|
Thursday | June 8, 2000
| ||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Making a will
THE BACKLOG of 50,000 cases at the Administrator General's Department (AGD), some going back for decades, should encourage everyone to make a will. The shameful inefficiency of the Department, which has been recently given executive agency status, is a disgrace upon the Government. But that having been said, there would be far less pressure on the antiquated AGD if people took a little time and effort to make a will. The core business of the Department is to administer the allocation of the estate of persons dying intestate, leaving children under 18 years. There have been a number of high-profile cases of persons dying without making a will, leaving large, complex estates in the ponderous hand of the AGD. But large numbers of ordinary Jamaicans are failing to make wills for reasons ranging from the fear that if they make a will they are calling down death, to secrecy about their assets, and not knowing how to make a will. A will is nothing more than a written statement of a person's wishes for the disposal of legally owned personal property after death. The statement is made legally binding by the signatures of two witnesses. Another angle to the widespread failure to make wills, which the AGD must take into consideration as it embarks upon a planned public education campaign, is the poor sense of responsibility among so many Jamaicans to pass on a legacy, however small, to the next generation and to secure the welfare of dependents after death. This negative attitude carries a huge developmental cost for the country and is amply demonstrated in the widespread scatter-shot approach to having and raising children. A puzzling aspect of the non-performance of the AGD, which has led to successful lawsuits against the agency for delinquency, is the fact that it is able to invest some $400 million annually in government securities. The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.
|
|
||||