Lack of a Family Relationship as Grounds for Disinheritance

[Couscous]

This is an interesting paper about how in Spain, where they have forced inheritance laws, it is still possible to disinherit a child on the grounds that emotional ties broke or were weakened before the parent’s death. It’s easy to imagine how narcissistic parents will take full advantage of this exception by claiming they were emotionally abused by a child who has distanced him/herself from them. Gotta wonder just how many Spanish Supreme Court judges are narcissistic themselves…

Spain provides two recent examples of the tendency to attach more importance to emotional ties than to those based strictly on kinship when making decisions about disinheritance. Firstly, its Supreme Court has reinterpreted the concept of abuse in Article 853.2 of the Spanish Civil Code (hereafter, Spanish CC) to include the emotional abuse suffered by a testator who has been neglected. This follows other legal systems in which the law expressly allows the testator to deprive forced heirs of their right, without any need to specify or list behaviour, if they openly contravene their duty of care and attention to the testator or her family. Secondly, the legislature had incorporated a new ground for disinheritance into Book IV of the Catalan Civil Code (hereafter, Cat CC) well before this, which consisted in the absence or breakdown of the family relationship for reasons exclusively attributable to the forced heir.

www.diposit.ub.edu/dspace/bitstream/2445/98489/1/659223.pdf

[Turkish]

So it sounds like they're aligning more with nations without forced inheritance laws.

[Notwendy]

It can go the other way too. Perhaps a parent has a child who is a criminal and may do destructive things with the money.

Perhaps Spain has decided that people have a choice of what to do with the money they earned.

However, as Couscous warned, this could be done in hurtful ways and cause long term family divisions. Inheritance is more than property. It states the relationship and connection and if someone is disinherited, it erases their family ties.

[Couscous]

I personally don’t think kinship ties can ever be erased, although I kind of wish they could! Emotional ties can be broken, that is true, but in narcissistic families, there aren’t actually any emotional ties to begin with. Instead, we have trauma bonds and are our parents’ hostages due to our fear, obligation and guilt.

But it actually makes a lot of sense that narcissistic parents disinherit their children who try to separate and individuate and set boundaries with them because they genuinely feel like they are being abused by those children. I know I would certainly not want to be forced to leave my estate to someone who is abusing me.

I personally feel that it is prudent to assume that I will be disinherited, and to make peace with that. If by some miracle I am not then it will be a pleasant surprise. But I know that I am not going force myself to remain in contact with my parents just in case I will be able to avoid getting disinherited. If this is the price I pay for freedom then I will gladly pay it.

I suspect that separating from our parents and individuating is a guarantee that we will be disinherited as it’s the ultimate form of retaliation for the ultimate “crime” we committed by not staying enmeshed (aka “filial duty”.) My mother is a very retaliatory person so I cannot imagine that she will be able to resist the temptation.

I certainly do not want to end up the position that Margaret Paul found herself in: https://www.innerbonding.com/show-article/4734/the-mirror-of-betrayal.html

[Notwendy]

People think these are about material property but they send an emotional message independent of the amount. If a parent had $2 and 2 children and gave them each $1, that sends a different message than if one got $2 and the other none. I doubt anyone would care about $2 but they would care a lot about the message that the parent sent in how it was awarded.

[Couscous]

People think these are about material property but they send an emotional message independent of the amount. If a parent had $2 and 2 children and gave them each $1, that sends a different message than if one got $2 and the other none. I doubt anyone would care about $2 but they would care a lot about the message that the parent sent in how it was awarded.

So what do you think the message is, and why does it matter?

[Notwendy]

While I understand that a parent could be angry, could be disappointed with a child, using a will to relate that may be something that can not ever be repaired. The message to the child that gets $2 is " you are my child and I value that". The message the child who isn't mentioned or who gets nothing is "you are not my child".

I think the parent-child relationship is too important to erase. It may be a difficult relationship, even an impossible one but it still exists regardless. By not acknowledging it, they erase that connection.

[Couscous]

The message the child who isn't mentioned or who gets nothing is "you are not my child".

A parent doesn’t have to disinherit a child in order for them to decide that their child is dead to them. They just have to cut off contact. And just because a parent says, “You are not my child”, doesn’t make it so, and doesn’t mean anything about the child.

I personally think that for a narcissistic parent disinheriting is meant as a punishment.

I thought this was a pretty good perspective on the topic: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HqnrIrvZ2xo

[Notwendy]

I agree - and BPD mother wanted to punish me - and she did.
I have no way to know if it was just her idea or my father’s too.

[Methuen]

NW, what happened with your father at the end of his life when he defended your mother and demanded you should do the same knowing the abuse you suffered under her, was a betrayal of everything you believed about your father and his character.  

I am sorry this happened. I am thinking it rocked you.

I hope I got that first sentence sorta accurate, but forgive me if it’s  a bit off in accuracy as I’m relying on the memory of what I remember you have told in past posts.  

There was no opportunity for you to resolve this betrayal problem because he passed.  But he was the parent you had clung to as normal and healthy, and you had good memories of him.  You could trust him. And that betrayal kind of shook the belief that you always had of your father, since you didn’t have a mother you could rely on ( in the true sense of how society defines that a mother is kind, loving, protective and trustworthy).

You are right that you have no way of knowing if it was just her idea or your father’s  too.  

This question might also be a symptom of the depth of the feeling of betrayal. Anyone in your situation would feel the same..

After that, you were left wondering if what you believed about your father was accurate or not.  

Have I got this somewhat accurate, or am I off base?

I’m going to go out on a limb next.  I hope this is ok.

Let’s apply analysis and Let’s imagine a scientific experiment.  

The experimental group has all the players in your family, and the experiment was the series of events that actually happened.

For the control group, swap out your mother with a non BPD player.  If your dad had not been married to your mother, or subjected to her distorted thinking and mind games and manipulation and meanness all those decades, would he have said this at the end of his life?  Was he capable of that without her influence?

At the end of his life he was vulnerable.  She on the other hand was relentless.  He may have said what he said just to shut her up and get some peace so he could pass.  This is exactly what played out with my MIL when she was dying. Her daughter (my SIL) wanted something (probably has a PD herself) and was absolutely relentless at the end of her mother’s life.  It was something that was against MIL own value system. But my H was present when his mom relented and agreed to what her daughter wanted to happen.  Everyone knew she agreed to it to shut her daughter up.  Then she passed later that day or the next.. Daughter got what she wanted.

I don’t know if these musings help or not. The intent is to be supportive. I realize this is tough going and a difficult time with all that is happening with your mother. .  I am sorry this happened to you at the end of your fathers life.  He may not have felt he had a choice.  He was on a journey to the end, vulnerable, and maybe he just needed to get there because he had no fight left in him.
 
How can you move forward from this sense of betrayal from your dad, if that is even what it is?

[Notwendy]

Hi Methuen, you are spot on.

In the context of disinheritance- and the you tube presented that Couscous posted - the emotional message is not about the money - it represents a connection to the parent. It also can't be changed once the person has passed.

While disordered parents may say something in the moment, this is an unwise decision as it can make that moment long term and so I don't think these things should be done.

This explains Couscous' question- why does this make a difference- is that this is disconnected from the money or amount of money and why giving one child $2 and another one zero matters even when that small an amount of money doesn't matter much.

I think I can process this from the perspective of my father- I know he only did what he could in a moment of being vulnerable and under pressure. I think the feeling of shock is that even with a difficult relationship with my mother- I didn't imagine she'd take it as far as she did. I know now that it isn't about me, but the extent of her disorder but it was at a time where I was grieving and didn't understand BPD dynamics as well. I still expected more "normal" behavior which would have been comforting and didn't understand why she behaved like that.

I think the Spanish laws (before they changed) have some wisdom in them. If the law decides, emotions don't- and this may have prevented family divisions.

[Methuen]

This is an interesting topic thread as it is one many of us face.

But it actually makes a lot of sense that narcissistic parents disinherit their children who try to separate and individuate and set boundaries with them because they genuinely feel like they are being abused by those children. I know I would certainly not want to be forced to leave my estate to someone who is abusing me.  

This is so insightful, as it explains their view of being the victim, which justifies the disinheritance. It is the separation and individuation which makes them feel abused because they find this invalidating, and completely unacceptable.

[Notwendy]

The presenter in that YouTube video made that point. He didn't do anything wrong but he didn't meet his father's emotional needs. I can see how that was interpreted as hurtful by the father.

It actually is a bit hurtful for the parent to see the child separate themselves that far. My kids have done that to some extent and at the time, I felt sad about it but knew it was what they needed to do as part of their own growth. My H reports he did this too with his parents and realized later that it felt hurtful to them. However, it's a normal and necessary part of their individualization to do this and become independent adults. How far they push can vary.

Our task as parents is to not make our feelings the focus and see it as their need to take this step. Once the child is more secure in who they are, they then tend to let the parent back into their world again, but we have to respect their adult boundaries. Maybe part of this issue with PD parents is the lack of boundaries. If they don't respect their children's boundaries, the children push back more and that results in the parent feeling hurt more.

[Notwendy]

I also think Methuen, you are spot on that this issue has been an emotional point for me, probably far more than it was intended by both parents at the time due to their circumstances. How to move past that?

Occasionally BPD mother has brought this up, saying cruel things to me about my father. She does this when she doesn't get her way- and I agree at all these points- me having boundaries, not appeasing her, she truly believes I am being abusive to her and reacts from that standpoint.

She doesn't apologize (she can't do that)but she has done her usual ways of trying to reconnect after her dysregulation. She's written me back in to her papers for what it's worth but has also threatened to make another relative her POA when she's angry at me.

Maybe that plays a part in asking me what I want of hers. While she uses items as a control with everyone, maybe it's her way of asking if I am still connected to her- but I don't know what that is. I think to her, my role is to meet her needs.

While BPD mother has since given me some items that belonged to my father, I have them put away for the kids. They know I have them and am keeping them for them. If I did accept something from my mother, I'd do the same- keep it for them. I don't think of these things as being mine- I can't go there. It's not value in money sense. It's the relationship- and I feel a need to keep some distance.

It's not just that one incident. It's just complicated to process how a parent both loves a child and then allows them to be mistreated and I am still working on that.

[Methuen]

Once the child is more secure in who they are, they then tend to let the parent back into their world again, but we have to respect their adult boundaries. Maybe part of this issue with PD parents is the lack of boundaries. If they don't respect their children's boundaries, the children push back more and that results in the parent feeling hurt more.

And thus the misunderstanding escalates.  I think you are onto something here.  How can someone who doesn't have boundaries and doesn't understand boundaries, forgive and understand the child who does have boundaries?  

I don't think of these things as being mine- I can't go there. It's not value in money sense. It's the relationship- I won't assume that and I think it's to help stay detached.

I get it.  At least I think I do.  "Going there" is risky, because it could result in another crushing disappointment, and there have just been too many of those.  It's much "safer" to just keep these items for your kids, than to allow yourself to believe in any hope of a relationship, no matter how remote.

It does help to stay detached.

All this really can be tied back to why they disinherit us or threaten to disinherit us, or make us feel like we will be disinherited.

There just is no trust, and because their worldview is distorted, we end up responding to these distortions and behaviors in mostly normal (defensive) ways which results in them feeling invalidated, and they retaliate and eventually this path leads to threats to disinherit.  That sounds like far too glib a summary.  But disinheritance is an ultimate threat.  Like NotWendy says, it has nothing to do with the money, and everything to do with retaliation, or vengeance, or having the last word, or intent to hurt, or all of the above.  It isn't the money.  It's the relationship.  Well said.

[Notwendy]

Yes, I think it comes down to not being able to trust them, and so hard to trust the relationship.

Admittedly - I was in tears sometimes over the kids' "rejections" that we began to experience when they were teens. They don't know who they are, but they know they are "not us" and there was a point where they pushed us away- for things like not liking something we bought them, or not wanting their friends to see us driving them to not wanting to talk about something- we've all been there.

Once past that, they want their privacy but it's through trust that they share their lives with is. They don't live very close to me, but close enough that they gave me their keys so I'd have a spare but they can only do that because they trust me that I won't just show up or go through their belongings.

By contrast, when BPD mother visited, we had to keep personal information locked up because she snooped through our personal things. My kids don't tell me everything that goes on with them- and I don't ask either. If we respect their boundaries they don't have to be guarded with us. If someone doesn't respect our boundaries, we are guarded.

[Riv3rW0lf]

When I decided to go NC with BPD mother, it was with a mindset that I didn't want an inheritance, or at least that I didn't care for it... In truth, in going NC, I am the one that decided I didn't want her as a mother or grandmother to my kids. So what right would I have to anything she has?  Even if we talk again some day, and enter some kind of low contact relationship : I still have this idea that she is not my mother, and I do not want any of her things or inheritance.

As the child, I am aware that this is a direct result of her poor parenting. But in the end, I am an adult making this choice, and it is also my choice, and I know I am hurting her doing this. I
Especially now that I understand BPD. I don't take pleasure in it, but I would feel horrible if she did ended up leaving me something, worse than if she didn't actually.

It is quite different for those of you who didn't cut entirelt contact, and who still try to be present in case of emergency, who are still maintaining some sort of contact and being abused for having healthy boundaries... Inheritance in that case would be much harder to navigate.

But honestly... I don't even expect anything from my father anymore, even though I have contact with him... I learned early on that the less expectations I had from both my parents, the easier life was... And lowering expectations in life in general has been a tremendous gift in having resiliency and bouncing back maybe quicker from pain or disappointment.

My father started talking a lot more about his will and testament after he had a heart attack a year ago. And I now realize this might be more about control than anything else? I don't see why else someone would talk this much about inheritance... So the more he talks about it : the less I want anything. I am building my life and my future basing myself on the idea that I will get nothing, from either of them. Because that's what life always was for me anyway. My parents don't give, they take. And I don't see why this would ever change in death.

[Couscous]

Wow… Apparently a BC court believes that society thinks that it is “valid and rational, and… [in] accord with community standards” for an verbally abusive parent to disinherit children who have estranged themselves from the parent. Apparently the lesson we are supposed to learn is that tolerating abuse pays.  

https://www.fultonco.com/2021/06/estrangement-disinheritance-lessons/

[Turkish]

I just saw an article where Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis said that they weren't doing a trust for their kids. They'd only give them money if they came up with solid business plans.  Even Warren Buffet isn't so harsh.

Two of my friends who struggled, and with PD parents have said that they won't help their kids with college because they had no help. Good job passing down your struggle and trauma 

[Notwendy]

I have a friend whose  narcissistic husband divorced her. He said the same thing. He didn't have help with college so he wouldn't help his kids. He could have afforded to help.

My friend worked full time, but her job was a lesser paying job than her ex's.

My take though is that it's still the behavior, not the money. How someone manages money, independent of the amount,  can be emotionally influenced and reflects that.

He was also controlling and stingy with his time with his kids. This is what influenced his relationship with them.

Long before these kids were old enough for college, the father's relationship with them was strained. They did well in school and attended colleges where they got generous scholarships.

[Riv3rW0lf]

Wow… Apparently a BC court believes that society thinks that it is “valid and rational, and… [in] accord with community standards” for an verbally abusive parent to disinherit children who have estranged themselves from the parent. Apparently the lesson we are supposed to learn is that tolerating abuse pays.  

https://www.fultonco.com/2021/06/estrangement-disinheritance-lessons/

I'm surprised. This is not how I viewed the article. The court corrected the will in favor of one of the daughters on account of the parents beings difficult to please. However, since there wasn't any evidence in the other daughter's case, they couldn't move the will, which makes sense. It is a court. And as such, the decisions cannot be emotional, it has to be evidence-based. So when no evidence is presented, no decision can  be taken. we would like the judge to "extrapolate" from the other daughter's evidence maybe, but they cannot do that... The court has to remain evidence based to preserve the law and the impartiality of future cases.

I personally thought the decision of the court was legitimate. From what I gathered, the daughter maintained low contact and upheld strong boundaries, and got 40% of the estate, which is not bad...

How does things work where you are?

[Riv3rW0lf]

Interestingly enough, we just had a heated debate with my husband  

He is of the opinion that the court shouldn't meddle at all, so to him, they shouldn't even have moved the will from 10% to 40%. I understand his point about : the government meddling with families... Albeit I don't think he is right... Laws and governments are different beasts, and those kind of inheritance laws, I think, came from the religion and overall history... Parents are supposed to will their things to their children when they die...

He is of the opinion that the responsibility of the parents stop when the child hit 18yo, afterward, a parent should be able to dispose of his belongings as he sees fit... It's super interesting, because he is very "dynastic" and himself has this idea that everything he does is in the hope he can provide for them after he dies, that they can inherit something to push them forward in society and some day have some kind of influence instead of being "modern peasants".

Just thought I'd share... Clearly, upbringing and culture seems to play a HUGE role on how someone views inheritance, and it seems to be very emotional.

I somehow don't feel emotional about it... And I think it has to do with learning from an early age that I could never depend on anyone. I now see myself as an orphan, and my expectations now fit this view : I don't want anything from them. But I will provide for my children though.

[Notwendy]

I have a relative who works with legal issues and families contesting wills. Apparently these can get very hostile and leave divisions. I don't think a will is the main cause of this- but I think how it is handled is one result of disordered dynamics.

A parent's perception of a child can be distorted. If the golden child is preferred and the scapegoat child is treated differently- that child may want more distance from the parent, and the parent might assume it's the child being the problem.

On an emotional/relationship level- what the parent decides impact the future of the family relationships. On a purely material level, you husband is right. The parents have no obligation to a child once the child is 18 and the child should have no expectations. However, just because something is legal doesn't mean there won't be negative consequences to the decision.

This has less of an emotional impact on you because you are the one who decided to distance yourself and so should not expect the parent to do something to consider you. However, in the case where the parent decides to not recognize the relationship and the child does care, it can have an emotional impact on them to see that the parent didn't do what they had hoped for- to have the relationship valued. This has nothing to do with the amount of money.

My grandfather left a modest sum to each of his grandchildren. It meant a lot at the time as we were in college and had no money but the value of the sentiment was far greater than the sum. First of all- he didn't have to do it at all and he was not obligated to do it. His wife was deceased so his finances would be divided between his children. But he made the point to arrange a small gift to his grandchildren. The message we got was "all my grandchildren matter to me and I love all of you equally".  This lasts a lot longer than a modest sum of money.

Sad feelings can last as well. Imagine if he only left something to some of his grandchildren. This would send a different message. He was not obligated to do this and we had no expectations. It came as a surprise and it was a nice one.

[Riv3rW0lf]

Sad feelings can last as well. Imagine if he only left something to some of his grandchildren. This would send a different message. He was not obligated to do this and we had no expectations. It came as a surprise and it was a nice one.

I agree with everything you wrote, even mentioned earlier I could see how this might be different for someone who is low contact and still trying.

I think one of the reasons I don't feel very emotional about it is in that sentence you wrote. I actually think a lot of the deception and pain is linked to the expectations we hold on to to be valued and finally see for what we are.

Since we were never valued growing up, it is probably healthier to completely detach ourselves from any possible inheritance. Because why would the dynamic change in death? It won't.

The inheritance is just an extension of the already existing family dynamics.

It just seems easier to me to work on grief and detachment, and to expect and want for nothing from them.

It doesn't mean I don't still visit or call my self-centered father (he really is, last time I saw him, I finally witnessed all the narcissism), but I don't do it because I expect the relationship to change. I do it because I know what the relationship is and accepted it for what it is. It is about him, and it is ok, I can manage it. The difference with my mother is she triggers C-PTSD symptoms and I have yet to decide if I am ready for it or not.

Then... When the grief and detachment is completed, of course it will sting when I do end up getting nothing, but I will not create more issues for anyone (myself included) because my peace is already made with it. I'd just rather put my energy someplace else.

I understand why you say it is emotional. It is. But it is also just money and things. Their money and their things. Both statements are true, and I think we can chose which one to focus on to preserve our mental health.

[Couscous]

However, in the case where the parent decides to not recognize the relationship and the child does care, it can have an emotional impact on them to see that the parent didn't do what they had hoped for

The main lesson I took away from that BC case was that the mother still tried to disinherit the non-estranged daughter even though she was doing her duty, out of spite for past grievances, and that due to her irrationality her decision “failed to reflect actual existing conditions”, i.e., that her daughter was making an effort to maintain contact with her.

….[the mother’s] reasons were not rational….they did not reflect community standards, were completely out of proportion to the alleged offences, contained an element of spite, and failed to reflect actual existing conditions.

And as horrible as this is, all we can do is let go of false hope and accept reality, which is that irrational people do irrational things — like scapegoat and/or disinherit a child for no justifiable reason to anyone but the irrational person.

[pursuingJoy]

I can relate to this:

I somehow don't feel emotional about it... And I think it has to do with learning from an early age that I could never depend on anyone. I now see myself as an orphan, and my expectations now fit this view : I don't want anything from them. But I will provide for my children though.

I didn't even know some countries had forced inheritance laws. I wonder how much of it is cultural.

My BPD MIL has rewritten her will to withdraw inheritance from errant family members several times. Against our advice, she cosigned on a car loan for her granddaughter. Granddaughter didn't pay and was written out of the will for 5 years. MIL wrote her back in when they resumed contact.

My  daughters moved in with their dad after conflict with H. MIL told everyone in her family that my daughters don't like H, therefore she is no longer visiting and they are out of her will. Eye roll.

H lives knowing that she could write him out at any time. It's not about the money. He's more concerned about being deemed a bad enough son that he'd be written out of the will.

I don't want anything, and I don't want my kids feeling I'll disinherit them if they don't toe the line. That feels so icky.