logo
Dear Julia: I'm scared my siblings will lose our close bond over inheritance

Dear Julia: I'm scared my siblings will lose our close bond over inheritance

Times2 days ago

Q. My siblings and I were always close, but since our parents started dividing assets and discussing inheritance, tensions have skyrocketed. I never thought we were this kind of family, and I'm scared we'll lose our bond.
A. I am sorry you're going through this. Inheritance has a way of exposing fault lines even in the closest of families. This isn't just about money — it's about love, fairness, power and belonging. When these core needs feel threatened, emotions run high, close family members become foes and long-buried tensions can surface.
What you're describing is extremely common, yet it's an area with surprisingly little psychological research or widely accepted guidance. In this intense and fraught topic, psychotherapy has been lax in offering helpful support.
I want to help normalise the difficulties you face. Every family, regardless of wealth, will face these questions. There can be battles over money that shatter families and equally painful disputes about sentimental objects — a floral jug, a photograph album. I've known families who did not speak for decades because of a dispute about an old armchair.
Your parents are responsible for holding the family together while they lead this discussion and share their assets. Perhaps they have not thought about it deeply and naively believe it will be straightforward. It is never straightforward unless it is dealt with sensitively. Your parents need to consider their legacy — what they want to be remembered for, what values they hope to pass down — as well as their 'stuff'. Ideally, their decisions should align with what matters most to you all, rather than inadvertently create division.
Money is never just money. It often serves as a proxy for deeper, unspoken dynamics:
• Love: Am I loved? Who is the favourite? • Power: Who gets to decide?• Control: Is money being used as manipulation?• Security: Will I survive without the money I believe is my right? • Legacy: Who will be loyal to my legacy? Will my legacy be what is remembered more than me?
When these questions remain unspoken, resentment or fear can grow. Each family member may tell themselves a story that fits their feelings, ignoring other family members. Old childhood roles re-emerge — was one of you always the 'responsible one' and another the 'bad' sibling? These deeply ingrained narratives shape how you perceive what is 'fair' and who believes they have a right to make the decisions.
Reflecting on how your family has historically related to money is essential. Was it openly discussed or shrouded in secrecy? Did previous generations experience financial scarcity, creating a mindset of precarity? Understanding these patterns won't provide instant solutions, but it will help you to see the context within which your beliefs have formed — it can help you to resist being pulled into knee-jerk reactions.
Families tend to approach inheritance in one of four ways
Equality: Assets are divided equally to preserve family unity.
Reciprocity: Distribution is based on past contributions or needs.
Egoism: Decisions are made with individual self-interest in mind, with little regard for family cohesion.
Tradition: Rules have been passed down from the past, like primogeniture, where the cohesion of the estate overrides individual family members.
There are no clear answers to this, but I suggest as a family, you think about these ideas:
1. Pause ongoing plans — talk together. Ask your parents and siblings to delay major decisions and invite open discussion. Transparency is crucial, as secrecy or sudden surprises tend to escalate conflict. It helps if parents can share their reasons and allow space for their children's perspectives to be heard.
2. Commit to honest conversations — this is easier said than done. These discussions aren't just about 'who gets what' but about what feels just and emotionally fair. The key is to ensure that no topic or feeling is off-limits — when people feel heard, it reduces the toxicity of underlying tensions. Be patient; this process takes time.
3. Agree on shared values — what does your family stand for? Do you prioritise fairness, tradition, or security? If you can align on your core values, they can act as a guiding principle for decisions.
4. Accept conflict but prioritise repair — disagreements are inevitable, but how you handle them will determine whether your relationships survive intact. Acknowledge when something feels unfair, name your feelings without blame, and work towards repair rather than retreat into silent resentment, or replay old fights. Be mindful of past family patterns — the roles that each act out.
5. Imagine your future — picture where you want your family to be in five or ten years. What does a 'good outcome' look like — not just financially, but emotionally? If the ultimate goal is to maintain close sibling bonds, then protect and prioritise those relationships over the assets.
6. Seek professional advice — inheritance disputes are rarely just financial; they are deeply psychological. A mediator or family therapist can help to navigate difficult conversations alongside financial advisers who can provide practical guidance. You may not want to spend the money on this now, but any money spent now will save you financially and psychologically .
7. Discuss the chattels — many fiercest battles are over objects with emotional value. If your parents are willing, discuss these now, while they can help to facilitate fairness. Some families take turns choosing items, while others use written agreements to avoid future disputes.
• Read more advice from Julia Samuel on The Times
These conversations will challenge you all, but they are also an opportunity. I've seen families torn apart over wealth, but I've also seen families who come through this process more robust as a unit, with a deeper love for one another.
I believe that family bonds — being there for each other in times of crisis, celebration and day-to-day —are more protective than financial wealth. If you're lucky enough to inherit financial security, let it strengthen your relationships, not break them.
I hope this helps, and I wish you and your family the best to find a resolution that works for everyone.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Mommy influencer announces new career as she emerges a year after husband's Hamptons suicide
Mommy influencer announces new career as she emerges a year after husband's Hamptons suicide

Daily Mail​

time29 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Mommy influencer announces new career as she emerges a year after husband's Hamptons suicide

A mommy blogger who vanished from social media after her husband took his own life at their $12million Hamptons mansion while drowning in debt has launched a new business endeavor. Candice Miller has returned to the spotlight and revealed she is now a certified professional life coach, 11 months after she first went quiet and wiped her popular Mama and Tata blog. The glamorous mother-of-two updated her Instagram bio section to share with her 84,000 followers the surprise new role. 'She who has a Why to live for can bear almost any How. CPC | Certified Professional Life Coach,' she wrote. Her return to work comes as she builds a new life away from the ritzy Hamptons scene that she and her husband were accustomed to, brimming with glittering parties, private plane trips and luxury cars. The 'Mama and Tata' page, which was also a lifestyle brand, frequently featured lavish displays of wealth like $800 facials and celebrity workout classes, helping her to amass a loyal following of aspirational viewers. The illusion of the glamorous life she led was shattered on the 4th of July weekend last year when her husband Brandon Miller's body was found inside his Porsche in the garage of the family home. He died of carbon monoxide poisoning while Miller and her two children were holidaying at a $2,000-per-night resort on Italy's Amalfi Coast, and his death was ultimately declared a suicide. Brandon died owing $33.6million, leaving just $8,000 in the bank. She has always maintained that she wasn't aware of her husband's finances or business dealings. Brandon ensured his family would still be taken care of despite his debts, taking out life insurance policies worth $15million which were paid out after his death. But some of that money could be swept up in legal fees and repayments as Miller works with lawyers to determine what debts she is on the hook for. She was sued for $194,881 in unpaid rent from the Park Avenue apartment in New York where she and her family had lived since 2021, but argued that she did not owe any money given she did not personally sign the lease. It's understood shortly after Brandon's death, Miller agreed to pay about $4million to settle a lawsuit over a separate loan. In all, her husband had taken out an estimated $20million in unsecured loans, the New York Times reported at the time. She sold the family home in the Hamptons in December 2024 for $12.8million. The home reportedly had five mortgages taken out on it, totaling nearly $12million. After the sale, she and her two daughters began a new life in Miami, living in a $10million condominium overlooking the ocean which has been loaned to her by her friend, Alexander von Furstenberg, son of fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg. Far from hiding out and wallowing in misery, sources told Page Six she appeared to be thriving in the Miami scene. 'She's weirdly okay,' another socialite said. 'She's at parties and events and dinners. She's not sitting at home wearing all black with the lights off or anything. 'She's not shopping at Chanel every day. But, day to day, she is living life. She's residing in an expensive apartment that's been loaned to her by friends, She's going to dinners and places like the Four Seasons Surf Club and Casa Tua, working out, and traveling. 'Obviously, everything's changed. But, from what we see, it doesn't feel like anything's changed. She's not super laying low. That's for sure.' She first returned to social media on Monday evening, sharing a cryptic quote to her Mama and Tata Instagram page accompanied by a picture of a sun peaking through clouds over the water. 'In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer,' the caption read. 'And that makes me happy. For it says that no matter how hard the world pushes against me, within me, there's something stronger – something better, pushing right back.' The glamorous mother-of-two shared a cryptic quote to her Mama and Tata Instagram page on Monday evening, accompanied by a picture of a sun peaking through clouds over the water The cryptic statement was a quote from French philosopher and writer Albert Camus. Miller's return to social media was met with an influx of supportive messages from her loyal fans who have been patiently waiting 11 months for her to end her self-imposed exile. 'I'm a stranger to you but I pray for you and your girls often,' one fan said. 'So happy you're back,' another added.

Thousands of lawsuits over baby formula should stay where filed, court says
Thousands of lawsuits over baby formula should stay where filed, court says

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Thousands of lawsuits over baby formula should stay where filed, court says

CHICAGO, June 4 (Reuters) - An Illinois appeals court said on Tuesday that thousands of lawsuits claiming baby formula made by Abbott Laboratories and a Reckitt Benckiser subsidiary causes a dangerous disease in preterm infants should stay in the court where they were filed, a venue considered plaintiff friendly. The Appellate Court of Illinois' 5th District upheld, opens new tab a lower court's ruling rejecting Abbott and Mead Johnson's motions to transfer the lawsuits out of Madison County, Illinois. The decision allows the claims to move forward in what is often viewed as a plaintiff-friendly county court. Madison County is often flagged by tort reform groups as a jurisdiction known for outsize jury verdicts against corporate defendants. The appellate court, however, reversed the lower court's ruling denying the companies' separate motion to transfer or dismiss the lawsuits based on their argument that the cases were filed in an inconvenient location. The appeals court sent that ruling back to the lower court for reconsideration. A representative for Mead Johnson said in a statement that the company will continue to pursue dismissal of the cases in Madison County, many of which don't involve Mead Johnson products or injuries that occurred in the county. The representative said that plaintiffs' lawyers were trying to "coerce settlement by building a large inventory of claims, even when plaintiffs' lawyers have no intention of ever trying them,' the company said. A spokesperson for Abbott Laboratories did not respond to a request for comment. Tor Hoerman, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs said in a statement that the ruling "reinforces the importance of corporate accountability and helps ensure that families impacted by these tragic injuries can seek justice in the appropriate forum." All of the lawsuits allege that the companies failed to warn that their specialized formulas used by newborn intensive care units in hospitals could cause necrotizing enterocolitis, a disease that almost exclusively affects premature infants and has an estimated mortality rate of more than 20%. The companies have denied the claims, saying that while breast milk protects against NEC, formula does not cause it, and that the benefits of breast milk have long been known to clinicians. In addition to state court cases in Illinois, Missouri and Pennsylvania, a federal multidistrict litigation with more than 700 cases over the claims is moving forward in Chicago, according to court records. The same Illinois appeals court is also considering a similar dispute over transferring more cases over the preterm formula that are currently pending in St. Clair County, Illinois, another court targeted by tort reformers for being plaintiff-friendly. In 2024, a jury in St. Clair County ordered Mead Johnson to pay $60 million to the mother of a premature baby who died after being fed the company's Enfamil baby formula. A few months later, a St. Louis, Missouri, jury ordered Abbott to pay $495 million in damages in another case. Both companies prevailed in the most recent trial, in October. However, the judge in that case in March ordered a new trial, finding that lawyers for the defendants had acted improperly. The case is Jupiter v. Mead Johnson and Co LLC, Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District, No. 230248. For the plaintiffs: Ashley Keller and Benjamin Whiting of Keller Postman; Tor Hoerman of TorHoerman Law; and David Cates of Cates Law Firm For Abbott Laboratories: Linda Coberly and Stephen D'Amore of Winston & Strawn; Thomas Kilbride and Adam Vaught of Kilbride & Vaught; and W. Jason Rankin and Emilee Bramstedt of HeplerBroom For Mead Johnson: Joel Bertocchi of Akerman; Anthony Anscombe and Darlene Alt of Steptoe & Johnson; and Donald Flack of Bartholomew, Shevlin & Flack

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store