Inheritance And Consanguinity: Who Really Gets Your Estate?
Few things can complicate the otherwise straightforward matter of death quite like family and the possibility of inheritance. More specifically, few things can turn a well-intentioned estate plan into an unexpected legal circus quite like consanguinity—the fancy legal term for blood relations.
For most people, the idea of passing on their worldly goods to family seems intuitive. But estate planning attorneys know better. Blood, as it turns out, is not always thicker than a well-drafted trust. Consanguinity is both the backbone of estate law and, quite often, its Achilles' heel.
In estate law, consanguinity determines who gets what, who is left weeping in the wings, and who must accept their fate with a forced smile at the reading of the will (which, incidentally, is not a real thing and only happens in movies). Most inheritance laws are rooted in a ladder of blood relationships, ranking heirs from the closest (children, parents) to the most distant (third cousins you didn't know existed until they showed up with a lawyer).
The general rule of thumb is: the closer the blood tie, the stronger the inheritance claim. But just because a person has a high rank on the consanguinity chart doesn't mean they are automatically favored. After all, there's a reason estate planning attorneys exist—they help people bypass that chart entirely when necessary.
Historically, inheritance laws have prioritized keeping wealth within the family. This worked well in eras when property and titles were the primary markers of wealth, and a well-placed marriage could consolidate power (hello, European aristocracy). However, in modern times, familial closeness is measured less by genetic markers and more by holiday dinner invitations.
Just because someone shares your DNA does not mean they share your values—or your competence in managing wealth. Countless horror stories exist of squandered inheritances, bitter legal battles, and feuds that last generations over a single ceramic rooster that Grandma apparently promised to multiple grandchildren.
Estate planning allows people to make rational decisions about their assets, free from the iron grip of bloodline expectations. Of course, rationality is often in short supply when discussing money and mortality.
For those who wish to exclude a family member from their estate plan, there are both delicate and dramatic ways to do so. The most common method is simply drafting a will that allocates assets elsewhere. However, some people opt for the more entertaining approach: leaving a relative a pittance—say, $10—just to prove they were not 'forgotten.' But beware: in some states, even this token amount may grant the recipient certain rights as a beneficiary, potentially entitling them to more information than you intended, rather than cutting them off entirely.
Another tactic is the use of trusts, which can provide for certain relatives while ensuring that they do not, in a fit of financial irresponsibility, purchase a pet tiger or invest in a doomed cryptocurrency scheme. Trusts allow for a degree of control from beyond the grave, ensuring that wealth does not evaporate within a single generation.
For those who fear posthumous backlash, the 'no-contest clause' can be a strategic addition to an estate plan. This provision ensures that any beneficiary who challenges the will risks losing whatever inheritance they might have received. It's a polite way of saying, 'Take what I left you and be grateful, or walk away with nothing.'
Dying without a will (or 'intestate,' as lawyers like to call it) means that the laws of consanguinity take over. In many jurisdictions, this means your assets will trickle down a predefined family tree, starting with children and spouses, then moving outward like a particularly unexciting family reunion. If no close relatives exist, state law may dig up increasingly distant kin, and in extreme cases, your estate may even escheat to the state (which is a lawyerly way of saying the government gets it). If you've ever wanted to see long-lost cousins emerge from the woodwork, failing to draft a will is an excellent way to accomplish that. Even more amusing is the phenomenon of previously indifferent relatives suddenly remembering their deep and abiding affection for the deceased once an estate is at stake.
While consanguinity still plays a dominant role in inheritance law, modern estate planning offers a plethora of ways to override default family-based distribution.
At its core, estate planning—the process of determining who receives an inheritance from your estate—is about balancing personal wishes with legal realities. Consanguinity is a helpful legal framework, but it should never be mistaken for a moral obligation. For those looking to ensure their estate is distributed according to their actual wishes rather than an outdated family tree, the best move is to consult a competent estate planning attorney (preferably one with a sense of humor about the whole thing). After all, while you may not be around to witness the aftermath, you can at least have the satisfaction of knowing that your estate plan was airtight, your legacy secure, and your least favorite relative appropriately baffled by your final decisions. In the end, estate planning is an art—one that blends legal strategy with personal history, practical considerations with emotional realities. Whether you choose to distribute your wealth among family, friends, charities, or a particularly pampered pet, the key is ensuring that your wishes are honored, your assets are protected, and your departure—while inevitable—does not create chaos in its wake.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
2 hours ago
- News24
Man passes through OR Tambo airport security with two hand grenades in luggage
Illustration / Getty Images Be among those who shape the future with knowledge. Uncover exclusive stories that captivate your mind and heart with our FREE 14-day subscription trial. Dive into a world of inspiration, learning, and empowerment. You can only trial once. Show Comments ()
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Teachers Are Sharing The Rise In Misogyny They're Seeing In Young Boys In The Classroom, And It's Terrifying
Recently, I came across a post on the popular Teachers subreddit that piqued my interest. The post, written by user escrawl and addressed to fellow teachers, was titled, "Have you noticed a rise of misogyny among boys?" "I teach fourth grade, and I'm already seeing it with my boys," escrawl began. "They talk about how women can't be leaders, they don't have to listen to me because I'm a woman, etc. I have boys already following Andrew Tate and other similar influencers. What do you do?" Antonio Suarez / Getty Images, Alon Skuy / Getty Images She continued, "I once warned a mom about what a bad influence Andrew Tate could be, and the dad came back at me hard, saying I don't know what I'm talking about." NBC "I'm at a loss," she said. "Do you just leave them be?" "I do not preach my politics to my students," she clarified. "I make it a point to not show where I lean, even when talking about politics in Social Studies. "I brought up the concern up with a parent, not directly to the student. The only thing I push is to be respectful to others. I would also be concerned and address misandry if observed." Other teachers chimed in. "46-year-old man here," one teacher, toddkhamilton, wrote. "When I was teaching in the late 2000s, another male teacher and I noticed the early signs of what has become a very serious situation with this topic." "We taught in a progressive education environment where the administration was very supportive of teacher led initiatives, so we proposed a 'G Day' (guys day) where for an hour and a half each Wednesday (basically lunch and recess), two other male teachers and myself would take the grade 5th-8th grade boys and just kind of hang together. We'd have a topic each week, and then open things up for the boys to ask questions." "It was incredible," toddkhamilton continued. "They'd ask fascinating questions about all sorts of things — people they saw online, situations they were in with girls or at home — and it worked really well. My colleagues and I saw a change in them, especially over the years of doing it." "It worked so well that the administration created the equivalent for the girls, and they felt it was successful too. I left after the third year, but heard they continued it until a head of school who felt it opened us up to liability took over and shut it down. Boys need healthy men to be able to talk to and share their thoughts with and learn from. Today's male youth seem to only really have toxic men to learn from. Until there are strong positive male voices equally available to them, the toxic bros are setting the agenda." Another male teacher, Leucippus1, wrote, "I have certainly noticed that the algorithm has been pushing overtly misogynistic content to me; I can only imagine what it does to teenage boys." Photosbypatrik / Getty Images, NBC Another user, Jack_of_Spades, replied, "I made one Facebook post that I was feeling sad after a breakup. My feed was flooded with 'the problem with women...' 'real men do___' shit for MONTHS. I'm thinking this AI fed algorithm shit should be illegal." "It should be, yes, wrote user MossSalamander. "A lot of vulnerable people are being radicalized to hate others because of this." "Middle School teacher here," wrote user ImpressiveCoffee3. "The boys watch all of that content, even a lot of the sixth graders. They say they don't take it seriously, but they keep watching it, and watching it, and watching it." DANIEL MIHAILESCU / AFP via Getty Images, Tulcarion / Getty Images "There is also a rise in the idea that they should all be entrepreneurs and not only skip higher education, but refuse to work for someone else. They think they should have 'motion' and that because I am a teacher, I have somehow failed at life because I am paid a salary by an organization." "Glad it isn't just me," wrote teacher lilygirl112; "I heard second grade boys praise Diddy." User poopbucketchallenge chimed in: "I also think these kids are on the internet FAR TOO EARLY and it should be illegal until 18 to access any part of online other than tightly controlled academic and safe-for-work curiosity stuff." Another teacher, _Lost_The_Game, wrote, "From what I remember as a kid, [they're just being] edgy, BUT…eventually it can set in unironically. I remember lots of my classmates starting to say things just to be edgy, and eventually it just became their default state, like how you start saying some phrase or word ironically, and then later it becomes normalized." A male teacher with the username misticspear wrote, "It's easy for me because boys who fall for that don't have a role model who THEY choose and respect, and that's typically my role. I go in hard early. Call Andrew Tate stupid and talk about how he preys on people who don't know any better. Then I lead by example." Replying to escrawl's question about whether she should "leave it be," u/Ranger_242 wrote, "No, you don't leave it be any more than you tolerate racism or other forms of bullying or hate." ABC "If it becomes enough of a problem, start writing referrals and get your union involved. As for parents, make it clear to them as well." High school teacher Helen_Cheddar wrote back, "Unfortunately, misogyny is a lot more socially acceptable than other forms of bigotry. I had my FEMALE principal brush it aside when I brought it up, and she essentially said, 'boys will be boys.'" "I see it in some of my first graders," wrote teacher nochickflickmoments, "especially in boys whose dads are clear with me that they voted for Trump. Or when one of the first graders told me 'that women shouldn't be president.'" ABC User Major-Platypus2092 wrote, "I've noticed this quite a bit. I'm one of the only male teachers in my department, and students will often look to me to validate their Andrew Tate bullshit. I've tried correcting them in various different ways, but usually what happens is they just decide I'm a 'simp' or whatever and not worth listening to. I've broken through a few times, but it's pretty horrifying." CBS / Via u/Brothless_Ramen wrote, "Yeah, it's pretty great how quickly a man instantly isn't a man because he doesn't buy into their garbage, it makes it so hard to pull them out. It's like they think there's this global conspiracy where all women and some men are personally against them and trying to make them fail algebra, and if you question that, you're part of the conspiracy." "My daughter just finished fifth grade, and after the election, she had several boys saying things like 'your body, my choice,' which is kind of horrifying," said user -dudess. User BugMillionaire wrote, "It's because the algorithms are designed to feed young boys alt-right/misogyny content. There have been many studies showing how the algorithm changes depending on age and gender, and how hard it is to deviate away from the alt-right info once you get it." "And we know how echo-chambery the internet is. Once they've gotten hooked, that's ALL they get. It's called algorithmic radicalization." "Yes," u/CharmingAmoeba3330 wrote in response, "This is what I was going to say. I saw a post the other day from a doctor and team who have been studying the growing misogyny in young boys. They said they found that if a kid, 17 or younger, made a TikTok account, within the first 17 seconds they would be pushed alt-right/misogyny content." "I also saw another post about the uptick of young teen boys murdering teen girls in the UK." "It's not just the boys," u/Sad-Biscotti-3034 wrote. " I teach senior girls in my government class who truly think that women should never run for office and claim they'd gladly give up their voting rights if they didn't have to work and could be homemakers." "Yes, I live in a very red county. It's scary because many of them are voting age, and I can only teach them so much in the amount of time I have with them." This behavior is so concerning, I want to hear what you have to say. Tell me all your opinions and first-hand stories in the comments — especially if you're a teacher, parent, or student. This is a necessary discussion to have! Or, if you want to write in but prefer to stay anonymous, you can check out the anonymous form below. Who knows — your story could be included in a future BuzzFeed article. Please note: some comments have been edited for length and/or clarity.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Thousands of leather shoes, bags and sword scabbards discovered during dig in medieval harbor in Norway
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. While excavating near an old harbor in Oslo, archaeologists have uncovered thousands of pieces of preserved, waterlogged leather that are nearly 700 years old. The bags, purses, shoes and sword scabbards — all dated to around the 13th and 14th centuries — are revealing new information about everyday life in medieval Norway. This past winter and spring, archaeologists with the Norwegian Maritime Museum and the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research began digging at a site called D2 ahead of the planned construction of the Bjørvika School, a new primary and secondary school in Oslo. In medieval times, the dig area was open water in the harbor at the mouth of the Alna River. But in the 19th century, the area was filled in to create more land — which ended up preserving the discarded items there and creating an archaeological treasure trove of leather goods. Artifacts likely wound up in the harbor for various reasons. Traders lost goods they were transferring, children dropped bowls of porridge, and people tossed away their old shoes. Light items made of wood and leather may have been chucked further upstream and then floated down the river and settled in the harbor. Wet clay at the old harbor has preserved myriad leather artifacts, which don't decompose in the oxygen-free environment. So far, the archaeologists have discovered more than 200 shoes. "We wouldn't be surprised if we reach well over 1,000 before we finish going through everything we found," they wrote in a translated blog post. Many of the old shoes show signs of wear, suggesting they were purposefully pitched in the past. One shoe was quite large, corresponding to a men's U.S. size 13 or a 47 in European sizing. Some had decorations cut into the leather, but most were simple, hand-sewn shoes — a leather sole and plain leather upper boot. Related: 8 ancient Roman shoes of 'exceptional size' discovered at Roman fort near Hadrian's Wall "When we hold one of these shoes in our hands today, it is like being close to the person who walked in it," the researchers wrote. "It is like a footprint from the Middle Ages: concrete proof that a person has lived, walked and had a life in this city." In addition to shoes, archaeologists have uncovered 15 medieval bags and purses from the Bjørvika School dig. Most of these bags were small enough to be worn on a belt and hidden under a tunic. Both women and men used bags as "practical accessories" in a time before pockets were sewn into clothing, the researchers wrote in a translated blog post. "Bags contained what you needed during the day," the researchers wrote. This might have included coins, a comb, a needle and thread, or even a small cross or amulet. "Medieval people needed to carry things around, just like us," they wrote, and the leather bags "give us insight into how people organized their everyday lives — and what they valued." Almost everyone in the Middle Ages carried around knives attached to their belts, the researchers wrote in a blog post. Archaeologists have also found the remains of several protective leather sheaths at the Bjørvika School site. RELATED STORIES —Remains of 14th-century gauntlet discovered in Oslo's medieval harbor —'Outstanding' 2,200-year-old child's shoe discovered deep underground in Austrian mine —2,700-year-old leather saddle found in woman's tomb in China is oldest on record One of the last things archaeologists excavated at the site this spring was the skeleton of a dog. In a blog post, the researchers noted that most of the more than 3,000 bones they recovered were from food trash, but the partially complete skeleton of a medium-size dog was a surprise. "The bones show no obvious signs of wear, disease or dismemberment," they wrote, "but are well-fused together, meaning the dog had a good life with access to food and probably cuddles." While excavation of the archaeological material is now complete, the researchers have just begun studying the loads of finds they've recovered, hoping to gain new insight into medieval Oslo. Solve the daily Crossword
