I know it sounds creepy, but because a few bad apples made it so. Most people operate this way quite normally.
The obstacle with trusts where a trustee is named for a minor child is that none of the funds can be used for any other purpose other than the child and the specified uses. (Unless you have a very detailed trust, identifying uses for the money--and in all likelihood, if there is a divorce in the middle, I doubt this is highly likely for the average bear.)
This can be really short sighted, especially if the child is very young and cannot access the funds for years. Meanwhile, the family needs income to sustain itself.
For example, what if an uninsured driver totals mom's car? The funds cannot be used to purchase her a minivan so she can perform her job duties as mom.
Trusts are usually boilerplate, and unless you actually sit down to negotiate where and when the funds can be used, you might find it vague enough that it's not worth the paper it's written on.
I realize that there are a few dangerous ex-spouses out there who would love to take out the ex and have access to the proceeds of a terrific life insurance policy. But LNL's H doesn't sound bright enough to pull that off. And face it, he'd have to step up to the plate and accept full responsibility for their D and her care. My guess is that he wouldn't want the job. Therefore, she's a lot more valuable alive than dead...
LNL--Sorry for the grim commentary! I just felt I had to point out the obvious. You're worth your weight in gold!
Betsey
"There are only 2 ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle."
Betsey 
