KEY POINTS:
A woman who claims her father raped her and abused young family members was forced into a legal battle with Save the Children after he left the bulk of his fortune to the charity.
The man left his family less than 10 per cent of a $715,000 estate.
The woman, 60, alleged her father raped her 30 years ago, molested her sister when she was young and also abused his granddaughter.
She suffers from a debilitating muscle-wasting disease and lives on a disability benefit.
The woman was left $5000 in her father's will after his death in December 2005.
Seven of his nine grandchildren, a 20-year-old son from another relationship and four friends also received $5000 each.
The balance of $650,000 was willed to Save the Children, which works to change children's lives for the better.
It raised more than $10 million in the 2005 financial year.
A family member told the Weekend Herald that the man never financially supported any charity and left the bulk of his estate to Save the Children "out of sheer spite".
The daughter, her two children and another two of the man's grandchildren suffer from the same genetic disease.
She challenged the will because the money would "release them from financial burdens because they are living on welfare", the family member said.
The challenge was filed last July and this week Save the Children was awarded just $56,666 of the $715,000.
Executive director John Bowis would not discuss the case yesterday.
"I think it's a private matter with the estate. I'm not prepared to comment," he said.
In an affidavit supporting her claim, the woman said she had a "very difficult relationship" with her father and described an incident where he raped her at age 30.
She further alleged she caught him molesting her sister when the girl was 7.
Many years later, the woman said, she discovered her father and brother had abused her own daughter.
A complaint was never laid with police and the father was never charged but the woman's brother was convicted of abusing his own daughter and jailed in the late 1980s.
The woman described a difficult childhood where she and her siblings were made to dig drains, paint buildings and do maintenance work for their father.
Another children's charity, ChildFund New Zealand, said the case raised an interesting moral question.
National director Paul Brown said ChildFund once had a family challenge a bequest but the matter was dealt with by the Public Trust. ChildFund did not become involved but in the end the charity received the full bequest, Mr Brown said.
"I guess we respect the wishes of the donor or sponsor, in terms of how they can leave a legacy to create a better world. I'm not sure it would be for us to judge how that person has lived their life, but it's a really difficult situation in terms of what that person's done in their life and what it means for family and other persons included in their estate."
ChildFund had a policy on donations from corporations, and would not accept money from a company involved in the manufacture of arms and ammunition.
"Again, it's very hard for us to criticise a person and how they've lived their life if they've offered to create a better life for children in need once they've actually passed away."
Mr Brown said ChildFund would want to take into account what a family needed and not insist on the letter of the law.
