Tough question and no real easy answer. Consider your options. You could choose not to marry and when he passes, you would be free of his family and money with no one controlling you. The negative of that option is fairly obvious. Option 2, is to to marry him and be subject to his sister the trustee controlling the monies as you need them. Sounds painful but the purpose of the trustee is to protect the interests of the trustor's wishes (your partner) and not necessarily you. You as the beneficiary get the fruits of his wishes which may come with strings. But under option 1 there is no strings and no money. Unless you are financially independent, you can always go for option 3, which is to ask your partner to pick a different trustee, such as a bank or if he balks, his sister and someone close to you so as to provide a balance. You cannot blame him for wanting to accomplish two things, one, to provide for you and second to keep the reside of what you don't need within his family. This is normal. There is another option as well, and that is to have him buy a life insurance policy on his life, assuming he is insurable, payable to you. This way, if he passes prematurely, he can bequeath his fortune to his family and leave you with the life insurance proceeds. Over time, the need for insurance will go down, and the fear of the untrusting sister as trustee won't matter as much if you have insurance proceeds at your disposal.
Answered on May 29th, 2013 at 7:59 PM