Choosing Who (and How Many) Will Handle Your Estate
A common assumption in estate planning is that naming more than one person to handle an estate is automatically the safer choice.
In everyday planning, this can look like naming co-successor trustees of a trust, more than one executor of a will, or co-agents under a power of attorney.
The reasoning makes sense. It can spread responsibility, create oversight, and avoid the appearance of favoritism.
Sometimes it works.
Often, it creates complications people don’t anticipate.
When more than one decision-maker is named, actions are usually required to be taken together unless the documents clearly say otherwise. In practice, that can slow administration, complicate routine tasks, and turn straightforward decisions into points of disagreement, especially when family dynamics are involved.
What looks fair on paper doesn’t always function smoothly in real life. Disputes can delay administration and, in some cases, require mediation or court involvement, increasing both cost and stress for the family.
The intent is usually to create peace. But shared decision-making can unintentionally amplify existing sibling rivalries or family friction.
These choices deserve more thought than most people give them. Estate planning isn’t just about documents—it’s about anticipating how real people will make decisions under emotional pressure.
The goal is simple: make things easier for the people you leave behind.
