Could a seemingly perfect will drafted by artificial intelligence in Finland lead to a family feud and nullify your final wishes? Finnish tax and legal consultant Bettina Miettinen is raising urgent alarms after encountering a troubling new trend over recent months. She reveals that Finns have begun creating their own wills using AI services, a practice that carries significant legal risks due to the technology's inability to correctly handle Finland's complex inheritance legislation.
Miettinen reports that these AI-generated wills can appear legitimate and proper at first glance. However, a closer reading reveals dangerous contradictions and problematic clauses. In one recent case, a mutual will for a married couple contained a critical conflict. 'It first stipulated that inherited property could not be sold,' Miettinen explains. 'Then, in the very next clause, it stated that the property could be sold. The client had apparently read the clauses quickly and hadn't paid attention to the contradiction.' This type of error is fundamental, she notes, because if full ownership rights are granted over an asset, that right cannot subsequently be restricted.
Fundamental Legal Flaws and Form Errors
The problems identified by Miettinen go beyond simple contradictions. She points to serious deficiencies in meeting the formal requirements for a legally valid will in Finland. 'There have been shortcomings in the formal requirements,' she states, noting that witnesses have been missing from these AI-drafted documents. Furthermore, the wills often lack a crucial declaration revoking any previous testaments. Without this, multiple conflicting wills could exist, creating immense legal confusion for heirs and executors.
One of the most severe errors involves the legal rights of statutory heirs, known as 'rintaperilliset' under Finnish law. 'It has been incorrectly stipulated that statutory heirs have no right to claim their compulsory portion,' Miettinen says. 'This stipulation is not in accordance with the Inheritance Code.' The Finnish Inheritance Code protects certain close relatives, like children and spouses, guaranteeing them a compulsory share of the estate regardless of what a will says. An AI cannot navigate this nuanced legal protection correctly. While a testator can express a wish that a statutory heir not claim their share, they cannot legally strip them of that right.
Why These Errors Render Wills Invalid
The combination of contradictory provisions and failure to meet formal requirements has a dire consequence: the will becomes legally invalid. 'The formal requirements are important,' Miettinen emphasizes. 'The absence of witnesses also means the will is invalid, even if the testator has signed it themselves.' Under Finnish law, a standard holographic will typically requires two disinterested witnesses to be present at the signing, verifying the testator's identity and sound mind. An AI cannot provide this human, legal safeguard.
If a will is deemed invalid, it cannot fulfill the deceased's final wishes. The estate would then be distributed according to the default rules of the Inheritance Code, which may be entirely different from what the person intended. This can lead to family disputes, unintended beneficiaries, and lengthy probate processes. 'For that very reason, we want to bring this matter to people's attention,' Miettinen stresses, 'because an AI-drawn will can look right and valid, even though in reality it is not.'
The Rise of DIY Legal Planning and Its Pitfalls
The trend toward using AI for will creation fits into a broader pattern of do-it-yourself legal and financial planning, often driven by a desire to save on professional fees. Online templates and chatbots promise a quick, cheap, and private solution for end-of-life planning. However, estate law, particularly in a jurisdiction like Finland with its specific Inheritance Code and formalities, is a minefield for the untrained and for generalized artificial intelligence. An AI model trained on a global or US-centric dataset will not accurately apply the nuances of Finnish statutory heir rights, community property rules for spouses, or the exact witness requirements for document validity.
Miettinen's cases demonstrate that the technology is currently generating a convincing facade of legality without the substantive correctness needed for such a vital document. The language may be formal and the structure may mimic a real will, but the embedded legal instructions are flawed. This creates a false sense of security for individuals who may not seek a professional review, believing they have adequately sorted their affairs.
Expert Recommendation for Securing Your Legacy
Given these risks, Miettinen offers clear advice for anyone considering using digital tools for estate planning. 'If someone decides to draft their will using AI, they should also give it to an expert for review,' she recommends. A qualified legal professional, such as a lawyer or specialized consultant, can check the document for compliance with the Inheritance Code, ensure all formalities are correctly outlined, and verify that the instructions are logically consistent and executable.
This expert review serves as a critical safety net. It transforms a risky DIY attempt into a safer, hybrid approach where technology might aid in drafting initial thoughts, but human expertise guarantees legal soundness. 'It is important that the will-maker's final wishes are carried out correctly,' Miettinen concludes. The stakes for getting a will right are simply too high to trust to an algorithm that cannot understand the full weight of Finnish law or the personal complexities of a family's dynamics. As AI tools become more pervasive, this warning from Finnish experts serves as a crucial reminder that some decisions require irreplaceable human judgment and professional accountability, especially when your legacy is on the line.