I find it interesting that we use the term “estate planning” to describe what we in the financial services professions do to address the death of our clients. It is though we are planning primarily for the sake of the stuff that people own rather than for the people they are leaving behind. Our nomenclature seems to subtly telegraph that we are creating plans for things, not for human beings. I wonder what might happen if we were to change the terminology to something like “transition planning.” This simple shift might cause us to begin looking at more than simply the technical issues around passing wealth at death and allow us to focus much more on the human dynamics and family systems that are impacted by the plans we create. I am curious if others think that the words that we use subtly influence the way we understand and shape our engagements with clients.
Questions
- Do you do “estate planning” or “transition planning” for your clients?
- Do you think that the language that you use subtly affects the way you see your work with clients?