[frankdegodsnft]

Imagine this made up story. There was a man who has a son and his wife passed away during birth. His son has down syndrome and goes to special ed school.

The man was a successful engineer, not too wealthy, not too poor, but rather average salary. Since the man was old and was receiving money through his pension and living off of retirement fund, he told his female friend (a granny, about the same age as him) who he had known his entire life to take care of his special ed son in case he dies. He also signed papers so all his finances from pension be transferred to the granny friend, so she can take care of his son.

The granny's husband died of old age so she lives with her daughter (lets say the daughter is a grown woman in 40s or 50s). One day the man died. Now all of the finances go to the granny, because the special ed son can't even count to 20, let alone manage finances.

Heres where things go south: the granny actually takes his money and uses it for herself and her daughter, leaving chump change for the man's son just enough to feed him and survive, because shes obligated by law and papers to take care of his son. The special ed kid doesn't suspect a thing nor does he understand the situation or how much money he's supposed to receive. The granny's daughter buys a brand new SUV with that money, clothes, bills, and leaves the rest in retirement fund, while receiving the pension money indefinitely.

Is this illegal immoral or... normal?

The question is: what would You have done if you were receiving monthly pension from a dead person thats supposed to be used to take care of a special ed kid?

[Juoku]

This technically isn't illegal, depending on the signed agreement and terms stated in the will, but it's not moral imo.
I believe I'd take a better care of the mans son if I agreed beforehand.

[u8898731]

Both immoral and illegal. If the signed papers included clear text that the finances should be going towards his son and not new cars and clothes for herself, then that's illegal if caught

But all in all, seems immoral since there'd be slightly no chance of getting caught in this fashion

I would stick to my word if I were in this situation. Would I have signed papers to begin with? Probably not. Because I know how much of a lifetime commitment that would bring me to. I would've offered help with no form of contracts or finances given to me - just a sign of good gesture

I'm curious to hear how someone would find this to be normal behavior though lol..

[Pikachu]

immoral for sure, thats a fucked up situation right there.

[Nate]

Hella immoral , probably has definitely happened in the pass tho…

Probably best option is putting money into a trust if have an attorney dish out money to cover expenses of the family

[卂卩卩ㄥ乇]

Is this illegal immoral or... normal?

The question is: what would You have done if you were receiving monthly pension from a dead person thats supposed to be used to take care of a special ed kid?

Not illegal, but definitely frowned upon. 🤐

[Pug Life]

Dont know about illegal, depends on the exact text of the signed papers.
100% immoral tho, people are greedy and money is very tempting.As soon as some ppl get x amount of money, their bad side comes to light no morals near to be found.
Pretty sad and stuff like this happens way to much in one way or another.
I sure could not live with that.

[badguy1971]

100% immoral, dont do it.

[Roberto Carlos]

That is a very selfish and greedy granny that should be jailed in anyway if caught but it not possible to get caught in this fashion so it immoral.

[Drekel]

IDK if it's Illegal, but thats irrelevant to me completely. Immoral? Yes. Normal? Yup, sadly.

[trojohn]

Looking after a down syndrome man in your old age is a big job and it sounds like she got a big advance on her pay.

[Fitzy]

Imagine this made up story. There was a man who has a son and his wife passed away during birth. His son has down syndrome and goes to special ed school.

The man was a successful engineer, not too wealthy, not too poor, but rather average salary. Since the man was old and was receiving money through his pension and living off of retirement fund, he told his female friend (a granny, about the same age as him) who he had known his entire life to take care of his special ed son in case he dies. He also signed papers so all his finances from pension be transferred to the granny friend, so she can take care of his son.

The granny's husband died of old age so she lives with her daughter (lets say the daughter is a grown woman in 40s or 50s). One day the man died. Now all of the finances go to the granny, because the special ed son can't even count to 20, let alone manage finances.

Heres where things go south: the granny actually takes his money and uses it for herself and her daughter, leaving chump change for the man's son just enough to feed him and survive, because shes obligated by law and papers to take care of his son. The special ed kid doesn't suspect a thing nor does he understand the situation or how much money he's supposed to receive. The granny's daughter buys a brand new SUV with that money, clothes, bills, and leaves the rest in retirement fund, while receiving the pension money indefinitely.

Is this illegal immoral or... normal?

The question is: what would You have done if you were receiving monthly pension from a dead person thats supposed to be used to take care of a special ed kid?

Not illegal but definitely a f'd up thing to do lol

[The Pact]

I have a special needs relative that is going to inherit something like $53,000 I don't know how much yet it goes up about three grand a year because they have invested it until he turns 20. He is going to have no idea what to do with it. It will go on pizza, chips and Thomas the Tank Engine toys but I don't know what else if anything. He did say to me he wants an electric guitar but I don't know that he would have the patience or ability to learn to play.

But of course if those two in the story don't give him the best pre-school show bedspread, toys, books and nice food and clothes they are scum. They can possibly justify a car to drive him around though.

However when my relative tried to get new wheels for her car from such a trust to drive her own special needs child around it was denied. They originally said she could spend up to half of it on his needs before he was given it at age 20. But in the end all they approved was he could have a laptop out of the funds. The only other thing she tried- was later she asked for new wheels for her car for safety, but they denied that request.

[Zexi]

Immoral for the most part, but if she isn’t neglecting him or abusing him, the funds are better off in her hands than in his.

He probably wouldn’t be able to live on his own or manage finances himself unfortunately.

[Kryme]

It depends from which persons perspective you look at it from.

The father's - it would be deemed immoral and should be illegal.

The son's - He is well fed, clothed and has a bed to sleep in, he's happy and none the wiser.

The granny's - She may see it as deserved, rightfully and legally hers to spend.

The daughter's - Depending on what she knows, then she may not see it as anything but normal.


The granny may see it as immoral, but that would only depend on her moral compass or the moral compass of someone/something else.