Ideally you want a Durable Power of Attorney as well, which gives you the power to handle their affairs while they're living (if necessary). Both for being able to take care of them, and as a trump card in case someone else does influence them into signing a new Will you can question their mental competence without ending up in a world of hurt regarding conservatorship etc.

From my understanding a Living Trust is really just a way of bypassing the Will and probate process, and actually allows for less oversight. This might make things easier, or it might make it harder to get justice.

There are also irrevocable trusts that allow for making designations that can't be taken back, which perhaps may fit your situation. But since they're irrevocable they need to be drafted and planned more carefully.

Of course if they're not looking to you to fulfill such a role or discuss such things, then perhaps it's not your scene no matter how much you think it is. Whatever the case may be, you're better off having these conversations sooner rather than too late.

IME a parent's death is when all those unresolved childhood disagreements come back to roost.

I've done this. I made a will in favour of my two kids; and lasting powers of attorney, to cover the eventuality that I become mentally incompetent, but fail to pop my socks.

The will is scrupulously fair - straight 50:50 split, no special provision for need or whatever. Both kids are named as executors. I bung them some money from time to time, especially if one of them is in need. I always give them both the same amount, even if the other isn't in need. My hope is that they won't fall out over my legacy. I don't think they will.

Greedy, grasping offspring is a thing. I have friends who have that problem. They don't care to spend time with their offspring, because of tedious conversations about money. I'm so glad I don't have that problem. My kids never ask me for money, even if I invite them to ("Are you OK for money?") I never asked my parents for money either - I didn't want to feel beholden to them.

I assume you trust both of them, or you wouldn't have designated both as executors. One of them will have to step up and take the burden (assuming you didn't name them co-executors that need to act jointly?). And assuming they both view it as a burden, they can decide that for themselves.

IMO problems between honest people arise when an estate drags out due to large non-monetary assets like houses, causing legitimate differences in opinion. If they both just want to sell it, that's easy. When one wants to keep it to live in, or if there is a lot of land and someone wants to subdivide to get more money, then you get into arguments. Or other intangibles like if one of them ends up spending a lot of time personally taking care of you, what's that worth post facto.

FWIW I don't know how the probate process is in your state, but you could look into a living trust to keep the process easier and more private. States that have adopted the uniform probate code are pretty straightforward, but ones that haven't can get somewhat tedious even for uncontested estates (eg publishing a list of all your assets in the public record).

TBH you probably have a gut feeling of whether your kids will work together or argue, and if you want to head off problems the only way is to talk about it ahead of time and plan for the things that will cause friction.

> One of them will have to step up and take the burden

Yes. They are not co-executors (they can choose how they divide the burden). And I know it is a burden; some people hire an accountant to do it for them. It took my sister about 6 months to do probate for my father. I'm glad I didn't have to shoulder that.

So as far as I'm concerned, that's up to them. I trust them both. I trust them not to fight. But in the end, even if you've done your best to set things up properly, people can still find a way to generate a conflict.

Most of the legacy happens to be a couple of homes; they'd be hard to divide, but both my kids have their own homes. I imagine they'll just sell both properties. I appreciate your remarks about divisible land legacies; my property isn't easily divisible. At any rate, my will is quite clear; the division is to be 50:50.

I really hope neither of them ends up having to care for me; but if that should happen, I suppose I'd just compensate them for their trouble while I'm still alive.

Trusts can be simple or byzantine. I don't think I need to make a trust at all. My affairs aren't complicated, and there are no secrets. I mainly want to protect my legacy from my two ex-wives, who have each already taken everything they're entitled to.

Incidentally, I was a bit miffed that my Dad appointed my sister as sole executor; but I never mentioned that to anyone. Fact is, she is a competent maanager and administrator, and I'm not. He did the right thing.

In my jurisdiction the executor cannot be a beneficiary of the will. Getting named as the executor means that you cannot inherit anything.

Interesting. Never heard of that before. Definitely not the case in the two US states I’ve lived in when I was an executor.

Meh, maybe I am wrong: I was told this by an attorney in 1992. It might have changed, or I could have been misinformed.

I am in South Africa, BTW.