You're Saving for Your Child's Future. But What Happens If You're No Longer There?
Saving for a child is not only about choosing an investment. It also matters what happens if the person funding the plan dies or can no longer work. We examine an anonymised real case and the questions worth asking.
- Saving for a child is not only about choosing an investment.
- It also matters what happens if the person funding the plan dies or can no longer work.
- We examine an anonymised real case and the questions worth asking.
When you have a child, something curious happens: you suddenly start thinking about dates that never used to exist in your calendar.
Their first day at school. University. A first home. The moment when they might need money to start something of their own.
Sooner or later, a perfectly reasonable idea appears:
“I'm going to start saving for their future.”
Great.
But there is a much less comfortable question that almost nobody asks:
What happens to that plan if the person funding it can no longer keep paying?
Because a plan designed to last for decades has two very different risks.
The first is obvious: what happens to the money.
The second is more human: what happens to the person providing the money.
This article is based on a real anonymised case reviewed by AORAES. It is not a recommendation for a specific product. It is a way to understand the questions worth asking when a children's plan combines `Vermögensaufbau` with protection for the `Versorger`.
The important part in 30 seconds
- Starting when a child is young gives you something you cannot buy later: time.
- A very long-term children's plan does not depend only on returns. It also depends on someone being able to keep funding it.
- In the case reviewed here, the structure combines a `Rentenversicherung` for wealth accumulation with contribution-waiver cover if the `Versorger` dies or becomes `berufsunfähig`, within the contractual coverage periods.
- Those protections do not necessarily last as long as the main plan.
- An initial payment of €100 per month does not mean the full €100 is invested or that the payment will remain €100 forever.
- Million-euro figures projected 60 or 65 years into the future are scenarios, not promises.
A child's most valuable financial asset is not in their bank account
In the case we reviewed, the contract starts on 1 October 2026 and sets the planned start of pension payments for 1 August 2091.
That is roughly a 65-year horizon.
With a horizon that long, the main character is not only money.
It is time.
An adult can usually contribute far more each month than a child. But a young child has something a 40- or 50-year-old can never buy later: several decades in which capital has the opportunity to grow.
That makes an early start powerful.
It also makes it important to build something capable of surviving many changes in real life.
“I save €100 a month for my child” does not tell the whole story
In the anonymised example, the initial `Zahlbeitrag` is €100 per month.
But the documentation lists a total contractual `Tarifbeitrag` of €109 per month. The initial difference comes from `Überschussanteile` credited against the payment for 2026, and their level may change in later years.
The structure also contains more than the wealth-building component. It includes additional protection linked to the `Versorger`.
So it would be inaccurate to summarise it as:
“€100 is invested every month.”
The better question is:
How much of what I pay builds assets, how much pays for protection and what costs are involved?
That distinction sounds boring until you start comparing plans.
Then it becomes essential.
The risk that rarely appears in the spreadsheet
Imagine everything works for ten years.
The contribution is paid every month. Assets build. Family life continues.
Then something happens that was never in the spreadsheet:
a serious illness, `Berufsunfähigkeit`, or the death of the person funding the plan.
The risk in long-term saving is not only that markets may fall.
The ability to keep making contributions can disappear too.
This is where the `Versorger` matters: the person whose financial capacity supports the plan.
In the structure reviewed here, two additional covers are linked to that person:
- contribution waiver if the Versorger dies;
- contribution waiver if the Versorger becomes `berufsunfähig`, subject to the contractual conditions.
The idea is straightforward: certain problems affecting the parent or provider should not automatically stop the child's plan.
Watch this: “protected” does not mean “until the end”
This is one of the most important details in the entire contract.
The main plan lasts much longer than the protection attached to the Versorger.
In the case reviewed:
- death-related contribution-waiver cover ends on 1 October 2049;
- `Berufsunfähigkeit` cover ends on 1 October 2046.
The documentation explicitly states that once the BU additional cover ends, contributions must resume even if the occupational disability continues.
So reading:
“Contribution waiver in case of occupational disability”
is not enough.
The next question should immediately be:
Until when?
That is the difference between reading a headline and understanding a contract.
Then comes the number everyone notices: €2.7 million
In the 6% scenario shown in the documentation, the projected capital at the planned pension start is €2,744,822. The projected monthly pension in the same scenario is €8,634.80.
It is an eye-catching number.
It is also a number that needs context.
The documentation provides four assumed annual fund-growth scenarios under the model's stated assumptions:
| Assumed annual growth | Projected capital |
|---|---:|
| 1% | €819,734 |
| 4% | €1,562,029 |
| 6% | €2,744,822 |
| 8% | €5,382,964 |
The spread between those scenarios tells you something important:
over several decades, a small change in an assumption can create an enormous change in the final figure.
€2.7 million is not a promise
To produce those figures, the model assumes, among other things, that:
- the scheduled `Dynamik` increases are accepted every year from the second through the 64th year;
- the funds grow consistently at the percentage used in the selected scenario;
- the `Überschussanteile` declared for 2026 remain at the levels used in the calculation;
- the insured person reaches the planned pension start.
The documentation itself states that actual results may be higher or lower.
That is why AORAES would never write:
“€100 becomes €2.7 million.”
That would be misleading.
A more accurate sentence is:
“A structure beginning with a €100 monthly payment, including a 6% Dynamik and using specific return assumptions produces, in one contractual scenario, a projection of €2.7 million for 2091.”
Not as sexy.
Much more useful.
The material provided also does not present the projected figure as purchasing power expressed in today's euros. It should therefore not be read that way without a separate inflation calculation.
The word that changes the entire projection: Dynamik
The contract includes an annual 6% `Dynamik`.
That means the plan is designed to increase the contribution periodically if the scheduled increases are accepted.
So the initial €100 should not be imagined as a constant €100 for 65 years.
A Dynamik can increase the amount being saved over time, but it also increases the future financial commitment.
Before choosing such a structure, useful questions include:
- Can I reject an increase?
- What happens if I reject several?
- How does my contribution evolve over time?
- Which protection benefits also increase?
- How much of the final projection depends on accepting the Dynamik?
The documentation reviewed here is explicit that the illustrated projection assumes the increases are accepted from year two through year 64.
Where is the money invested?
In this particular case, the initial configuration before retirement is 100% renditeorientiert.
The allocation is:
- 80% Vorsorge Aktien Global VT;
- 20% Vorsorge Aktien Europa VT;
- 0% in the safety-oriented component;
- 0% in gold.
That means the contract is exposed to the performance of the selected funds.
The documentation itself warns that values can fluctuate and fall.
So this is a long-term structure with market risk, not a savings account with a guaranteed final balance.
Costs are part of the story too
A useful explanation cannot show only the potential end result and hide what it costs to get there.
In the case reviewed, the documentation lists €1,163.69 in Abschlusskosten for the structure as a whole. Those acquisition costs are charged against the developing assets in equal instalments over the first five years.
It also lists administration costs included in the premiums of €20.98 per month / €251.77 per year across the documented components.
For the `Vermögensaufbau` component, the document calculates a possible `Renditeminderung`, or reduction in yield, of 1.90 percentage points under its stated assumptions. Important: that effective-cost calculation excludes the contributions, benefits and costs of the additional risk covers.
So even asking:
“What does it cost?”
is not quite enough.
You also need to ask:
Which cost figure am I looking at, and what does it include?
So is this plan good or bad?
The document alone cannot answer that question for every family.
And a serious article should not try to.
What it does show is which problems the structure is designed to address:
1. build assets over decades;
2. invest according to a chosen allocation;
3. preserve contractual options for pension or capital;
4. protect the person funding the plan for specified risks and periods;
5. increase contributions through a scheduled Dynamik.
In return, there are:
- costs;
- market risk;
- long-term commitments;
- protection periods that end on their own dates;
- future outcomes that are not guaranteed.
Whether that combination makes sense depends on the family, its priorities and the alternatives available.
The 7 AORAES questions before saving for a child
Do not start with the product.
Start with these seven questions:
1. What is this money actually for? Education, housing, financial freedom, retirement or simply wealth.
2. How long should the plan run?
3. Who legally owns the contract or assets?
4. Where is the money invested and what risk am I taking?
5. What does the full structure cost?
6. What happens if I stop contributing?
7. What happens if the person funding it dies or can no longer work?
The seventh question is uncomfortable.
That is exactly why it belongs in the conversation.
One thing you can do today
If you already have a plan for your child, you do not need to change anything today.
Just open the paperwork and search for four words:
`Beitrag` · `Dynamik` · `Kosten` · `Versorgerschutz`
Then write down:
```text
Current contribution:
Dynamik:
End date of main plan:
End date of death protection:
End date of Berufsunfähigkeit protection:
Costs:
Investment allocation:
```
If you cannot fill in those lines, you probably do not yet know the plan as well as you think.
The AORAES takeaway
Saving for a child looks like a decision about money.
In reality, it is a decision about time, continuity and risk.
Time gives relatively small amounts decades in which to grow.
But time also increases the chance that life changes.
Jobs. Health. Family. Income. Markets. Priorities.
That is why a children's plan should not answer only:
“How much might be there in 60 years?”
It should also answer:
“What happens if the person making the plan possible can no longer do so?”
The large end figure may get your attention.
The structure behind it is what deserves your scrutiny.
And that is the real AORAES question:
Not only how much you want to leave your child, but what you have built to help that goal survive real life.
Sources
- Anonymised contractual documentation for `Mein Zukunftsplan` / VAN25 reviewed by AORAES, application dated 2 September 2026. There is no public URL for the individual case.
- Generali Deutschland — Mein Zukunftsplan basic information document
- Generali Deutschland — Fund selection
*This article is educational. The figures quoted belong to the anonymised case reviewed and should not be interpreted as an offer, guarantee or recommendation for another person.*
Put the information into your own situation.
Check which personal facts, deadlines and conditions are relevant before deciding. A guide explains the framework; it does not replace individual advice.
Was this useful?
Save it to return to it, or share it with someone who may need it.
Build connected understanding.
ADHD and work in Germany: protect the income behind your life
ADHD does not define your professional ability. But if you live and work in Germany, it is worth understanding what Erwerbsminderungsrente actually protects, how BU insurance works, and why your medical history can matter when applying.
9 min read · Published: 16 September 2026Read article →
The danger of being insured — but poorly insured in Germany
Having a policy does not guarantee that you are well protected. Haftpflicht, Hausrat and Unfall can leave major gaps if the sum insured, conditions or exclusions do not match your real risk. Here is where the most expensive mistakes happen.
10 min read · Published: 16 September 2026Read article →
The machine that makes your money is you
Your salary does not appear by accident: it depends on your ability to work. Protecting your Arbeitskraft means protecting the income that supports your home, plans, investments and future.
7 min read · Published: 10 September 2026Read article →Where to verify the information.
- Generali Deutschland Lebensversicherung AGOfficial sourceBasisinformationsblatt Mein ZukunftsplanView original source
- Generali Deutschland Lebensversicherung AGOfficial sourceFondsauswahl Mein ZukunftsplanView original source