Essence:

This case concerns three children whose parent passed away. There had been a period of estrangement between the elder children and their now-deceased parent, which was reconciled when the parent’s illness was revealed. After the funeral, the two older children discovered they had been disinherited, while the youngest had inherited everything, including the family home. This news came as a shock to them. The settlement of the estate had stalled over “practical” issues, leaving underlying emotions and family dynamics unaddressed. Systemic interventions and concepts helped guide the parties toward a future they envisioned together.

Case Background:

The disinherited elder children were deeply shaken by the news and how it had been communicated. The once-strong relationship between the heirs and the sole beneficiary became strained, halting the estate settlement. Trust in the youngest sibling diminished due to a perceived lack of transparency and exclusion. The elder children wanted to understand their parent’s motivations directly, rather than through the executor, whom they regarded with distrust. The parties disagreed over the legitimate portion owed to the elder children. Through mediation, they sought not only to settle the inheritance but also to break an intergenerational pattern and preserve family bonds for themselves, their children, and future generations. They were also keen to keep the family home within the family.

Systemic interventions and concepts helped guide the parties toward a future they envisioned together.

Legal Context (Visible Issues):

The deceased parent’s estate included land and a house, with everything passing to the youngest child. The news was conveyed by an outsider rather than a family member, which worsened the communication. The youngest child needed the inheritance and a mortgage to make the house habitable, while the elder children required their legitimate portion to enter the housing market. Thus, the estate’s valuation, especially of the home, was critical in determining what the elder children would receive. After the funeral, further revelations about the estate raised more questions about the legitimate share.

Systemic Issues
(Underlying Dynamics):

The entanglement:

The siblings had previously enjoyed a good relationship, but communication had broken down, straining their bond. The elder children felt disregarded, unrecognized, and excluded, especially due to the executor’s involvement. The fact that the entire estate had passed to the youngest child disrupted the family order and disregarded the elder children’s place in it. Having an outsider (the executor) largely dictate the estate settlement was also challenging for them. Consequently, trust in both the executor and the youngest sibling waned, with transparency concerns fueling their sense of exclusion.

The beneficiary’s conflict:

The youngest child felt caught between loyalty to their parent’s wishes and their relationship with the other siblings. Compounded by financial constraints with a partner, the beneficiary was “paralyzed” by the conflict, leading to inaction and a lack of transparency, which further eroded trust. Each sibling felt isolated in their intense emotions, projecting their hurt onto each other.

The drama triangle emerged, with each party feeling victimized, accusing others, and attempting to “rescue” the family legacy, which resulted in a cycle of reactivity. This pattern of disengagement and delaying hindered progress, with no party fully acknowledging their role in the dispute. With rising construction costs and mortgage rates during mediation, time pressure added urgency and risked compromising their interests.

Systemic Approach:

A genogram mapped the family system across generations, revealing an intergenerational pattern where inheritance passed to one child, often leading to a complete rupture with the others. Realizing that this conflict was, in essence, inherited, the parties could make a choice: either perpetuate this pattern or break it for future generations.

Solution Exploration:

The conversation shifted toward individual and shared interests. Each sibling identified their needs based on four decision-making elements (financial, emotional, relational, and pragmatic), distancing the focus from a set amount to a broader solution. They considered the cost, risk, and polarization that litigation would entail.

Homework:

Each sibling was assigned tasks to complete individually and then discuss in caucus and group sessions. The aim was for all parties to take responsibility for reaching a resolution, also ensuring that the youngest, seen by the others as having taken on the parent’s excluding role, could shift to a peer level within the sibling hierarchy to foster collaboration.

Progress:

The elder children needed a show of goodwill from the beneficiary while acknowledging the right to keep the family home. With this framework, the mediators facilitated transparent solution proposals that balanced the sibling’s needs with the desire to keep and renovate the home.

Interests:

Common interest:
• Breaking the generational pattern to prevent exclusion and burdening future generations.

Elder siblings’ interests:
• Insight into the parent’s reasoning and restoration of perceived injustice
• Moving forward with their lives
• Recognition and visibility
• Transparency
• Restored trust, communication, and family bond
• Using their legitimate share toward buying a home.

Beneficiary’s interests:
• Honoring the parent’s will and remaining part of the family system for future generations
• Retaining and renovating the family home
• Resolving the estate promptly due to increasing renovation costs.

Executor’s interest:
• Fulfilling the will’s terms within legal constraints.

Outcome:

A settlement was reached wherein the beneficiary demonstrated goodwill toward the elder children, fostering a sense of inclusion and enabling the family home to remain in the family.

Mediator’s Reflection

Despite their family history, the siblings could look beyond themselves and prioritize their bond. While trust had been damaged, they recognized the importance of maintaining this relationship for future generations. What had once been excluded found its place, with the inherited home preserved as a family asset.

The genogram was instrumental in revealing the pattern, though creating momentum proved challenging, with mediation taking over a year due to multiple parties, COVID-19 delays, and the need for cost assessments and renovation quotes.

This case highlights the value of pre-mortem mediation in allowing parents to communicate their reasoning directly to heirs. Such preemptive dialogue can prevent projection of unresolved feelings onto beneficiaries, which otherwise burden family relationships.

The collaboration with a financial mediator provided balance and enhanced the group’s guidance, supporting transparency in calculating the legitimate share.

The executor’s indirect role in the mediation was significant, with their position outside the family system adding complexity. Once the family reached a financial agreement, this had to be finalized with the executor.

Referral Source:

The parties found the mediator online.

Co-mediation Details:

This case was handled through co-mediation with a financial mediator.

Mediator’s Background:

Lawyer–Mediator, inheritance mediator, family constellation practitioner, dialogue facilitator for financial discussions in various relationship phases.