Can This Child Be an Heir?

[Bluefavorite]

Land in Kentucky
I am married to a person who fathered a child prior to our marriage with a woman he was never married to. We did not know the child existed for a few years.

I am going to inherit a lot of land from different family members. My family. Not my husband's family. Kentucky is a state where spouses share assets without a prenup. My husband has a will that states our only child is to inherit his assets. We don't have a joint will. I am going to draft one but I want my family land to go to my child only. I don't want a person I am not related to and is not my child to be able to possibly have my families land. I am not being mean, it is just that it is important it stays within our bloodline as it has for 3 generations now.

So, would this person (turning 18 in two years) be able to claim this land due to blood relation to my husband? I plan to make it clear in any will any and all assets are to be left to my child and my child only. Is that enough?

My husband and I have a mortgage on a marital home. This is what WE consider joint assets. But my husband has stated he does NOT want to have any claim to any of my families land. I don't know how in my state, I can even inherit land, as a married woman, and my husband have no rights to it. I told him I would have to make him an executor if I died prior to my child becoming an adult. But he wants it worked out somehow that he has no legal claim to my family land. It is possible that after our child soon turns 18 we may split up but stay married for insurance purposes. And we already have split bank accounts. I am OK giving my husband our marital home. This all feels complicated. We Will likely die still married but likely not living together. We have been married almost 20 years.

 

[quincy]

Land in Kentucky
I am married to a person who fathered a child prior to our marriage with a woman he was never married to. We did not know the child existed for a few years.

I am going to inherit a lot of land from different family members. My family. Not my husband's family. Kentucky is a state where spouses share assets without a prenup. My husband has a will that states our only child is to inherit his assets. We don't have a joint will. I am going to draft one but I want my family land to go to my child only. I don't want a person I am not related to and is not my child to be able to possibly have my families land. I am not being mean, it is just that it is important it stays within our bloodline as it has for 3 generations now.

So, would this person (turning 18 in two years) be able to claim this land due to blood relation to my husband? I plan to make it clear in any will any and all assets are to be left to my child and my child only. Is that enough?

My husband and I have a mortgage on a marital home. This is what WE consider joint assets. But my husband has stated he does NOT want to have any claim to any of my families land. I don't know how in my state, I can even inherit land, as a married woman, and my husband have no rights to it. I told him I would have to make him an executor if I died prior to my child becoming an adult. But he wants it worked out somehow that he has no legal claim to my family land. It is possible that after our child soon turns 18 we may split up but stay married for insurance purposes. And we already have split bank accounts. I am OK giving my husband our marital home. This all feels complicated. We Will likely die still married but likely not living together. We have been married almost 20 years.

You can set up a trust (not a joint trust with your husband) and designate your beneficiary (your child) and put your inherited property (deed, title) in the name of the trust, transferable to your child on your death.

See an attorney in your area to discuss this and other options and for help setting it up.

Good luck.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Kentucky is a state where spouses share assets without a prenup.

Not exactly correct. Kentucky, like pretty much all the other non community property states, has rules for equitable division of marital assets in a divorce, The only reason that the concept of marital assets come into play in those states are in a divorce. Apart from divorce, land is held by whomever holds title to the land. Thus, your husband could be the sole owner of Blackacre but if the two of you divorced and he acquired Blackacre during the marriage you would generally have a marital interest in Blackacre (unless he got it as a gift or inheritance or by using other separate property) and get portion of it in the divorce. But outside divorce you'd have no interest in that property — he could sell or give away Blackacre without the need for you to sign off on it.

So, would this person (turning 18 in two years) be able to claim this land due to blood relation to my husband?

If your husband dies without a will then his children would all share in the estate , including this child he had before your marriage. How much of this estate the child would get would depend on whether he was married at the time he died, how many children he had, and whether all the children survived him. The child would not inherit any of your assets when you died if you did not have a will.

If your husband has a will, then he can give his stuff to whomever he wants and those who aren't given anything in the will simply lose out (though you might have a claim to a share of his estate if he left you out). However, when not living anything to a child he should have a simple statement that acknowledges the child exists and that he has chosen not to give the child anything. It really should not say why he made that choice, or anything else about the child. Keep it simple. Just not mentioning the child at all is not good because it opens the door to the child asserting that the child was just not mentioned as an oversight and that had he remembered he surely would have given the child a share of the estate. A lawyer can draft the will for him to ensure it will work as he intends.

I don't know how in my state, I can even inherit land, as a married woman, and my husband have no rights to it.

First of all, as mentioned above, marital interests only come into play in a divorce. Second of all, in general property that one spouse inherits is not considered marital property even in a divorce because the spouse did not get that from marital funds.

Getting the wills set up right for this would not be complicated for a lawyer to do and thus wouldn't cost a huge amount. So see an estate planning lawyer to ensure you get everything set the way you want it. A trust, as quincy mentioned, is another option for this.

 

[LdiJ]

Of course, if you were to make the mistake of adding your husband's name to any deeds regarding the land, then you will have gifted him a share of the land, and that would change the whole story. So, don't do that.

 

[zddoodah]

our marriage with a woman he was never married to.

Mmm hmmm....

We did not know the child existed for a few years.

Has your husband's paternity ever been established? If so, how was it established? Does your husband pay child support? How did your husband come to learn of the child's existence?

Kentucky is a state where spouses share assets without a prenup.

Huh?

My husband has a will that states our only child is to inherit his assets.

So...he wants to leave everything to your child and nothing to you?

We don't have a joint will. I am going to draft one

Why do you think a "joint will" would be a good thing, and how are you qualified to draft one?

So, would this person (turning 18 in two years) be able to claim this land due to blood relation to my husband?

Anyone can claim anything, but it's certainly possible for you to engage in estate planning that would avoid any possibility that your husband's child who is not your child would acquire the property in question.

I plan to make it clear in any will any and all assets are to be left to my child and my child only. Is that enough?

No.

I don't know how in my state, I can even inherit land, as a married woman, and my husband have no rights to it.

Well...I imagine that's because you have misconceptions about how these laws work.

If, in fact, you are going to be "inherit[ing] a lot of land," you would be quite foolish not to retain the services of an estate planning and tax attorney.

 

[quincy]

“Bastard child” is a term that needs to be retired.

 

[Just Blue]

“Bastard child” is a term that needs to be retired.

It's a legal term, but I agree it's vile.

 

[Taxing Matters]

It's a legal term, but I agree it's vile.

Right, the term predates the insult now associated with it. It was more useful in the law when being born out of wedlock had a lot of important consequences, including a loss of social status, inheritance rights, etc. Today there is very little difference in how we treat kids born during marriage versus born out of wedlock so the term has very little value today beyond its use as an insult.

 

[quincy]

Right, the term predates the insult now associated with it. It was more useful in the law when being born out of wedlock had a lot of important consequences, including a loss of social status, inheritance rights, etc. Today there is very little difference in how we treat kids born during marriage versus born out of wedlock so the term has very little value today beyond its use as an insult.

There are many better alternatives to use.

 

[Just Blue]

There are many better alternatives to use.

Yes...like "natural".

 

[quincy]

Yes...like "natural".

Or non marital.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Yes...like "natural".

So you are saying a child born to married parents isn't "natural"?

 

[quincy]

So you are saying a child born to married parents isn't "natural"?

“Natural” is a synonym for “bastard.”

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

“Natural” is a synonym for “bastard.”

But so unused in that context and so used in other contexts that it would cause more problems than it creates.

Just because a word has been bastardized (pun only somewhat intended) doesn't kill off its long-used meaning.

 

[quincy]

But so unused in that context and so used in other contexts that it would cause more problems than it creates.

Just because a word has been bastardized (pun only somewhat intended) doesn't kill off its long-used meaning.

The term “bastard child” can easily be replaced with other terms that are not used most familiarly as slurs. The U.K. has largely replaced it. The U.S. should (and largely has), too.