed would hate to hear that, but sometimes you really have to wonder.

OP has two daughters – one his, one his wife’s – and his mother-in-law always favored her biological granddaughter.

I have two daughters that were my late mother-in-law’s only grandchildren, Elise (22f) and Rea (21f).

She always favored Elise because Elise wanted to follow in her footsteps and be just like her.

She spent so much more time with Elise, teaching her her profession and using her connections to get her set up in her field.

They shared an interest, and she gave that daughter some valuable assets while she was still alive.

When she went into care, she had to dispurse her assets to pay for it.

She took yet another opportunity to favor Elise by making sure she alone got her tools and a small amount of land that she used to set up greenhouses.

After her death, they learned her estate was to be shared by the two granddaughters.

She passed a little over a year ago, and we got a letter in the mail about a trust that she had set up about a decade ago.

There isn’t much, about $30,000.

The trust states that it’s supposed to be shared equally between her grandchildren and can only be fully dispersed when the youngest is 21.

The only two grandchildren are my daughters, Elise and Rea, and Rea just turned 21.

That is, with one very specific catch.

We asked about it, and got the answer that unfortunately, only Elise is eligible to withdraw any money from this trust.

She set up a clause that anyone who had a child before the minimum age to inherit is automatically disqualified.

In short, if one of the grandchildren has a baby before age 21, they get $0 and their portion goes to the other heirs.

Rea has a two year old son, and Elise doesn’t have kids, so according to the terms, Elise gets 100%.

I’m angry.

My wife wants to just let it go and ignore that it ever existed just like the land.

I don’t.

My mother-in-law never treated Rea like a real grandchild. She never spent real time with her or gave her the same opportunities.

At the time she set this up, Elise had had to undergo a hysterectomy.

She set this up so that only Rea could “fail” and she’d have an excuse to get a dig in one last time.

His wife and her daughter want to let it lie, but OP can’t stop thinking about how unfair it is.

I swallowed the land thing because it was affected Elise’s career and there were already things to maintain that only Elise cared to, but this is too much.

I think Elise is obligated to do the right thing and split this with her sister.

Elise thinks we shouldn’t fight the will and my wife is trying to “stay neutral”.

Is Reddit on his side or hers? Let’s hear them out!

The top comment thinks the blood relation piece could be important.

Source: Reddit/AITA

This person agrees that grandma can do what she wants with her money.

Source: Reddit/AITA

No one is entitled to an inheritance.

Source: Reddit/AITA

Most of the time people know exactly what they’re doing.

Source: Reddit/AITA

But this commenter can understand where OP is coming from.

Source: Reddit/AITA

This one is tougher than most people wanted to think.

OP has every right to have his feelings hurt on behalf of his daughter.

If you thought that was an interesting story, check this one out about a man who created a points system for his inheritance, and a family friend ends up getting almost all of it.