"The Ethicist" column in today's New York Times magazine addresses the issue of whether to tell your friends that you are removing them as guardians of your children under your Will. The column is here.
I'm not an ethicist (insert attorney joke here), but I agree with Randy Cohen that there is no need to tell the friends about the switch. Especially when you are switching to family members (most people understand that blood is thicker than water). Maybe I feel this way because my wife and I did something similar. We named our friends as guardians of our daughter, but then switched to my sister and her husband once they got settled and had kids, and we saw that their parenting style matches ours.
A similar ethical issue (not discussed in "The Ethicist") involves telling people that they are named as guardians. I'm always surprised that people DON'T tell their friends/relatives that they have named them (or plan to name them) as guardians. I know this always makes for a heart-warming film ("lovable moppet(s) show up at the door of self-absorbed yuppie, who then discovers the value of family"), but it's significantly less heart-warming in real life. My advice: talk to those you plan to name, BEFORE you do so. (They may say no. That's what happened to the people my in-laws asked, when my wife was a kid.) And talk to those you have named, AFTER you do so, to fill them in on how things will work.
I reviewed Meryl Gordon's book Mrs. Astor Regrets earlier this year (here) -- it was one of my favorite books I read in 2009.
The trial of Mrs. Astor's son, Anthony Marshall, is coming to a conclusion (barring appeals). Mr. Marshall was found guilty of "looting his mother's fortune" (another lawyer, Francis X. Morrissey Jr., was also found guilty) -- here is the story. I can't understand why the maximum sentence is only 3 years -- why is that? Because Mr. Marshall is rich? Ugh.
I'm also a little troubled by this line in the article:
The judge noted Marshall's World War II service and the possibility that the late Astor herself would have been aghast to see her son imprisoned, but he added that the law left him no choice but to impose a prison term.
1. Would Mrs. Astor REALLY have been aghast, in light of what her son did to her?
2. I realize that many people want to give members of The Greatest Generation a free pass (and unlimited free health care, free prescriptions, etc.) as a result of their actions in World War II, but I can't figure out why Mr. Marshall's heroics 60+ years ago have any bearing on this case.
The Summer Hours is a French film directed by Olivier Assayas (he also directed Irma Vep), and starring Juliette Binoche. It's also one of the few films I've ever seen address how children deal with the loss of their parent. By "deal with," I mean both how they emotionally cope with the loss, and how they try to move forward and dispose of (in this case) their mother's belongings.
The film opens with the mother (75-year-old Hélène) surrounded by her children and grandchildren. She begins to tell her oldest son, Frédéric, how to dispose of her summer home and priceless art collection after her death. Once that death occurs, Frédéric and his siblings (Jérémie and Adrienne, who is played by Ms. Binoche) have to work through what to do in light of what is practical. Can the home be kept in the family? What about the art work? What about the French estate tax?
This isn't a film about huge family disputes -- the children all act like adults, and try to work things out. It IS, however, a beautiful movie about memory, art vs. commerce, and what it means to be a family. Highly recommended.
Preferred stock can offer outstanding dividends, capital appreciation, and safety to boot.
