In many instances, the answer is "no," Colpitts says.
"They don't want their children to feel a sense of entitlement," she says. "I think they feel like if things had been easier for them, they might not have tried so hard."
But giving money to charity instead of family comes at a cost, says Jules Haas, a New York City-based estate attorney. When people cut out their heirs, it means any good that may have come from that money, as it was passed on to future generations, will never be known because the money was diverted away from the family.
"It's like pinching a vein," Haas says.
Not everyone is actually seeing the trend. Meg Goldstein, an estate attorney with Poyner Spruill LLP in Charlotte, N.C., says she still thinks it's relatively uncommon for parents to not leave the bulk of their wealth to their children. She believes 80% to 90% of most wealthy individuals still give their money to their kids.
"I think parents, wealthy or not, see their children as their charities. And they're going to take care of their families, above all others," Goldstein says. "Maybe some are disappointed when their children are spendthrifts, or not developing good business acumen, or maybe they've become couch potatoes. But there has to be a huge wedge for a parent to disinherit a child. I've had a few of those, but they're rare."