by Anonymous on May 24th, 2009

Anonymous

Question

Help answer this question below.

A friend requires that his daughters be drug and alcohol free for an entire year after the reading of his will, or their share of his estate is donated to charity. It also mandates DAILY substance testing (only Sundays are excluded). Good idea? Bad?

  • Like
  • Report

Answers. 10 helpful answers below.

  • by PrettyPirate on May 24th, 2009

    PrettyPirate

    What a terribly sad situation.

    Ultimately, I don't think it's a good or bad idea. There are a fairly equal amount of negatives and positives each way. Forcing his children to get sober and clean is good, but at the same time, that kind of thing is never easy and people should be given some leeway to make mistakes or have bad days.

    There is also the possibility that they will remain sober and clean until the estate is theres and then go right back to being dependent on drugs and alcohol. People with severe dependency issues are very, very clever at doing what needs to be done to get a fix. The fix is their priority - not STAYING clean. Of course, this isn't always the case.

    They may also remain clean and go on to live happy, fulfilled lives. Either way, this situation is very sad and is going to cause pain to people.

    • Like
    • Report

    17 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by DreAnna on May 24th, 2009

    DreAnna

    Well..seems a little extreme, but, I guess if they want the money that bad, they will deal with it. :)

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Kewl Guy - has gone 360 on May 24th, 2009

    Kewl Guy - has gone 360

    better to give themn a chance to clean up before inheriting the estate then letting them just piss it off on drugs and alcohol

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Gone on May 24th, 2009

    Gone

    A father has the right to inflict this clause for the better of his children - if they can do this for a year the chances are (hopefully)free from their addictions. Secondly no doubt this guy worked damn hard to leave his legacy - I say fair play to him!

    Let the guy have the last word and try and straighten out his kin

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Eidelweiss on May 24th, 2009

    Eidelweiss

    It's his stuff, his rules, his controlling behavior even after he is gone...

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by tonsofun on May 24th, 2009

    tonsofun

    Depending on past actions by the children, one year may be enough for them to clean up. Stranger clauses are written in wills. Dad might know best.

    • Like
    • Report

    2 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by buxtonite ..slowly losing my mind on May 24th, 2009

    buxtonite ..slowly losing my mind

    bad...bad...bad!, who the hell does he think he is trying to run his kids lives even after he's kicked the bucket... they should tell him to stick it up his arse and let this fool take it with him ...bloody jerk!!!

    • Like
    • Report

    8 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Anonymous on November 30th, 2009

    Anonymous

    Good idea. I wouldn't want to leave my money to someone without any real character. If he gives it to Bill Gates' charity it will probably be used well. I do think he should leave each daughter enough to get along on for that one year, though -- get a good car, an apartment -- and guidance for staying busy in a good way (school, music, a job) so they'll get a taste of the good life. I think the year ought to start up to a month after the reading of the will, too, to give them a chance to test the waters and slip up and get back on track.
    There's no way (if I had control) I would leave the money (i.e., freedom and opportunity) to a person who was more interested in maintaining a personal high than in studying to become a doctor or someone else who would contribute to society.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by john pennington on May 24th, 2009

    john pennington

    Why is Sunday excluded? drug users know no day of the week.

    Its a great idea for one year, but if they are drug users, think what will happen after the reading of the will and the year has ended?

    Good idea, kinda.

    The money should given monthly, based on a drug free screening. no money for a neg. result. no lump sum.

    This will keep them in line, at least until the money runs out.

    • Like
    • Report

    2 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by schmee2369 on May 24th, 2009

    schmee2369

    Y are sundays excluded?...and if his daughters needed to be forced into being sober for a year to please their fathers will it shouldnt be done. And its NOT a good idea to make them sober, cuz after they get that money, on the last day...its gonna be a PARTY!!! no more rules, regulations...tests...lets take the money and PARTY!!...Is exactly what is gonna be done. its like when people get offa probation, first thing they do is party. I would tell then they better quit whatever it is they do TODAY, AND STAY CLEAN or they wont get any money at all....maybe they would turn their life around. But...money to drug addicts or alcoholics...isnt a very good idea, at all...AT ALL.

    • Like
    • Report

    4 comments | Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

You're reading A friend requires that his daughters be drug and alcohol free for an entire year after the reading of his will, or their share of his estate is donated to charity. It also mandates DAILY substance testing (only Sundays are excluded). Good idea? Bad?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads