Verify Family Can Access Bitcoin
Verifying Family Can Actually Follow Recovery Steps
This memo is published by CustodyStress, an independent Bitcoin custody stress test that produces reference documents for individuals, families, and professionals.
Intention Versus Capability
A bitcoin holder wants family members to access their bitcoin if something happens to them. They leave instructions, materials, or both. Time passes. The question surfaces: can the family actually do this? The phrase "verify family can access bitcoin" points to a gap between intention and demonstrated capability. Intention exists. Verification does not.
This assessment considers the difference between assuming family access works and having evidence it works. Most holders leave something behind for family members—a letter, a seed phrase, a location hint. Whether that something translates to actual access remains untested. The family's ability to execute remains a matter of faith rather than observation.
Intention Versus Capability
The holder intends for family to have access. This intention produces actions: writing down information, storing materials, perhaps having a conversation. The actions feel complete. The holder believes the job is done.
Capability is different from intention. Capability means the family member can physically and mentally execute the recovery. They can find the materials. They can understand the instructions. They can follow the steps. They can handle the technology. Each requirement is separate. Each can fail independently.
The holder's intention does not create the family member's capability. The two exist in different minds and different skill sets. What seems obvious to the holder may be incomprehensible to the family member. What the holder considers complete may omit steps the family member would need explained.
This gap between intention and capability is invisible to the holder. They see what they left behind. They imagine a family member using it. The imagination fills in gaps that the reality would expose. The holder pictures success because they understand their own system. The family member would approach it as a stranger.
What Family Members Face
A family member attempting bitcoin recovery faces multiple unknowns at once. They may not know what a seed phrase is. They may not know what a hardware wallet does. They may not know the difference between a PIN and a passphrase. Each piece of terminology represents a concept they must learn under stress.
The family member approaches the situation from a position the holder cannot easily imagine. The holder lives inside their custody system. They know what each piece is and how it connects. The family member stands outside, looking at objects and words that carry no inherent meaning.
Emotional conditions compound technical confusion. The family member may be grieving. They may be managing an estate with many other demands. They may be dealing with time pressure from legal processes or financial needs. Learning bitcoin custody under these conditions differs from learning it leisurely.
The holder's instructions assume a baseline the family member may not have. "Use the seed phrase to restore the wallet" assumes the reader knows what restoring a wallet means. "Enter the PIN to unlock the device" assumes the reader knows which device and where the PIN is stored. Each instruction contains buried assumptions about knowledge the family member may lack.
The Difference Between Leaving and Verifying
Leaving materials is not the same as verifying access. Leaving creates potential. Verifying converts potential to demonstrated reality. Most holders leave without verifying. The leaving feels like enough.
Verification would require the family member to actually attempt access before it matters. They would try to use the materials with the holder available to observe. Failures would surface when they could still be corrected. Gaps in understanding would reveal themselves when explanation remains possible.
This verification rarely happens. It requires awkward conversations. It requires admitting mortality. It requires the family member's time and attention for something that feels distant and hypothetical. The holder postpones. The family member does not push. Life continues without the test.
Without verification, the holder has only assumption. They assume the materials are findable. They assume the instructions are clear. They assume the family member can execute. Each assumption may be true. None have been tested. The holder does not know what they do not know about what the family member does not know.
Knowledge Decay Over Time
Even if the family member once understood the system, that understanding fades. A conversation two years ago about "where things are" becomes hazy. The family member remembers that a conversation happened. They may not remember the details. The holder assumes the information persists. Memory does not work that way.
Instructions written clearly at one time may become unclear later. References to specific locations or devices may become outdated. "The wallet is in the desk drawer" fails when the desk is sold. "The seed phrase is in the safe" fails when the safe combination changes or is forgotten.
The holder updates their own mental map as things change. The family member does not receive these updates. A gap opens between what the holder knows and what the family member was told. The holder may not notice this gap because they are not thinking from the family member's perspective.
Time also changes the family member. Their life circumstances shift. Their memory of the original explanation fades. Their technical comfort may increase or decrease. The version of the family member who could have executed the recovery years ago may differ from the version who eventually needs to.
Complexity Hidden in Simplicity
The holder's system may seem simple to the holder. A hardware wallet plus a seed phrase plus a passphrase. Three things. But each thing contains complexity the holder has internalized and forgotten.
The hardware wallet requires power, cable, software, PIN, and knowledge of which buttons to press. The seed phrase requires understanding what it is, how to enter it, and what it produces. The passphrase requires knowing one exists, knowing its value, and knowing where to enter it. Each "simple" component expands into multiple steps.
The holder skips over these steps mentally because they are automatic. Years of use have compressed them into single actions. The family member has no such compression. Every micro-step is a separate challenge. What takes the holder thirty seconds could take the family member hours, with failure at any point.
Instructions that seem complete often omit these compressed steps. "Enter the seed phrase" does not explain how to enter it. "Restore the wallet" does not explain what application to use or where to download it. The holder's curse of knowledge makes it difficult to see what has been left out.
Scenarios That Expose the Gap
A spouse finds a letter explaining that bitcoin exists and where to find the seed phrase. The letter does not explain what a seed phrase is or what to do with it. The spouse holds twenty-four words on a piece of paper. They have no idea how these words become accessible money. The letter assumed knowledge the spouse does not have.
An adult child receives instructions that reference a specific wallet application. When they download the application, the interface has changed since the instructions were written. Buttons are in different places. Terminology has shifted. The instructions no longer match what appears on screen. The child cannot proceed without guidance that no longer exists.
A family member attempts recovery and encounters a passphrase prompt they did not expect. The holder's instructions did not mention a passphrase. The family member does not know whether one exists or what it might be. They enter nothing and receive a wallet with zero balance. The bitcoin exists behind a passphrase they do not know is required.
In each case, the holder's preparation was incomplete without being obviously incomplete. The missing pieces only became visible when someone without the holder's knowledge attempted execution. By then, asking questions was no longer possible.
The Role of Assumption
Assumption fills the space that verification would occupy. The holder assumes the instructions are clear because they wrote them clearly. But clarity depends on the reader, not the writer. What is clear to someone who already understands may be opaque to someone who does not.
The holder assumes the family member will figure it out. People learn new things all the time. The internet has answers. This assumption underestimates how specific bitcoin custody knowledge is. Generic searches may produce outdated information, incorrect advice, or scams. The family member navigating alone faces dangers the holder never considered.
The holder assumes circumstances will be favorable. The family member will have time, will have emotional bandwidth, will have technical access. These assumptions may hold. They may not. Actual circumstances include probate timelines, family disputes, geographic distance, and technical failures that assumptions do not account for.
Each assumption is a load-bearing element in a structure that has never been tested. The holder builds on assumptions without knowing which might collapse. The structure appears solid because it has never held real weight.
Assessment
The desire to verify family can access bitcoin describes a recognition that intention does not equal demonstrated capability. Holders leave materials and instructions. Whether family members can use them remains unknown until the moment of need arrives.
Family members face challenges holders cannot easily imagine: unfamiliar terminology, missing context, compressed steps expanded into confusion, and emotional conditions that impair learning. Instructions that seem complete to the holder contain gaps visible only to someone attempting execution without background knowledge.
Without actual verification—having the family member attempt access while the holder can still observe and correct—the holder has only assumption. The assumption may be correct. It may not. The gap between assumption and verified capability remains until someone crosses it, and by then, correction may no longer be possible.
System Context
Examining Bitcoin Custody Under Stress
Spouse Asks Who Else Knows About Bitcoin
For anyone who holds Bitcoin — on an exchange, in a wallet, through a service, or in self-custody — and wants to know what happens to it if something happens to them.
Start Bitcoin Custody Stress Test$179 · 12-month access · Unlimited assessments
A structured, scenario-based diagnostic that produces reference documents for your spouse, executor, or attorney — no accounts connected, no keys shared.
Sample what the assessment produces