Nigella Lawson Wants Kids To Realize ‘How Lucky They Are’
 Rosie Greenway/Getty |
Update: Nigella has responded to criticism of the interview quotes, writing on her website,
"You might have noticed in the press that I have (apparently) cut my children out of my will, cruel mother that I am. Of course I have no intention of leaving my children destitute and starving — rather, this is a story that came from a comment I made about my belief that you have to work in order to learn the value of money. I have always said of my children that once they have finished university or training, whatever education they choose, they have to support themselves through work, as I did, but I have never discussed the details of my will with anyone.
The story that has been circulating is not a true reflection of my intentions and, although I’d normally ignore it, I want to set the record, not least to spare my children continuing embarrassment."
Originally posted earlier today: For celebrity chef Nigella Lawson, the only thing better than a homemade gift is one that makes her laugh. So when her daughter Cosima, 15, and husband Charles Saatchi one year got her an extendable fork with a telescopic handle, she was overjoyed. "It reaches up to two feet away and you can graciously take what you want from a distance or, even better, pinch food off other people’s plates when they’re not looking," she tells the December issue of Red magazine. Her children — which include son Bruno, 11 — were almost certainly not laughing one Christmas when Nigella made them hand over almost all their gifts to sick children at the Great Ormond Street hospital in London. "I don’t want to turn Christmas into a thing about shopping," she explains.
"I wanted them to think about how lucky they are. Of course, they roll their eyes every time I start."
That philosophy is echoed in Nigella’s stance on leaving her children an inheritance. In an earlier interview, the 48-year-old author and television host revealed that she was "determined" that her children "should have no financial security" because "it ruins people, not having to earn money." Said Nigella,
"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."
Cosima and Bruno’s father, journalist John Diamond, died of cancer in 2001; Charles is also dad to a 13-year-old daughter, Phoebe.
- Posted on Nov 3, 08 at 6:00PM
- Permalink
- 23 Comments
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:22 pm
i have a feeling this is post is going to get a lot of comments
While I think it’s a wonderful thing to teach your children compassion and caring for others, you want them to do it from their hearts, not from obligation or guilt. So, while I agree with Nigella’s premise, I don’t know if her strategy of making kids give away their gifts is the best. I wonder how her children really feel about it.
Also, I think there are many ways to teach your children the value of a dollar and the importance of working hard… without cutting them out of the inheritance.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:25 pm
While I can appreciate the ideals behind her actions, I think that it is cruel and could send the wrong message to kids to take away their presents. Their is a better way to go about giving charitably…how about having your children help you pick out gifts for sick children, as opposed to ‘re-gifting’ their presents…or teach your children that gifts do not always need to come in the form of materialistic objects.
Also, I believe that not wanting her children to inherit anything after their mother’s passing because she believes that “it ruins people, not having to earn money” should not be an issue if she is raising her children the way she is saying she does…JMO
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:30 pm
My mother is very determinedly working her way through our inheritence and I love her more for it. In her retirement she’s taken up travelling to strange places, hiking up volcanos and mountains, riding Mongolian ponies across the Steppes and all kinds of things. I think that kind of example of being happy and brave and bold and adventurous is a much better inheritance for me, my siblings and our children.
I think inheriting large slabs of money can do more harm than good if children (or adults!) haven’t also been taught a work ethic or how to deal with money responsibly. Stock markets crash, ventures fail, etc.
I do think it’s quite cruel though, to give children presents and then force them to give them away.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 pm
if I were a kid again, i’d be pretty upset on giving something
up that i’ve been waitng for a long time…but, what I would do
is make my kids give up their old toys that they don’t play
with anymore but that’s just me
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I think that Nigella obviously will leave her children an inheritance but I think she is making a point that just because she and Charles are super rich doesn’t mean that their children can automatically have it all when they die. I think this is a good attitude to have, I know my parents probably will leave the house to me and my brother but I don’t expect them to. If they end up spending everything and there is nothing left I will be just as happy. I think Nigella is saying this to make her children realise that they have to work and contribute and do something with their lives rather than relying on a big pay off from their parents. I don’t think Nigella would leave her kids with nothing, what mother would? I just think she is teaching them to go out and get it for themselves. When you are not expecting it then an inheritance is just a bonus!
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
While I strongly agree with teaching children to care for and give to those who are less fortunate and work for what they want, to say I strongly disagree with the way Nigella goes about achieving this is a major understatement. Giving children toys only to take them away to give to the less fortunate and putting the kids on a guilt trip for wanting their toys back and feeling bad about it? Are you kidding me? What lesson does that teach? Why not have them go to the toy store, pick out a few toys to give to kids in need, and drop them off somewhere where they can play with them and the kids they are giving them to? Honestly, I think what Nigella did was outright mean, not to mention counterproductive. Guilt is no way to solve inequality; it only creates resentment, which leads to more problems.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I would set up trust funds for them where they only would get so much per year. To cut them off entirely is cruel. They need to have the value of money instilled in them, not be cut off entirely.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:50 pm
I love this woman, but I do not agree with everything she does, I think that yes her children do need to realise they are lucky, and I am sure they do but I do not think the tradition of christmas should be ruined for them, yes they can give to the less fortunate, but they should also be able to be kids and enjoy their christmas, they have enough money to do both.
I agree that Christmas for most kids is about who gets the best most expensive present, but if you teach your kids values and make them realise that there are people out there that have nothing then they will grow up wonderfully instead of remembering that mum didnt get us anything we had to give all our stuff away.
And while saying that her children will not inherit anything, that is just silly, yes make your kids work, maybe tell them that they are not getting anything so they have to pull their finger out, but always leave them something, there are things that happen in the world that are unforeseeable and they may need help one day, sometimes when people say this, they give all their money to charity and sometimes to their animals, always make sure your children are looked after no matter what.
November 3rd, 2008 at 7:33 pm
I think her intentions are great, but how she is acting them out is not the best.
Instead of making kids give away toys they get for christmas, just get them fewer toys and also, as part of the christmas shopping, teach them to, for every gift they buy, to buy a toy to donate to Toys for Tots.
And set the example… let them know that for every toy you bought them, you did buy one to donate.
Another thing to do would be to give them allowances… and get them one of those banks that has them portion it out… some to save, some to spend, some for charity…
teach them to think of giving on a daily basis… and not because they have to give up their own things, but because they have more than enough and care about the community.
Teach them about WHY they need to give (before and when you give them the banks… and then reinforce it with talks after) and what people in this world are going through.
Now, as for inheritances, I think she’s doing great. Kids do need to work.
Does that mean she shouldn’t leave them ANYTHING… no… but the idea of having most of it be for her retirement or to give away to those in need when she is gone is wonderful.
She can leave her treasured possessions, things with meaning, and some money to get them a good rainy day fund or a trust fund, but then also give them a personal letter about why the rest was done the way it was.
They need to understand the act of giving and doing it from the heart and out of goodness.
November 3rd, 2008 at 7:39 pm
I respectfully beg to differ with the notion that taking the gifts exhibits cruelty on the part of Nigella. I remember how angry I always got at my mom for giving away my belongings (granted, after, not before, I’d used them) to friends, relatives, or the needy. But, now that I’m an adult, while I still sometimes wished she’d have asked, I realize it took her making that choice, mean as it seemed at the time, to get me to give anything away. Now, I think I’m not as bound to possessions, and I honestly have my mother to thank.
Annoyed as those kids may be, her actions speak louder than words, and I have no doubt she expresses her love in ways that have little to do with tangible objects.
November 3rd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I love Nigella. She’s always so prim and propper on her show and the way she explains things is utterly hilarious. I watch her show just to get a good laugh at her describing things.
As for Nigella not leaving her kids anything? Well she’s denied the report.
From Wikipedia:
“It widely began circulating in the media in early 2008 that Lawson had been quoted as saying her two children should not inherit any of the fortune. She strongly denied these plans in a statement on her personal website, which read, “Of course I have no intention of leaving my children destitute and starving – rather, this is a story that came from a comment I made about my belief that you have to work in order to learn the value of money”
November 3rd, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I do hope Dierna’s info is correct, because Nigella is able to do what she does because her parents made sure she wasn’t hurting for money. I’m also confident her late husband made sure she and their children were well-provided for.
Warren Buffett has set a good example of making sure your kids aren’t destitute, but also know the value of work.
It appears Nigella has good intentions, but goes about matters clumsily. I’m not a fan of hers.
November 3rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
I think teaching kids about the importance of saving money is the key, also about choosing a substantive livelihood. When it comes right down to it, she doesn’t HAVE to teach her kids either of these things. So whatever values of the common person which she chooses to instill is a success in my book. LOL sorry for sounding a little bitter.
November 4th, 2008 at 4:45 am
We don’t even have children yet, but have discussed this. We come from middle-class families who went through tough times – very tough times. We’ve worked for what we have and weren’t spoiled and that gives you character. We’ll tell our kids we’ll pay for half of college, should they choose to attend, but they cover the other. Of course, if they need us, we’ll help out in a pinch…but…really, leaving your kids enough money they’d never have to work and handing them money whenever they want a new purse or stereo is bad parenting.
November 4th, 2008 at 6:15 am
I understand she wants to teach her children that you have to deserve something, that they shouldn’t take everything for granted just because their mom is a celebrity, but having them hand over their Christmas gifts, that’s a bit harsh. Why not, instead, agree that no one buys each other presents one year but buy some for underprivileged children? There are ways to teach children to be respectful and thankful for what they have, but you don’t have to do it the hard way.
November 4th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Chances are the children will be grown and maybe even retired when they get (or don’t get) their inheritance. Unless she dies young (like her first husband), they’ll have to work hard because the money won’t be available when they’re in their child-raising years. Just a thought.
November 4th, 2008 at 7:23 am
I don’t think she should have taken the gifts. Maybe sitting down with them and asking them, letting them make up their own minds would have been better. If she has raised them to be kind, loving children they probably would have agreed with her, depending on their age of course.
As for not leaving them inheritance, I don’t believe her. Isn’t the reason we all work because we want our children to have better than we had, we want everything for them. I hope she doesn’t let them have millions when they turn 18 but as someone else suggested I would hope she makes plans for them to be given a reasonable amount on a yearly basis.
One of the best lessons she could give them is to teach them the fear of what it is like not knowing where you will find money to pay bills, food etc. They will probably never HAVE to experience that but if you have gone through it one you will realise how to treat the money you are lucky enough to have.
November 4th, 2008 at 8:15 am
This reminds me on the birthday party scene in MOMMY DEAREST. I do think it is cruel and uncalled for and I doubt it will teach the children anything except that their mother can not be trusted.
November 4th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Please don’t use Warren Buffet as an example of a good person. He pays less taxes than his secretary for a reason. He’s sneaky with his money. He loves the death tax because he makes money off of children having to sell off their families’ businesses to pay the taxes resulting in their parents’ deaths. What does that teach his children? We’re super rich so less take advantage of the barely rich.
I personally think that Nigella raises her kids this way for a particular reason. She’s seen how kids raised with wealth can end up and wants to avoid it in her children. Also inheritance is like welfare for rich people. It can make them lazy and she wants to avoid that. I say good for her. We don’t need more Paris Hiltons in the world.
November 4th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Nigella denies ever having said any of that stuff:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-511887/Nigella-Lawson-hits-claims-plans-cut-children-will.html
November 4th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Eh, I’m not going to take this at face value. Every parent has a reason for what they do with their children. They do what they think is best and only they know how their children will react to something. I doubt she takes the presents away from them every year but they may have been acting quite spoiled that year and decided to make a very solid point.
As for inheritance, my kids won’t be getting anything until they turn 28, later if I failed to raise them to realize the value of money and that not everyone is as fortunate to be left anything.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I really just think the key is balance…going overboard in either direction isn’t a good thing. There are some celebrity children that I worry will never ever have to want for anything and grow up completely spoiled and entitled. But then at the same time, I don’t think you have to make your children give away their Christmas presents to learn that it’s not all about money.
As far as inhertances go, I think the ideal would be to leave some money to your children (depending on how well off they are — some people don’t need the money), to spend a good chunk on enjoying the later years of your life, and donate any remainder to charity.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
why is this even being posted here now? I read this interview on the Daily Mail website over a month ago, or something. Weird!