Which of these situations would be better for my kids?
My husband mentioned that we should get wills drawn up about who would get our kids in case something happened to us. I think it's always a good idea but he's under the assumption that if we died without there being a decision already made, the state would take the kids and put them in foster care. My parents live a few miles away and are also the only relatives we have who live in our state and I know they would want the kids right away. Would the state take them away from their blood grandparents? My husband thinks they would be taken away, and his suggestion is to leave our kids to his sister, who lives out of state and already has 5 kids. The reason I disagree with that is that it's hard enough for 2 young children (both under age 10) to lose their parents, without adding moving to another state, starting over at another school, etc. Somebody please tell me what you think and school me on this subject if you have any knowledge of such. Thank you!
Update:For those who asked; My mother is in her 50's, Dad is in his 70's (and still working, did not like retirement). Both in good health, even though Dad is a lot older than Mom. They are very close to the kids, have a great relationship. My husband, however, thinks they should go to someone younger, regardless of circumstance. I know his sister would love them and she is a great Mom, but I just don't want them taken out of state if the worst should happen. I have made my point very clear to him and he has threatened to draw papers on his own and put in his own "Will" that he wants the kids to be placed with her. I won't sign it because I don't agree with it, and I will make that known to any attorney as well. (In case you are wondering, we are not separated, just disagree on big decisions like this.)
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
In our state, social service will contact the closest relatives to see if they will take the children. If nobody wants the kids, then the children are put into the foster care system.
I am like you: I wouldn't want my children to go out of state and away from their friends after losing their parents. Then again, how old are your parents? How old will they be when the kids are teenagers? It's a tough decision.
I'm in England and I'm not sure if it differs much but I'm certain that if anything happened to me & my husband our children would definitely go to my parents. I think the maternal grandparents tend to be (and should be) the obvious place for children to stay. My husbands parents are local too but they don't keep good health and, if i'm honest, I would not want them to have the children (not because I don't trust them but because their parenting skills are somewhat different to ours, maybe you feel the same way about your husbands sister??). Obviously as mothers we follow in our own mums footsteps. Our mums understand us better as daughters and what we would want for our kids. Maybe this should be the approach you take with your husband when discussing who should take guardianship of you kids. I know for certain that you should not (under any circumstance) put in your will that you want someone to look after your children when you really don't.
Your husband's sister already has 5 kids, do you think she could handle taking care of your kids on top?
And concerning your parents, it depends on how close they are to your kids. Are they in a good relation, and do you think they are quite able to take care of your kids?
You should consider all these elements, and make sure that your kids would be feeling fine with the people you're gonna choose for them.
It's hard enough to raise 2 children..imagine 7! His sister can do it? I don't think the children would be taken away. but wright the will fo your children to go live with their grandparents. I think it's the smartest choice.