>>The only way to control her access to money, is to have her declared “non compos mentos”. Or how ever it’s spelled....<<
This is not an area of expertise for me...
But I was a department head at a $50,000 a year private high school and the kids did talk about such things. Apparently the kids often felt burdened by the administrator of their trust funds who judged the “reasonableness” of their spending prior to the age when they gained full control - and age that was as late as 35 years in some cases. The interpretation of reasonable got much more strict when they acted up in some way.
Of course that did require planning on the part of the parents and an administrator with backbone. In many cases the parents were using the administrator’s backbone as a substitute for their own.
Smart move.
Very interesting. If I had money, the condition for my second oldest daughter would be that she or her daughters would not inherit one cent until that b@stard was out of their lives.
He considered me a walking wallet, and had the nerve to tell my bf that his babies were his retirement plan. Basta!
For some, 35 yrs old might not be old enough. I don’t know about backbone in a situation like trust fund administration. Parents have a hard enough time parenting, without being in charge of trust funds. An administrator is an excellent idea. Put the kids on an allowance, and let them earn money for the “shortfall”.