Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

williamhalaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 55 posts

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#31

Post by pjerem »

andrewstuart wrote: post #16
rvba wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many wouldnt though. An statement by rich software developer does not extend to a significant part of a population.

If only I was rich. I'm not. As the other commenter says, doing the right thing isn't about money. Integrity is doing the right thing even when no-one is looking.

It also depends on your political beliefs about inheritance and merit.

I don’t think anyone "deserve" to inherit. It’s just money you never worked to get and that you get because your parents had extra money.

So, morally, why would the brothers deserve more the money than the ex girlfriend ? Maybe they were still in good terms. Maybe she brought more joy in his life than his brothers. Maybe not but enough for her to get her share. Or just maybe he didn’t care enough about this and should be considered ok with the outcome.

You don’t deserve 1 more million on your bank account because you happened the brother of someone. Yes it may happen eventually but that’s just luck.

And I’m not taking side for anyone here. I can totally understand why the brothers would be upset and I would probably be if I were in their shoes. But at the same time, as someone who doesn’t count on his brother’s death to become rich, I’ll have a hard time being empathetic.

They should at least be upset about the carelessness of your brother rather than the ex girlfriend.

tl:dr; You are allowed to think that doing the right thing is not to give the money back because it was never meant to be theirs.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#32

Post by bnegreve »

tossandthrow wrote: post #26

It is super difficult to ask deceased people what they actually wanted. In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. It might be there there is a brother somewhere that feels hurt. But we really don't know if the deceased one really wished that his early crush should have the money. What we can do, however, is to make sure we update our wills.

> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will.

We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#33

Post by card_zero »

austhrow743 wrote: post #28
nuz wrote: post #24

The article seems to suggest that this is a bad thing. But what's the alternative? That it just gets soaked up by the bank or the state or whatever happens when there's no will? Better it go to a person even semi by mistake like in this case in my opinion

People updating their wills is the good alternative they're advocating.

Life's too short.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#34

Post by ElFitz »

andrewstuart wrote: post #16
rvba wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many wouldnt though. An statement by rich software developer does not extend to a significant part of a population.

If only I was rich. I'm not. As the other commenter says, doing the right thing isn't about money. Integrity is doing the right thing even when no-one is looking.

Certainly.

But the lower the stakes, the easier it is to show integrity. Doing the right thing at no cost is easy.

Integrity isn’t just about doing the right thing when no-one is looking.

It’s doing right thing, even when no-one is looking, no matter what it costs you.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#35

Post by navane »

ThunderSizzle wrote: post #15
rvba wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many wouldnt though. An statement by rich software developer does not extend to a significant part of a population.

Wealth doesn't breed morality. Morality is something that cuts across all wealth lines. Poor people aren't all criminals and rich people aren't all saints.

"Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral." -Brecht

(First food, then moral)

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#36

Post by amanaplanacanal »

bnegreve wrote: post #32
tossandthrow wrote: post #26

It is super difficult to ask deceased people what they actually wanted. In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. It might be there there is a brother somewhere that feels hurt. But we really don't know if the deceased one really wished that his early crush should have the money. What we can do, however, is to make sure we update our wills.

> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.

Judges rely on evidence when making decisions. Is there Any evidence that it is a mistake?

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#37

Post by madebylaw »

bnegreve wrote: post #32
tossandthrow wrote: post #26

It is super difficult to ask deceased people what they actually wanted. In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. It might be there there is a brother somewhere that feels hurt. But we really don't know if the deceased one really wished that his early crush should have the money. What we can do, however, is to make sure we update our wills.

> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.

There wasn’t a will. The guy wrote his GFs name in some form in 1989 and probably never thought about it again.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#38

Post by bnegreve »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #36
bnegreve wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.

Judges rely on evidence when making decisions. Is there Any evidence that it is a mistake?

I don't know. If the case is not discussed in court, we will never know. This is why we should not blindly follow a will out of respect of the dead person, because there may be evidence this is just a mistake.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#39

Post by Brian_K_White »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #36
bnegreve wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will. We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.

Judges rely on evidence when making decisions. Is there Any evidence that it is a mistake?

Yes. The time and other circumstances as described by the article.

That signature is only one piece of evidence, and it doesn't exist in a vacuum, it has a context.

Re: Remember When You Named Your Girlfriend as a Beneficiary? He Didn't Either

#40

Post by ptero »

rkachowski wrote: post #23
ptero wrote: post #18

TLDR: A person named a girlfriend as a retirement plan beneficiary. They later broke up, he had another girlfriend, they eventually also broke up, and 10 years after the second breakup he died single and childless. His brothers want money to go to estate (brothers), but the beneficiary form trumped estate (as it should). It is not clear from reading the post what the account owner wanted. It is possible he just didn'…

I think its important to mention that he broke up with the ex in question in 1989, and died in 2015.

There are, IMO, many things that would be important to mention if we wanted to try to glean the account holder's real intent on the disposition of his retirement account.

For example, how long he had relationship with each girlfriend (he had broken up with the second a while ago, too; for all we know there may be others). What were his relationships with each brother and so on.

But such moral judgements are, to me, not the right way to go. The person had money, if he cared where it should have gone after his death he should have made a will or changed the beneficiary. We should not reject his existing instructions just because they were too old and assume he wanted something different on the basis of some moral judgements. My 2c.

Post reply on HN