I know it's not exactly basketball season, but the NBA playoffs just finished two month ago. I'm generally sick and tired of professional basketball, I still watch the playoffs once in a while.

At first, when instant replay became a "big thing" in sports, I thought it might be OK. Maybe it would fix a few really bad calls, like being out of bounds, that could affect the game. But now it is out of control. Now players are crying for a replays on everything, including foul calls. That drives me crazy.

One of the main signals to initiate a replay is when the coach or the players, start twirling their finger in the air, which is the signal that they want a replay. Sometimes it's just plain ridiculous. A player will get called for a foul and jump up twirling their finger adamantly screaming that they didn't foul. They jump up and down like a baby. Then the TV broadcast shows the replay of the guy shooting the ball; the defender swipes both arms of the shooter, follows through hitting the guy upside the head and finally knocks him over with is body. And for some odd reason he didn't realize that was a foul. Are you kidding me?

Now we are seeing more of that same mentality showing up in farm estate planning. Mom and Dad outline their distribution plan. The rules are in place with legal documents. Then, after mom or dad or the survivor pass away, some of the heirs start running around twirling their finger and jumping up and down because they don't like the call. Well, nobody's asking if you like the call. The bigger question is your respect for the person who made the call. You don't have to agree with it. In fact, in some situations maybe nobody is even asking your opinion. Some of you have even heard of some parents who have even anticipated the estate version of the finger twirl and consequently had their attorney put language in their documents noting that if anyone contests or challenges their distribution plan, give them a dollar.

Unfortunately, as time goes on, I'm starting to observe a younger generation of attorneys as well. I believe most attorneys in the older generation would've completely respected the plan outlined by the deceased asset owner, and even if they represented one of the non-farming heirs, they would have said, "Well that's what your mom and dad wanted," and left it at that. But now that we have a new generation of estate beneficiaries and attorneys who are more than happy to jump into the mix fighting for non-farming heirs. Why? They know that estate values are large, and they're hoping to get a percentage of the settlement. Of course they never knew the decision makers or why they made the decisions they made. They just have an opinion that something is not right. Even though they should never win, the battle will cost money and create some long-lasting hard feelings and turmoil in the family.

So, what is the solution? Maybe it's time to go back and look at the strategies you implemented for distribution and confirm with your attorney that they are watertight and clearly identify any opening in the door, because that may be an opportunity for someone to kick the door wide open after your death.

So, does communicating your plan to them ahead of time insulate the plan? Not necessarily. In fact, I've seen situations where once children have found out about the plan, they not only make their parents miserable during their lifetime but they also begin developing a strategy to defeat the plan after a death. It always makes me nervous when I hear someone say, "It should be alright," "I think it'll be OK," "I don't think anybody will bother with that," "I don't think our kids will fight."

Well, well, well ... consider yourself warned.