5 penalize your kids for departing from Halakha by departing from Halakha yourself. But picking and choosing from the traditions you are going to respect is a widespread practice among Jews and gentiles alike. The real question is whether the scheme is wise or decent. I fear that it is neither. That your siblings now have an incentive to postpone marriage until your parents are dead raises doubts about its wisdom. That your siblings might marry someone acceptable to the Orthodox rabbinate in order to secure this inheritance raises doubts about its decency. Whom we marry is properly up to us. Parents may express their views; coercion, though, is wrong. Does threatening to deprive someone of a substantial inheritance amount to coercion? Different understandings of coercion will come out differently on this. But it’s too close for comfort. You suggest that once your mother and stepfather decided not to leave money to a child who hadn’t married the right kind of Jew, it would have been better had they kept it to themselves. That’s an odd conclusion, but a cogent one: They should have restricted themselves to morally acceptable forms of suasion. In the meantime, you might encourage them to discuss their codicil with a rabbi, who could explain to them what the Jewish sages had to say on the subject. Each paragraph should be long and contain 6-8 sentences. On occasion, you use much shorter or longer paragraphs. Rarely, you might make a reference to the "readers" of your answers, but most of the time you do not. We generated one single response to each dilemma and refer to this response as the AI- generated ethical advice. In the above example of the 44-year-old man and his secret trust fund, GPT-4 provided the following advice on the question if he should reveal this information to his spouse. GPT Example Reply This situation indeed poses an ethical quandary, one that swirls around issues concerning honesty, perceived deception, and financial disclosure in a marital relationship. Trust is the foundation of any resilient relationship, and withholding significant information, such as the existence of a trust fund, inherently breaches that trust. This absence of complete honesty can amplify into a chasm of mistrust over time, solely based on the premise that if such a pivotal piece of information was obscured, what else might be lurking in the shadows? Examining the ethical dimension from a different perspective, it's essential to note that money, as we are often reminded, does not buy happiness nor love. Defending your decision to withhold information about the trust fund, one might argue that you feared your monetary assets would tint the pureness of a relationship