Nigella Bites: "I will Not Be Leaving My Kids A Penny" !

  1. [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    Doting mother: Nigella poses with son Bruno (right) Mimi Diamond (centre) and Mr Saatchi's daughter from a previous marriage, Phoebe (left)

    [​IMG]
    Nigella's husband Charles Saatchi disagrees with her view that their children should not receive a large inheritance

    As the daughter of a former Conservative chancellor, Nigella Lawson knows a thing or two about privileged upbringing.


    But when it comes to raising her own children, the celebrity chef clearly believes in tough love.
    She shares an estimated wealth of more than £110million with her husband, the marketing guru Charles Saatchi, and has a £7million London home.
    However, Miss Lawson says she will leave none of it to her offspring.
    It is not a decision with which her husband agrees.

    Mr Saatchi, 64, is adamant that the children should be allowed to inherit the couple's wealth - and the subject causes more than a little discord between them, according to Miss Lawson.
    Mr Saatchi has one daughter, 12-year-old Phoebe from his first marriage.

    Miss Lawson, 48, has two children, 13-year-old daughter Cosima and son Bruno, 11, from her marriage to the late journalist John Diamond.
    Asked what she hoped the children would learn from her, Miss Lawson told the magazine My Weekly: "To know that I am working and that you have to work in order to earn money.
    "I am determined that my children should have no financial security. It ruins people not having to earn money.

    "I argue with my husband Charles, because he believes that you should be able to leave money to your children.
    "I think we'll have to agree to disagree." Miss Lawson has not said what she would rather do with the couple's fortune, although she has worked closely with cancer charities after her mother, sister and first husband died of the disease.


    The daughter of Nigel Lawson and Vanessa Salmon, a socialite and heiress to the Lyons Corner House empire, Miss Lawson married Mr Saatchi soon after her first husband died.
    She moved into his Belgravia mansion shortly afterwards.
    In 1998, she became a household name with the publication of her first cookery book How To Eat.


    Since then she has sold more than three million books, including How To Be A Domestic Goddess.
    Her most recent cookery show, Nigella Express, drew up to 3.2million viewers an episode.
    However, while other celebrity chefs such as Gordon Ramsay and Jamie Oliver learned their trade in restaurant kitchens, Miss Lawson took a more glamorous route.
    She attended Oxford University, although, by her own admission-she failed at school, and was made a deputy editor at the Sunday Times newspaper at 26.
    She then became a freelance writer and food critic.
    She is no stranger to the luxury lifestyle. She favours Vivienne Westwood dresses, Taittinger champagne and celebrity beauticians.
    In 1995, Miss Lawson was sacked from presenting a show on Talk Radio for being at odds with the show's "common touch" after revealing she employed people to do her shopping.

    Mr Saatchi is one of the country's richest men. He and his brother Maurice set up their first advertising company in 1976, then set up the marketing company, M&C Saatchi in 1995.
    It is believed that Charles is worth at least £100million. The brothers are said to be worth £231million, according to the Sunday Times Rich List, which includes Charles's multi-million pound modern art collection. Miss Lawson is thought to be worth about £15million

    By Simon Cable..Of The Dailymail
     
  2. well, that is the most retarded idea IMO. not leaving your children a thing? so what are you working for?

    and with good health and luck, she could live to be 98!! her children will already [hopefully] have already established careers and family. so they would have known what its like to work. smh
     
  3. I understand where she is coming from - it's very clear kids being brought up with money easily accessible dont do all that well sometimes.. but I think she should consider at least leaving them a healthy amount i.e enough for a house to get settled in, they they can start a career.
     
  4. I absolutely understand where she's coming from. If her kids grow up knowing that they're not going to be trustafarians, they'll be prepared to work hard instead of waiting around for mom to croak to get some cash.

    I mean, if you knew you were going to inherit $100 Million, how many people would go out & get a 9-5 job and work hard? Very few.

    And who knows, maybe after they establish themselves, and she sees that they're responsible adults instead leeches a la Paris Hilton, maybe she will change the will? They aren't set in stone.

    My Mom and I had this conversation about wills two years ago. She said she'd rather take me on a nice vacation every year of her life rather than leave me money & I agree. So far we've been to Ireland & on a cruise & this year we're going to Key West for 10 days. I'd rather have hundreds of photos of us having fun together than money to remember her by.

    I find the whole idea of making a profit on a dead family member all kinds of gross.
     
  5. Even Bill Gates is leaving his children just enough money to live comfortably, not luxuriously. I'm sure Nigella's husband has trusts already set up for them with or without her knowledge.
     
  6. Bill Gates is doing something similar. His kids will get trust funds but won't get the bulk of his fortune. That's going to his Foundation.
     
  7. Very well said. I think that she's just trying to teach her kids that they need to make smart choices and do the right thing- as in go to school, get a degree, be able to pay for themselves. I see nothing wrong with it.

    I agree about the dead profit thing too. It is a bit creepy when you think of it.

    Maybe my family is weird, but nobody is left money. Sure, some of the older people didn't have much to pass, if anything, but more recent people that have died just passed on possessions and donated money to charity. These aren't super wealthy people either, just normal, working people that saved and didn't want it to go to relatives. My great uncle left almost everything to the Humane Society.
     
  8. um. im sorry but the first line in the article listed how SHE grew up wealthy. and her kids are growing up wealthy. so wheres the logic? show them privileged lives, then throw them out with no money or true direction? the whole working hard for money thing can be learned two ways: one ur forced into it, or your raised with hard working parents and learn from example. i think the problem with trust fund babies you see in the news is not the fact that they have trust funds. its because they had bad parents.
     
  9. I remember seeing on oprah a long time ago how Warren Buffet the#2 riches man in the U.S.A isn't leaving his fortune either. He apparently has a philosphy that he has paid for there education and it is now there turn to carve out there own space in this world. I think it's a great concept, imagine having the freedom to get a good education and NOT having to worry about paying it back than go and do what it is you want with that education. Think about it if you at 27yrs old didn't have an $80,000 school tab looming over your head! People should not feel "intitled"

    On a side note the girl that went on oprah was apparently the grandaughter of WB, She said he paid for her education and she is now a artist and a home orginizer for a wealthy family but has no health insurance, He on the other hand is angry I guess from this interview and has come out saying she isn't even his real grandaughter but a daughter of his sons first marriage that belongs to his sons ex-wife. I guess he wants her to stop saying that he is her grandpa and use her biological last name. yikes!

    I just think if you provide for your child, food clothing, education you are giving them the right tools to do something for themselves! NO ONE should get a free ride!!
     
  10. I understand where she's coming from but... I still have to disagree with her. I don't think she should leave her entire fortune to her kids because THAT would ruin them for sure~ But leaving them just a small amount wouldn't hurt
     
  11. She WILL leave her children with something. I very much doubt that she will not leave them anything at all, she was probably just trying to make a point or something.
     
  12. ^ Yeah.

    I don't have a problem with her not leaving them much. And I don't have a problem with those that leave their children with a lot.

    I'm sure her kids are going to have the best education and experiences. And maybe good morals and values instilled in them, maybe she feels that's enough for them to make their own way in life?
     
  13. Yikes! I would never do that, perhaps the money should come with conditions...like graduating university, etc. I don't agree with leaving them with nothing.
     
  14. I have never been a fan of hers...she just seems really kooky/eccentric. I agree, its good to make sure your kids are educated/work for a living, but to leave them with nothing? Thats kinda mean..
     
  15. I agree that this is a good decision. She knows her kids better than anyone.