#parenting #ParentingStrategies #children #ChildrensAnxieties #depression
Children significantly are more anxious and depressed than they were five years ago.
So says a March article in JAMA Pediatrics,. The article was quoted in Nedra Rhone’s “Real Life” column published October 6, 2022, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Much of this anxiety is attributable to the pandemic, but, as Rhone points out, anxiety in children from birth to age 17 has been on the rise long before COVID-19.
In fact, she points out, from 2016 to 2019, children’s anxiety increased 27 percent and depression increased 24 percent, quoting data from a study from the National Survey of Children’s Health.
Parents and caregivers have suffered a steady decline in well-being over the past five years, she quotes from that study.
Shefali Tsabary has advocated for a parenting style that dispenses with traditional paradigms featuring control, fear and punishment, Rhone writes. Tsabary has a doctorate in clinical psychology and specializes in blending Western psychology and Eastern philosophy.
“What children really need from parents is not a laundry list of rules, and overload of shame and guilt or feeling silenced and oppressed. Children need to feel seen, to feel worth and to know that they matter for who they are rather than their accomplishments,” Rhone writes from Tsabary’s work.
There is much to unpack here, but suffice it to say that the old way of parenting apparently is not cutting it with kids today. In past decades, parents told kids what they expected of them. They may have even told them how they were going to live their lives as adults. Kids who fought such instruction were considered rebels, or something worse.
When some parents were children, rigor was all they knew. Disappointing Mom and Dad was taboo, even though Mom and Dad wanted them to be something they weren’t, or did not want to be.
Certainly, children need to be taught right from wrong. After all, some things are indisputably right, and indisputably wrong. But today, right and wrong have much gray area between them. Children should be allowed, with perhaps some limitations, to explore that gray area and decide for themselves what, to them, is right and wrong.
Kids should have some freedom to “be kids,” again with appropriate limitations. As they navigate childhood, they will make decisions for themselves AND accept consequences for those decisions.
Some will want to be like their parents. Some will want to be completely different from them as they grow.
If they want to be different from their parents, or what their parents expect from them, it likely is not from a lack of love of parents.
Parents, therefore, should encourage children to be who they want to be, with appropriate warning about the pitfalls of pursuit.
Perhaps that will make them less depressed or anxious. Parental and academic requirements can be overwhelming. Parents should strive to encourage their children, while trying to ease their burdens. Parents may not think burdens on children are a big problem, but they can be bigger than many realize.
Raising children in an atmosphere of encouragement rather than rigor may keep many from developing conditions that can be debilitating for life.
Peter
Tag Archives: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
NO ONE ASKS STUDENTS WHAT THEY THINK OF BOOK BANS
#BookBans #education #students #teachers #parents
Parents are clamoring for certain books to be banned in schools.
Do students want the same thing?
It appears no one cares what the kids think.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, tackled this subject in her October 11, 2022, column.
“(Parents) often roll their eyes or guffaw when students themselves defend the books, suggesting that while they want to protect kids, they don’t want to hear their views,” Downey writes.
Downey asked students who have attended school board meetings and hearings what they would like to tell adults advocating book bans.
“I would ask them not even to change their viewpoint, but to keep and open mind. Even though I didn’t agree with what the parents were saying, I still listened. They refused to listen. Whenever someone would speak against book bans, they would start yelling. I also wish they were more informed. They were taking so many things out of context.”
That quote comes from Anvita Sachdeva, a senior at Forsyth County High School, outside Atlanta.
The whole debate about banning books and “protecting” kids centers on open minds vs. closed minds.
So many fear that schools will indoctrinate children into believing things that oppose what they are taught at home by parents, at church or in other non-school locales.
Past generations were easily able to reconcile what they were taught in church, at home and in school, even if there were seemingly contradictory narratives.
Why do some parents fear that no longer is the case?
Perhaps these parents so desperately want their children to think exactly as they do. They don’t want them exposed to ideas, religions etc., that differ from theirs.
Parental restrictions may be the purest form of indoctrination.
The other problem is that parents objecting to certain texts take certain passages out of context, thereby condemning the entire work without reading it in its entirety.
Something that may have a good, even wholesome, overall message may have passages that are less so.
That seems like the old forest vs. trees syndrome.
In short, children should be taught to have open minds, for it is a closed mind that prevents innovation. In that quest, they may come across words, attitudes and behaviors they find objectionable. But that’s not nearly as important as raising a child to think for himself or herself.
Parents certainly want to teach children right from wrong. There are certainly words, attitudes and behaviors that are universally right or wrong. But, children are unlikely to become gay, or trans, based on what they are taught in school. Those are not learned behaviors, but are natural feelings.
Exposing children to people, cultures and beliefs that may not sync up with what their parents believe can not only open their minds, but teach them to accept others for who they are.
By doing that, the world will be better. The children themselves will be better people. And, unexpected friendships could result.
That should be the goal of every parent.
Peter
IT’S NOT ABOUT FINDING SOLUTIONS; IT’S ABOUT WHOM TO BLAME
#blame #solutions #politics #DifferencesOfOpinion #CultureWar
“Most Americans could … be considered pragmatic moderates on the majority of political issues. While research (shows) some polarization has increases, it appears to have been exaggerated.”
So writes Gail Sahar, professor of psychology at Wheaton College in Norton, Mass. An article, adapted from her book “Blame and Political Attitudes:The Psychology of America’s Culture War,” was published June 21, 2023, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Sahar believes that the basis for democracy assumes people can reason. When we underestimate the American public’s ability to rationally consider issues, we undermine our nation’s foundation, she writes.
“The current focus on blame has emerged as the missing link connecting ideology to attitude across a range of issues,” she writes.
In current political discourse, people not only want everyone to follow what THEY believe in, but also want to blame someone else when things go wrong.
To paraphrase the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. Congress would get more done if they cared less about who gets the credit. The converse is also true. If nothing gets done, the other guy is to blame.
This culture of blame, as Sahar calls it, may arouse strong feelings on both sides of an issue. But, we always find an excuse to blame the other guy. Therefore, nothing of consequence gets done.
What if we all, regardless of core beliefs, focused on what we can accomplish, instead of what points we can score against the other guy?
The result would be incremental action toward the common good. Incremental actions, when added up, can yield real accomplishments.
What would help this process is everyone agreeing on facts. When one side doesn’t get its way, it can tend to say the other side was wrong, or fraudulent, and can tend to invent its own set of facts.
Then, to emphasize the point, they keep spouting this set of “facts” as if it were true, thinking enough people will believe them.
In most instances, there is one truth. Anything to the contrary is, at best, “spin,” or, at worst, false. Once the actual truth is discerned, we can come closer to agreement on what to do, or not do.
Facts can certainly get in the way of a good narrative, or a good conspiracy theory. Although some in power fit the category of wanting to screw, or blame, the other guy, most people want to know the truth, find ways to apply that truth to the problems at hand and find solutions.
Complete solutions may be elusive on first pass. Therefore, incremental solutions tend to produce more agreement.
Most successful people believe in the phrase, “Go big, or go home.”
In today’s discourse, that may be a pipe dream. We will get more done amid differences of opinions and worldviews if we start small. Then, after a time, we can go on to the next small thing. The toe-in-the-water approach may seem pointless to some. But, it may be the best way to arbitrate differences and get to real solutions.
There are big differences of opinion in as diverse a country as ours. It’s difficult to celebrate differences. It may be better to acknowledge them, find points of agreement – or, at least, compromise – and move toward solutions.
The journey toward solutions may be long. But, those who are successful in whatever they do usually find the journey more worthwhile than the destination.
Peter
RUDENESS ON THE RISE; WHY ARE FOLKS SO ANGRY?
#rudeness #anger #frustration #incivility #abuse
The sign said: “Attention! Our employees have the right to be treated with dignity and respect at all times. They should be able to do their jobs without being physically or verbally abused. Most people respect this. Thank you for being one of them.”
That sign was displayed at an office at Piedmont Hospital in Atlanta. Nedra Rhone, “Real Life” columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, saw that sign at a routine medical appointment. She’d never seen such a sign before.
It prompted her to discuss general rudeness in a column published June 8, 2023. She quotes Christine Porath, who has studied incivility for more than 20 years.
“This kind of incivility leads to negative outcomes not only for workers who experience it directly, but also those who witness it – all of which harms businesses and society,” Rhone quotes Porath’s Harvard Business Review article.
Porath found that 76 percent of respondents in 25 industries across the globe say they’ve experienced incivility at least once a month. Those levels have risen since 2012, poking holes in the theory that the epidemic of rudeness started with the pandemic, Rhone writes.
Stress, negative emotions, isolation, technology and lack of self-awareness are the main drivers of widespread rudeness, Rhone quotes Porath.
The problem has many consequences beyond hurt feelings. Some of the front-line workers who experience this rudeness usually are not the most highly compensated. In a way, it makes them easy targets for the frustrated.
Often, these folks have no ability to ease the frustration. But as they experience the abuse, the employees are less likely to stay in those jobs for very long. It is just not worth it to them.
The frustration and anger at usually something small – Rhone sites a hair colorist lambasted by a client because she didn’t like the color that was chosen – can follow a frustrated person home. That means the frustration, without a stranger to whom to release it, can be felt by family and other loved ones.
Therefore, the frustrated person takes it out on someone at home who had nothing to do with the problem. Over time, that can lead to family dysfunction, divorce, broken friendships etc.
Such frustration can be taken into the political arena. When one or more people are angry and frustrated, it’s hard for them to agree on anything. So, little gets done.
In the same political arena, fear and anger can overpower optimism and looking to the future. People become focused on what they perceive has been done to them, rather than what can be done for them hereafter.
How does one become a less frustrated, nicer person? For many, it takes work. It takes being thoughtful before speaking or acting. It takes realizing that the person on whom you may be taking out your frustration cannot help you solve your problem.
There are indeed rational, civil ways to address grievances in most cases. Don’t become the person who is not happy unless he or she is miserable, fearful and angry.
Think about what is good in your life. Think about whether the energy you spend in anger is worth affecting your health, your well-being as a person and/or your relationships.
People can be, and have been, wronged by others or other things. If you feel compelled to express that anger outwardly, don’t choose targets that cannot help you solve your problem.
Those targets will disappear eventually, and you’ll be much worse off for THAT, rather than the original cause of your anger.
Peter
MANY COUPLES DON’T WANT CHILDREN
#childfree #parents #children #ChildbirthDecisions #MarriedCouples
Traditionally, a person grows up, gets married and has children.
That person becomes a part of the typical American family.
But a Michigan study has discovered that many adults don’t want to be parents.
An article on the study, written by Zachary P. Neal, associate professor of psychology at Michigan State University, and Jennifer Watling Neal, psychology professor at Michigan State, was published Aug. 17, 2022, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
The article says many people decide relatively early in life whether they want to be parents.
In fact, the article quotes the study, 21.64 of adults studied say they do not want children.
The study determined that a person was “childfree” if they answered “no” to whether they have ever had children (biological, adopted or step-children), whether they plan to have children in any of the three categories and whether they wished they had, or could have, children.
The study also breaks down the types of people in the category: “Childfree” people don’t want children; “childless” people want children, but can’t have them; “not-yet-parents” want children in the future; “undecided” people aren’t sure whether they want children; and “ambivalent” people aren’t sure they would have wanted children.
The study also says that under-population is not a problem. Despite the relatively high percentage of people in the Michigan study who don’t want children, the global population will continue to grow, the article says.
Having children is, and should be, an option for everyone. Parents of previous generations urged their children to at least “replace themselves” with children of their own.
For certain people, that may not be an option, physically. For others, it may be a decision based on other burdens in life. Still, for others, it may just be a matter of personal choice.
These people should not be criticized for their decisions. Very often, critics of such people have no idea what that person, or that couple, may be dealing with.
The article points out that workplace policies on work-life balance also favor parents. “We believe the needs of (the childfree group) warrant more attention from policymakers,” the authors write.
Having children should not be considered an obligation. Many parents of past decades lay guilt trips on their children for not producing grandchildren for THEM.
Of course, grandparents may love grandchildren, but they get to send them home, in most cases.
In short, children should be sent home with parents who WANT them, and are willing to put in the necessary work to raise them.
The article also points out that people who don’t want children are told they may change their minds down the road. That appears unlikely, the article says.
So, have children only if you want. If you do, have only as many as you want. But, if you don’t want to, that’s OK, too.
Peter
PROTESTS, LEGISLATURES AND DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
#NashvilleProtests #StateLegislatures #guns #SchoolShootings #AssaultWeapons #LegislatorsExpelled
Recently, thousands of students walked out of schools in Nashville, Tenn., and elsewhere to protest the Tennessee legislature’s lack of action to deter school shootings.
The previous week, six people – three adults and three 9-year-olds – were killed in a shooting at Covenant School in Nashville.
The capitol steps were overwhelmed with students, parents and others calling for mitigation measures to deter gun violence.
As Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution points out, there are more school shootings by far in the U.S. than in any other country.
Yet, as Downey writes, some legislatures seem to value the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution over second-graders’ lives.
In fact, two Tennessee state legislators were expelled from the House of Representatives, and a third survived expulsion by a single vote, for joining in the protests.
But the legislatures nationwide can learn from the Nashville protests.
First, the legislatures’ agendas may not be the same as those of some parents, students etc. Some of these protesting students will succeed the current occupants of legislatures one day, and their vision of a safe society may be very different from that displayed by some legislatures today.
Therefore, legislators of today can either begin taking measures to mitigate gun violence and gun possession among those that should not possess them, or they can leave it to the next generation to start to fix the problem. By waiting, there is no telling how many more children will get shot.
Better security in schools is a great idea, but given the power and availability of sophisticated and deadly weapons today, potential assailants can just shoot their way past security. Therefore, more security may save some lives, but not all.
The framers of the Second Amendment could not have had any idea that such killing machines would be created, and how certain members of the public would cherish possessing them as their “right.” Back then, it was all about defense against colonial tyranny, and the sophisticated weapon of the day was a one-shot-at-a-time musket.
Downey points out that there are more guns than people in the U.S. The more guns we have, the more likely it is that some, if not many, will end up in the wrong hands.
Also, some life happenstance can quickly turn some law-abiding gun owners into people who are no longer law-abiding.
If a law-abiding gun owner loses a job, loses a business, loses a loved one or has something else happen to him or her, does he or she suddenly feel so helpless that he or she may be tempted to take revenge, even against people who may have never wronged him or her?
In summary, as may have been demonstrated in Nashville, the next generation will have had a different experience with deadly weapons from that of their current elders. They may not be so easily swayed by those whose interest is in selling more guns.
When that generation takes over the political arena, attitudes likely will be very different. We, as the current generation, can do those children a big favor and begin to act now. Very few object to gun ownership for recreational, even self-defense purposes in some cases.
But the weapons that can expend multiple bullets very quickly are neither recreational nor defensive. They are mass killing machines. What purposes, other than evil, does it serve for so many of these weapons to be in the hands of a wide civilian population?
We can either begin to fix the problem now, or, certainly, the next generation – some of whom would have heard or witnessed gunfire in their schools as children – very likely will.
Peter
MEANING OR HAPPINESS? WHY NOT BOTH>
#happiness #meaning #purpose #trascendence #storytelling
“There’s more to life than being happy.”
So begins the “Money Matters” column by Wes Moss, published in the July 3, 2022 edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Moss, who writes about happy retirees, says crafting a life that matters may be more important than happiness.
Moss cites the book “The Power of Meaning: Crafting a Life That Matters,” by Emily Esfahani Smith, who, Moss writes, has made it her mission to show how people eschew happiness for meaning.
Her four pillars are belonging, purpose, transcendence and storytelling, Moss writes.
Belonging involves having a relationship with a person who values who you are, not for how you look or what you are willing to do for them, Moss writes.
Purpose involves the reason a person gets out of bed in the morning. It may not be what others may consider a grand purpose, but if your job was your purpose, and now you are retired, you may need to find a new purpose, Moss writes.
Transcendence is the ability to be awed by something sacred. That something may not be sacred in the religious sense, but it may give you a sense of amazement, peace or stillness, Moss quotes the author.
Storytelling is the narrative you would write about you – what makes, or made, you the person you are today.
If your life has meaning, as you see it, you are not necessarily unhappy. Your purpose may indeed make you happy.
One who does little or nothing with his or her life may be content in their relaxation, but it may be debatable whether they are actually happy. Contentedness and happiness are not the same.
Most people have meaning in their lives. As Moss writes, that meaning may be different for everyone.
Most retirees have things they can do when they no longer work. Others may keep working well beyond their retirement age.
Whatever you find meaningful, chances are it will make you happy. Meaning and happiness may go together like hand and glove.
Just as most everyone has some meaning in their lives, everyone has a story. One’s story may not be as compelling as someone else’s, but his or her story has meaning not just to themselves, but others close to him or her.
In short, meaning and happiness can be dual goals. If one finds one, the other may soon follow.
Go for both.
Peter
EVEN FOLKS WITH ‘HIGH’ INCOMES HAVING MONEY ISSUES
#incomes #SixFigureIncomes #inflation #FinancialProblems #MoneyManagement
Yes, it’s possible that a couple making a six-figure income together can still have financial issues.
Nedra Rhone, “This Life” columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution discussed this in a column published June 23, 2022.
Rhone says many people believe that anyone making six figures a year with financial problems have money management, not money, problems.
But as rents skyrocket and prices for gasoline and other goods rise to levels not seen in decades, it is possible for two people making a combined, six-figure income to have trouble making ends meet – never mind saving for the future.
Some decades back, a young couple just starting out in life might have thought that if they could just make $20,000 a year together, they would be OK.
Inflation has kicked that goal up fivefold, or more.
As Rhone points out, it’s great to teach kids, and young adults, good money management skills. It takes some discipline to watch what one spends money on. And, certainly, we all can improve our money management skills.
But, the lesson here is that costs of living can’t keep rising without some, if not everyone, feeling the pinch.
Food, shelter, clothing, energy etc. are all necessary for living and working. People certainly can cut out frivolous expenses, unnecessary trips etc. But everyone has to eat, have a roof over his or her head, drive to work etc.
Some recent trends are helping. For example, more people are working from home. That saves on energy, clothing and, perhaps, some food costs.
But, not everyone can work from home. In fact, it can be assumed that the less money you make at your job, the less ability you may have to work from home. Trades people, hospitality workers and others have no ability to work from home.
Fortunately, the world economy works in cycles. That means prices won’t stay at these levels forever.
Much of the high-price trends have to do with pent-up demand after pandemic lockdowns. More people are working than there were two years ago.
Wages are trending up, but many are no better off because of that pent-up demand. Some economic sectors are still having trouble filling jobs, even with offers of more pay and, perhaps, benefits.
A narrative is circulating that government policy is the prime driver of the inflation we are seeing. In reality, there is very little that can be done by government at any level to make a real dent in inflation.
The couple in Rhone’s column could look for a cheaper apartment. Those are hard to find in most areas. In fairness, landlords have had trouble the last two years getting tenants to pay rent on time because the pandemic cost the tenants their jobs temporarily. These landlords, along with retailers and other merchants, are trying to recover some of what they lost.
Rhone’s point in her column was not to criticize others’ financial situations. Don’t try to put a simple solution on a complex problem. Chances are, if you were in the shoes of the six-figure couple, you probably would face similar problems.
Times are tough for most of us. It’s time we all be less critical or judgmental of others, and more sympathetic and helpful.
Peter
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A COLLEGE EDUCATION?
#CollegeEducation #education #colleges #EducationDecisions
Does one get a college education simply to get a good job? Or, does one get a college education to expand his or her mind, and learn to think critically?
It appears most students today view a college education in practical terms: what’s the (employment) payoff at the end?
But, should they?
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, explored this topic in her May 10, 2022 column.
Downey quotes from the book “The Real World of College: What Higher Education Is and What It Can Be,” by Wendy Fischman and Howard Gardner of the Harvard Graduate School of Education.
The authors accuse college of “mission sprawl” and abandoning their main purpose, which they describe as enabling students to analyze, reflect, connect and communicate on the critical questions they will encounter in their lives and in the world, Downey writes.
“You go on a college tour and you hear about 100 different things,” Downey quotes Gardner. But what they don’t hear enough, in the authors’ minds, is how colleges develop the mind, Downey writes.
“If students don’t leave college better thinkers, writers and communicators, the colleges fail their core mission, Downey attributes to the authors.
Let’s break down what a college education is, and should be.
First, let’s establish that no college education is wasted, if the student vigorously pursues his or her studies, regardless of what his or her major is.
But, if a student, or his or her family, is paying dearly for that education, the student and family can reasonably expect a payoff at the end. Usually, that’s defined as a good job and career launch for the student. Worse yet, if the student incurs thousands of dollars in debt for that education, he or she had better have a good income to pay it back.
Today’s political environment might describe what the Harvard authors say the colleges’ mission should be as “indoctrination” of a certain political position. Or, as Downey calls it, “political correctness and free speech.”
A college education today also involves fun, new friendships, sports and other entertainment that can help mold a young person’s life.
This begs the question: why can’t a college education accomplish both the academic and practical goals students may have?
Certainly, some students’ studies can focus on critical thinking. Others can focus on the practical skills and knowledge that will help them launch the careers they want.
It boils down to choices. A student first must figure out what he or she wants to do after college. That requires him or her to take a certain batch of core courses toward that end. But in every semester schedule, there are usually electives that a student can choose to take that may have nothing to do with his or her major, but are of personal interest.
The smart student will choose those electives to help him or her develop his or her mind and make him or her a more well rounded, or well grounded, person.
Remember, too, that a college education isn’t for everyone. So, students and parents must determine whether the prospective college student is suited to college and ready for college (academically and financially).
The choices the student makes if he or she goes to college will determine how he or she uses his or her degree after graduation, and what kind of person he or she becomes.
Peter
THE GREAT WEALTH TRANSFER: ARE YOU PREPARED?
#GreatWealthTransfer #BabyBoomers #wealth #inheritances #EstatePlanning
A few generations back, the parents of Baby Boomers turned, or were about to turn, huge amounts in inheritance to their children or other heirs.
Those parents had built usually modest homes for relatively modest prices, though they didn’t think so at the time. Much of that homebuilding was thanks in large part to the federal GI bill that was passed as veterans came home from World War II to start families and new lives.
Those modest homes increased in value many times over during that generation’s lifetime.
That gave the children of that generation a big chunk of wealth to inherit.
And, many of them did – big time.
Now, the Baby Boom generation has a bunch of wealth to pass on to its children – the GenXers and Millennials.
Wes Moss, who writes a Money Matters column for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and has a similar weekly program on WSB radio in Atlanta, calls this “The Great Wealth Transfer.”
He discussed it in his column published April 24. 2022.
Moss writes that between $30 trillion and $68 trillion in wealth will be passed down from Baby Boomers.
To put that in perspective, the U.S. GDP (gross domestic product) for 2021 was $22 trillion, Moss writes.
When you take the 136 million people who are GenXers or Millennials, and you use the $30 trillion figure, that would mean each of those folks – statistically speaking — would get $220,000, Moss writes. We know that not everyone will inherit that much individually, and some will inherit much more.
Think you don’t have that kind of money in your family? Moss sites a person with a great aunt who died. The great nephew didn’t realize how much money she had. She was able to give all her great nephews and great nieces a nice chunk of change.
In other words, there could be that kind of money somewhere in your family, and you may not know it until a death occurs.
For Baby Boomers, this lesson brings about the need for proper estate planning. Yes, you may have more than what you think you have. How it gets distributed upon your death, or even before, should not be left to chance – or probate court. It would be worth the investment to draw out an estate plan, such as a will or living trust, to make sure the money goes where, or to whom, you want, when you want.
If you are a GenXer or Millennial, talk to your parents and other family members about how THEY want their estates distributed. Make sure that, if you believe you may have something coming to you, that your interest is protected.
Of course, if there are no heirs or your family members have not shown themselves worthy of inheritance, having an estate plan is even more crucial, so that your money goes where you want.
If you are transferring your wealth, get an adviser you trust to tell you how, when and to whom to give your assets – according to your wishes. Keep in mind that you should do all YOU want to do while alive with your assets. Don’t think about your heirs first. Think of you first.
Remember, too, that how, when and to whom you give will likely have tax consequences. Know those consequences, and what could happen if a mistake is made, well ahead of time.
It’s certainly great to reward loyal, loving family members or other heirs with your wealth. But if you think about you first, and plan carefully, all concerned should be, if not happy, assured that the distribution was done as you wanted it to be done.
Peter