Talk:Family strategic planning

Per Manual of Style, suggest changing title to "Family strategic planning" before article is linked elsewhere in the Wiki. --Peculiar Investor 22:09, 6 December 2012 (CST)

I renamed the page, no redirect. --LadyGeek 22:14, 6 December 2012 (CST)

Not happy with how this is unfolding. Think I will reconceptualize/reorganize from a pure wiki POV rather than trying to adapt my post. Socrativestor 10:47, 8 December 2012 (CST)

Sorry for the delay in getting back to this. Going to try to finish today/tomorrow. Thanks for your patience. Socrativestor 08:45, 7 January 2013 (CST)

Still not quite done. Hope to finish in the next few days (AKA "today/tomorrow" :-) )Socrativestor 17:42, 10 January 2013 (CST)

Take your time. For me, "the next day or so" usually ends up as several days. :) When you are finished, I recommend posting a thread in the forum to ask for comments. It will let others know that this article exists, while getting insight from different perspectives. --LadyGeek 19:41, 10 January 2013 (CST)

Well, let's call this the first draft. I just posted an announcement on the forum. I hope to try to gradually improve this. I'd also like to do a brief entry on "family succession planning". Also, is it possible to have the entry on "Estate planning" *not* redirect to the "list of estate planning terms" so that some text could be put in that entry (including a couple of book references)? Thanks for everyone's help and encouragement. Please let me know if/when I am going off the deep-end. Socrativestor 18:05, 3 February 2013 (CST)
 * I have deleted the redirect and opened a stub, Estate planning. Thanks --Blbarnitz 20:10, 3 February 2013 (CST)

Socrativestor, What I see as making this page difficult to read (and write) is that it tries to address two different kinds of families, where maybe this only applies to one kind. Although I haven't read any of the footnoted sources, "family strategic planning" as it is defined here seems like it would only apply to multi-generational families who have more wealth than they "need". They may feel their living expenses, retirement, education, hobbies/interests can be satisfied with a fixed amount of wealth but they may decide to use the extra wealth for some goal or "mission" that is bigger than the family (eg, research, world hunger, promoting education for the disadvantaged, etc). They may separate their living expenses money from their bigger goal money by putting the goal money in a non-profit or trust (which would also have different legal ramifications than their living expenses money).

I don't see "family strategic planning" being useful to families who don't have excess wealth, relative to the needs of all the family generations. These families may have the oldest generation fairly healthy in retirement and having excellent medical insurance (or can self-insure), whereas the next generation may have difficulty finding a satisfying job, permanent housing, or a health issue. If this second generation inherits money, they will need to spend it on their basic needs, regardless of what their parents want. They likely wouldn't be interested in their parents' goal if they themselves have an uncertain future.

Currently the page states that "traditional estate plans often fail to accomplish the financial asset Owner's objective of maximally benefiting the Owner's Heirs". This sounds like it refers to the second kind of family since the Owners and Heirs can have different opinions of what would benefit the Heirs. However, if the family had enough wealth that their living expenses were easily met, the inheritance can be put towards the goal that both generations had agreed on.

If you agree with this concept of strategic planning applying to only families with more wealth than they "need", this page should be edited toward that definition.

A technical observation is that, at this point, the page may not need the second level headings (ie, x.y) since each heading has so little content under it. For me, it is choppy reading because all the headings distract from the flow. celia 20:16, 7 February 2013 (CST)


 * Celia, might this styling rendition be an easier read? [Note: I made a few minor wordsmithing edits to better fit in with the new format]

Family strategic planning assumptions
Although not strictly necessary, family strategic planning often begins with an affirmation of the following premises.


 * Financial wealth is a means not an end. That is, financial wealth is not an end in itself, but rather is only valuable to the extent it can "buy" other things. Although most, if not all, families would agree with this premise in theory, many forget it in practice and "wealth for wealth's sake" often becomes the implicit order of the day.
 * Financial wealth is not inherently beneficial. Indeed, instances in which financial wealth has harmed those it was intended to benefit are all too common (this happens frequently with lottery winners for example as well as with addicts and other dysfunctional persons). As numerous philosophers have long pointed out, financial wealth is neither inherently beneficial nor inherently harmful. Rather, it is the "wise use" of financial wealth that makes it beneficial and "foolish use" of financial wealth that makes it harmful.
 * A family's "end" is its members' well-being. In American terms: A family's "end" is facilitating its members' "pursuit of happiness". Or in Maslovian terms: A family's "end" is facilitating is members' self-actualization. Or in ancient Greek terms: A family's "end" is facilitating its members' "excellence" / "goodness" / "virtue". However one puts it, though, a family's "success" is measured in terms of its members' "quality of life" (not: "quantity of toys").
 * Most families are dysfunctional to some degree. Most (if not all) families operate in ways that result in family members harming one another and/or themselves and thus take the family farther from (rather than closer to) its "end". Families with financial wealth are not only not immune from family dysfunction, they are on the contrary probably more prone to family dysfunction due to a variety of factors. In any case, the presence of financial wealth generally serves to amplify whatever dysfunction exists -- and also to motivate the disguising of family dysfunction in order to promote the public (and private) image of a "successful family".