How to Have Difficult Conversations With those you Love

This guest post is courtesy of Moriah Gaskill, Regent Law 3L:

How do you approach challenging conversations? When discussing estate planning, difficult topics appear inevitable. Yet, we often struggle with the thought of our own mortality and the mortality of the one’s closest to us. As a result, these conversations can evoke fear, stress, or a sense of isolation. There is something illusive and frighting about the thought of continuing life without the ones you love the most. But what if we could approach these discussions in a constructive and more comforting way?

In our Wills, Trusts, and Estates class, our professor, Mrs. Kohm, often spoke about the opportunity to leave a legacy by creating an estate plan. Legacies afford us the privilege of impact. As Christians, our lives, money, and time, are not our own, but instead, are instruments used to serve others and fulfill Christ’s purpose for our lives. Therefore, what it we made service and love the focus? We can support our loved ones in their estate planning process by extending patience and by listening to what is most important or concerning to them. Additionally, we can cultivate an environment where he or she feels both emotionally and physically safe to engage in vulnerable conversations. Just as a poet’s message can outlive their life through their work, similarly, a person’s mission can be reflected through charities, organizations, and persons in which or in whom they have invested.

How can you confront disunity or family discord when discussing estate planning? I believe one way we can unpack the dynamics of familial relations, and hopefully encourage more familial harmony, is by intentionally listening to the underlying interests and concerns of a person. What appears on the surface is not always fully reflective of the underlying emotion or motive. Our life experiences, positive or negative, values, past hurts, misunderstandings,

Actions, reactions, and traumas can have a significant impact on our relationships, which can not only affect our lifetime interactions, but also can affect the interactions between the loved ones left behind. Therefore, it is essential to have the right spiritual and mental posture when we engage in conversations that can be emotionally complex. We must seek clarity, encourage the truth to drive the conversation, validate legitimate feelings, and be prepared to propose creative solutions.

What if it is taboo to talk about death or incapacity in my family? Is there a way I can approach sensitive topics? Proverbs 18:21 reminds us that “life and death are in the power of the tongue, and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.” Our words have power, and one of the challenges I have found is discussing topics such as incapacity, life sustaining treatments, or funeral arrangements without making these discussions declarations or confessions. To combat this issue, one solution is to use articles such as “the” or “a” as opposed to possessive determiners like “my.” Another solution might be to create hypothetical scenarios before approaching the loved one’s views on the matter. These methods may help create some distance between the person and the topic being considered. Everyone’s estate plan and approach may be just as unique as he or she is, therefore, it is important to keep the person at the heart of the plan.

In conclusion, estate planning requires patience, diligence, vulnerability, perspective, introspection, and love. Although the conversations surrounding estate planning can be challenging, one’s legacy can be impactful. “Let your estate plan be your love letter.”

Estate Planning for your Family in the Era of Online DNA Testing

 

This guest post is courtesy of Amanda Ash, Regent Law 3L:

          “Discovering your family history is a journey, and we’re here to guide you,” boasts DNA testing service Ancestry.com. Throughout history and literature, stories of long-lost heirs have captivated audiences. Today, with the rise of online DNA testing, these plots are increasing playing out in real life. A recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted how newly discovered relatives are disrupting long-settled estate and inheritance plans.   

          If you are handling an estate—or planning one—it’s important to understand how biology interacts with state law. In many jurisdictions, including Virginia, biology alone is rarely enough to substantiate an inheritance claim. Instead, inheritance depends on the law of the state where the decedent lived, the wording of any will, legally recognized relationships in effect at death, and strict timing requirements.

          Under Virginia law, when a decedent leaves a will, it controls the disposition of the estate. Vague terms like “child,” “descendent,” “issue,” and “issue of my body” create ambiguity that may open the door to claim by a relative unknown at the time of drafting. A best practice when drafting a will is to refer to heirs by full legal name and update the will when family circumstances change.

          If there is no will, the laws of intestate succession apply, and courts look to legally established relationships. Virginia law includes procedures for establishing paternity for children born out of marriage, requiring clear and convincing evidence. Such evidence may include the parent’s acknowledgement of the child or expert genetic testing weighed alongside other factors. Virginia also requires that claims of succession be filed within one year of the decedent’s death. In short, a previously unknown relative may be able to establish a claim, but many legal requirements must align for the claim to succeed.

Of special note when considering DNA results:

·        Adopted children have no inheritance rights from a biological parent because adoption severs the legal parent-child relationship (except in stepparent adoptions, where the birth parent remains a legal parent).

·        Children conceived with donated sperm are generally barred by contract from asserting inheritance claims through the donor.

·        Children whose parent’s rights were terminated may still inherit from the parent, but the parent cannot inherit from the child.

 

          In short, the best protection against unwanted surprises to your estate plan: draft a clear, specific will and update it as your circumstances evolve. Doing so ensures that your intentions are honored—even in a world where DNA testing continues to uncover unexpected branches on a family tree.

 

The Change Sparked in California Conservatorship Law by the #FreeBritney Movement

 

This guest post is courtesy of Gretchen Collins, Regent Law 3L, and Fall 2025 Wills, Trusts & Estates student. This post serves as an update to The Conservatorship of Britney Spears (Continues…)Links to an external site. post from 2020:

Since this blog’s 2020 post on Britney Spears’ conservatorship, California has reformed its conservatorship system. The #FreeBritney movement was a public outcry that exposed systemic failures in how courts protect the most vulnerable individuals’ autonomy and dignity.  

A conservatorship is a legal arrangement in which a court appoints a person (conservator) to manage another person's (conservatee) personal care and/or estate, when that person is deemed unable to manage these matters independently.

The Conservatorship Reform ActLinks to an external site., signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021, transformed California conservatorship law in three critical ways. First, conservatees now have the right to hire independent legal counsel to represent their interests rather than relying on court-appointed counsel. Second, it allows interested persons to petition the court and mandates that all prima facie cases of abuse are thoroughly investigated (Cal. Prob. Code § 1851.6)Links to an external site.. Third, conservators found guilty of abuse of a conservatee now face civil penalties, including a fine of up to $10,000 in addition to other remedies (Cal. Prob. Code § 2112)Links to an external site..

Britney Spears’ case sparked these reforms. After petitioning in 2020 to remove her father as conservator, Spears delivered an emotional testimony in June 2021, describing her father’s conservatorship as abusive. That September, exercising rights granted by the Conservatorship Reform Act, she hired her own attorney. In November 2021, after 13 years, Judge Brenda Penny terminated her conservatorship (Britney Spears Conservatorship Explained by a Probate Lawyer, Keystone Law Group, Oct. 2024).Links to an external site. Her case brought conservatorships publicity, fueled a public outcry, and encouraged legislators to take action to prevent situations like hers in the future.

Building on this momentum, California introduced Assembly Bill 1663Links to an external site. in 2022, adding two key protections. Courts are required to use the least restrictive means when determining whether a conservatorship is appropriate.  A court must evaluate the allegations regarding the prospective conservatee’s capacity and any alternatives available to provide the necessary support before restricting an individual’s autonomy. Courts must also tailor conservatorships for persons with developmental disabilities to that individual’s specific needs. This expressly limits the scope of a conservatorship and requires courts to evaluate the unique circumstances surrounding requests.

Despite these changes, significant gaps remain.  Although interested persons may now report abuse, conservatees possess only limited authority to challenge their own conservatorship status. Advocates continue to push for stronger protections, including enhanced oversight, increased funding for investigations, and greater awareness of alternatives. Numerous alternatives exist, including supported decision-making, powers of attorney, and advance directives, all of which provide necessary support without stripping away autonomy. Conservatorships are meant to be a last resort when all other less restrictive means have been examined or exhausted.

The #FreeBritney movement awakened a hunger for justice. The public outcry forced legislators and legal professionals to evaluate their own roles in perpetuating systemic failures. When Spears delivered her emotional testimony, it sparked reform. Media attention brought change to California’s conservatorship law, but its lasting legacy may be in challenging legal professionals to question whether the means accomplish the goal of protecting, rather than controlling, vulnerable individuals.  

Happy Mother's Day Mom!

 

Celebrating motherhood takes on all new meaning for every single person on Mother’s Day weekend. Having, knowing, being loved by a mother provides a child with a biological parent who is entrusted with an altruistic investment in their offspring's success unlike any other person on the planet. 

Though renowned economist Dr. Gary Becker views this entrustment from an economic lens (Gary S. Becker, A Treatise on the Family (Harvard U. Press 1993), additional research suggests that being raised by one’s biological parent creates stronger parental investment and more effective parenting behaviors. (See Martin Daly & Margo Wilson, The Truth About Cinderella: A Darwinian View of Parental Love 63-93 (1998). That biological relationship may be "both necessary and sufficient" to explain the superior outcomes for children raised in married families with their mom.

Having that female role model within a committed relationship framework changes everything. From communication patterns, to security, to behavioral modeling that contributes to well-rounded development, there are thousands of definitive studies showing mothers are one of the most significant and important contributors of children’s physical, psychological, emotional and intellectual development. (See Lynne Marie Kohm, Rethinking Mom and Dad, 42 Capital U. L. Rev. 441 (2014).  

Gratitude to mom today is now understood even by social scientists. Happy Mother's Day mom!

Eugenics Rebranded

This guest post is courtesy of Mary Truitt, Regent Law 2L:

“That which has been is what will be. That which is done is what will be done. And there is nothing new under the sun.” Ecclesiastes 1:9.

In the twenty-first century, we are living through our own version of the industrial revolution, but with rapid technological developments. Among the array of incredible developments has been the ability to create life outside of the womb. This has greatly expanded families, but it has also resulted in millions of lives frozen indefinitely. It has created an ethical dilemma that continues to foster problems.  

Nucleus Embryo recently launched a new technology that allows parents to screen their embryos for the potential for genetic diseases and traits. It’s been marketed under the pretense of “preventative medicine.” The idea is that parents can choose the healthiest embryo to implant. Yet doing so necessarily discards the embryos that have genetic diseases or may be prone to developing a disease or health issue later in life. This process ranks embryos against one another, thereby devaluing embryos not considered perfect. This technology perpetuates the notion that children are a commodity and the weak do not deserve to live.

Our culture often struggles to call out the evil as we see it because it is not identical to historical examples. The fear is that by drawing modern comparisons, we’ll downplay the evil of our past. Yet in so doing, we are failing to understand the depth of evil right in front of us. Nucleus Embryo is eugenics. It allows parents to discard their weaker children by destroying rejected embryos because they have imperfections. It is not the disease that is being prevented from existing, but rather the child from being born.

Let us never forget that “…the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.” Therefore, Scripture calls us to “be sober, be vigilant.”1 Peter 5:8. Satan uses new tactics to employ the same evil. There is nothing new under the sun. Christians should be watchful that we may fulfill the command to “learn to do good; seek justice, rebuke the oppressor; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow.” Isaiah 1:17.

 

Young Adults and Life Insurance

 

Why Young adults should prioritize life insurance and why Term is the better option.

 

This guest post is courtesy of Hannah Holmes, Regent Law 3L:

Many young adults avoid thinking about end-of-life planning because it feels distant or uncomfortable. However, funeral costs average $7,000 to 12,000, and most young adults do not have enough savings to cover those expenses. Life insurance is an easy way to ensure that family members are not left with a financial burden during an already difficult time.

Although life insurance matters at every age, it is especially important for young adults who are still developing financial stability. A policy can cover funeral costs, outstanding bills, or other obligations so that loved ones are protected.

The two most common types of life insurance are term life and whole life, and they differ significantly. Term life insurance provides affordable coverage for a set period, usually 10, 20, or 30 years, and has no cash value. It is designed to cover individuals during the years when financial responsibilities are highest.

Whole life insurance, on the other hand, lasts a lifetime and includes a cash value component. While this feature sounds appealing, it is often misunderstood. While cash value technically grows within a whole life policy, it does so very slowly, sometimes taking more than a decade to break even. Additionally, borrowing against cash value reduces the death benefit unless repaid. A crucial point often overlooked is this: upon the insured’s death, beneficiaries receive only the policy’s death benefit—not the cash value—unless the policy has been specifically structured to include it. This nuance is frequently omitted in sales presentations, leading consumers to believe they are leaving both cash value and a death benefit to their loved ones.

For these reasons, term life insurance is usually the better option for young adults. It offers substantial coverage at a fraction of the cost, and the money saved by choosing term can be invested in retirement accounts or mutual funds—often yielding better long-term growth than the cash value in a whole life policy.

Life insurance is a crucial part of responsible planning, and term life provides young adults with the most practical and cost-effective protection.

 

A.I. and Your Estate Plan

 

This guest post is courtesy of Cameron Wall, Regent Law 3L:

In this modern day and age, individuals have been given a powerful tool with the use of the internet, even more so with the recent advent of A.I. (artificial intelligence). This has become a hot topic in the area of law as well, as many documents lawyers draft are often crafted with the use of helpful A.I. technology, whether it be for proofreading, templating, or for improved research efficiency. However, in a world filled with growing A.I. uses, there are also many drawbacks lurking in the shadows: A.I. providing incomplete or incorrect query searches and information (that have gotten lawyers in big trouble recently who solely rely on A.I. to formulate legal arguments), the advent of “deepfake images”, or the verification imperfections of valid online purchases. These issues also pose a significant quandary for the execution of wills in states that have yet to codify electronic signatures for authenticating valid will executions.

For example, in order for a will to be properly executed in Virginia, it must meet some fundamental requirements: the will MUST be in writing; MUST be signed by the testator (or someone else in the testator’s presence at his direction); MUST be acknowledged in the presence of 2 competent witnesses (witnesses must be of sound mind and over 18 years old) who subscribe to the authenticity of the transaction; and the testator MUST both possess (at the time of signing) testamentary intent and testamentary capacity to execute the testator’s will.

Of course, this raises the question, what about wills that are written down at the last second? Perhaps on a person’s deathbed? Virginia, as well as many other states, allow for two narrow types of “deathbed will exceptions”:

 

1)     A “holographic will”: this type of will without 2 competent witnesses present is only valid if it meets the following requirements: MUST be written purely in the testator’s handwriting, MUST have the testator’s handwritten signature, and the testator’s handwriting MUST be proven by two disinterested witnesses to the transaction in court

2)    A “nuncupative will”: an oral will that MUST be made/given during an active duty member’s last sickness or where they resided for the ten days preceding their death; MUST be proved by 2 witnesses that testator called on someone present to bear testimony that the oral statement was their intended will; and MUST only apply to personal property, not real property (i.e. real estate).

Virginia, along with many other states’ legislatures, implement these type of wet signature requirements (handwritten signatures in ink) to prevent the occurrence of fraud or illegality in executing wills, as these states place high value on protecting testator’s “freedom of disposition” (the constitutionally protected right that allows individuals to determine how their property will be distributed after their death).

With the advent of the internet and online verification processes, there is a noticeable (and somewhat concerning) trend among states (such as Oklahoma, Indiana, Maryland, Arizona, and Illinois, to name a few) which have enacted statutes allowing for the creation and execution of electronic wills, which include provisions for electronic signatures and remote witnessing. While these states offer (perhaps) a more flexible and accessible means to altering a will, by allowing online/remote verification and signature processes, these states appear willing to remain vulnerable attacks on the authenticity of their wills, especially in the event a motivated party is willing to “bend the rules” and alter a person’s will at the last moment to their benefit without having several of the critical safeguards in place to stop them- safeguards that states like Virginia have to prevent crime and fraud (handwritten requirement, physical presence of two witnesses, etc.).

This raises some ultimate questions for a prudent person to consider when drafting a will: when you draft your will one day, will you opt to have it drafted with an e-signature and an e-verification, or will you choose to have it handwritten in person? Will you choose to create your will far in advance of your deathbed? With or without the advice of a lawyer? And finally, at the end of the day, how much do you really care about securing your “freedom of disposition” and determining where your possessions should go after you leave this earth? Good stewardship requires answers.

12 Year Olds Now Serving in Iran War

 

Children can now fight for Iran. Not teenagers, or those almost eighteen – children aged 12. “Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (the IRGC) has lowered the minimum age for participation in war-support roles to 12, a senior official acknowledged on state television, in remarks cited by the Iranian news channel Iran International.” How desperate is the nation that puts its children to war. These 12 year olds will join the IRGC forces manning checkpoints and patrols repressing Iranian citizens. What heartbreaking calamity.

The move comes despite Iran's commitments under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which expressly and outright prohibits the use of children in military activities.

Child soldiering is a problem around the world, particularly with CRC signatory nations in conflict, because desperate regimes recruit children for their easy obedience, attracting them with ideology and perception of community strength they might gain from soldiering. Children in poverty who lack opportunity and education are easy targets. (See my research on this at  Suffer the Children: How the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Has Not Supported Children, 22 N.Y. Int’l. L. Rev. 57 (2009); and A Brief Assessment of the 25-Year Effect of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 23 Cardozo J. Int’l. & Compar. L. 323 (2015).

Furthermore, such a move to have children age 12 joining the IRGC defies United Nations treaty authority enforcement. In truth, enforcement has always been a weakness of the CRC, as the plight of children all over the world by CRC signatory states is not improving. It is as if the CRC is a triumph of international law that has enjoyed little success of the rule of law for the lives of children. This new decision by the IRGC is clear evidence of that.

Working on my sabbatical project casebook Children and the Law, my mind immediately rushed to the focus of our book – trauma informed lawyering on behalf of children. When children experience adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), they endure some level of trauma. ACEs are traumatic events that happen as a child grows up. Offering a new and pragmatic perspective, this casebook covers not only essential theory and practice, but accommodates expected law student demands for various expertise in child advocacy, particularly dealing with children who have experienced trauma. Having contact with the law in nearly any form can create a traumatic experience for a child. This casebook is designed to prepare and train lawyers, both experienced and new, in the rising interest toward the involvement of children in the law. Recognizing that a new approach is needed to this area of law and child advocacy, our goal is to provide a tool that will teach in an interesting and engaging manner by offering a fresh perspective on the subject matter with a balance of practical training and tools. It is scheduled for publication in Fall 2026.

So as abhorrent the notions of children serving in a war in any capacity are, the trauma they experience in that service will affect them vividly and dramatically for their entire lives, if they survive their wartime service. The IRGC is showing its true colors on the value they place on children. And the CRC is not protecting these children from child soldiering despite express prohibitions that Iran has agreed to.

193 nations have signed the CRC treaty, leaving the United States as the only UN non-signer. While often debated in legal halls, the reasons for U.S. refusal to sign the treaty are held in our Judeo Christian infused values for children, as those deserving of the protection of their best interests, with their parents holding the right and the serious duty to do so. “United States family law jurisprudence requires the protection of children by the legally enforceable standard of the best interests of the child. This is not a rights framework, but rather it is a protective framework that requires adult obligations and duties to act in the best interests of children based on their parental rights. However imperfect the best interests of the child may be applied, it has been immeasurably more successful at the protection, provision, and participation of the child than the CRC could ever be.” (Suffer the Children, at p. 11).

The IRGC is now another tragic example of the failure of the CRC. While numerous Middle Eastern news outlets are reporting these steps taken by Iran to enlarge its army, western media are seemingly and shamefully silent on this latest use of child soldiers. Understanding rights and obligations and communicating them accurately will always be a heavy task, but ignoring facts is never good – and it is tragic for children.

Rooted in Jewish tradition as a gift from God (Psalm 127, 128), the value of children passed on into Christianity by Jesus Christ in the New Testament. (Matt. 19:14, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16) Christianity brought a new and unfamiliar respect for children, in turn bringing a new view of children to the law which has manifested in the United States in the best interests of the child as a legal and statutory standard. This worth of children has become part of the fabric of our nation, setting us apart from many others around the world, especially the IRGC. 12 year olds should never serve in war in any capacity.