Inheritance & the family - Attitudes to will-making and intestacy

The National Centre for Social research have published a report providing robust data on attitudes to will-making and what the law should be when people die without making a will.  Evidence from the study is being used by the Law Commission.  The study was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and conducted in collaboration with Professor Gillian Douglas from Cardiff Law School, Cardiff University.

The findings are summarised as follows:

Most people have not made a will.

Only 37% of respondents have made a will, although this proportion increases with age, with 82% of over 75s having made a will. Making a will is also related to marital status and financial worth. Participants in the qualitative study highlighted their family circumstance and financial wealth as catalysts or potential prompts to writing a will. They also took into consideration their risk of death, what they wanted to happen to their belongings after death and the need for clarity in order to avoid family arguments.

Those who have made a will favour leaving their estate to their children or spouses/civil partners.

65% of respondents who had made a will had included their spouse or partner, while 73% had included their children. Giving priority to a spouse or partner was regarded by the qualitative participants at the 'natural thing to do' based on matters such as the couple's shared life and close relationship. Inclusion of children was attributed to the significance of lineage and blood ties as well as a desire to continue providing for children after death.

The study revealed complex attitudes towards testamentory freedom.

Attitudes from the qualitative study fell into three broad groups: those who favoured complete testamentary freedom, those who preferred a combination of testamentary freedom with the ability to challenge a will under certain circumstances, and finally those who indicated that a will should always be challengeable. Circumstances in which a will could be challenged were largely based on principles such as blood-ties, marriage bonds, the relative need of potential beneficiaries and whether or not a person had contributed to the estate.

In cases of intestacy there is strong support for surviving spouses receiving the majority of an estate, reflecting the current rules.

The majority (63%) favoured a surviving spouse receiving the entirity of a spouse's estate (rather than it going to a parent). However, support for spouses was weaker if the deceased had children. Qualitative study participants indicated that the importance attributed to spouses was based on the significance of marriage ties, as well as other factors such as joint contributions and emotional closeness.

After spouses, support in cases of intestacy was strongest for surviving children, again reflecting current rules.

Although support was strongest for spouses, a substantial proportion of respondents favoured children receiving something from the estate. Qualitative study participants said that whether or not a child should be provided for indirectly (through provision made to the surviving spouse/partner) or directly, depended upon how far respondents trusted the surviving spouse/partner to act in the child's best interests. Where children were to inherit directly there was a strong view that the estate should be divided equally.

The findings of the study can be found here