Interesting thread in which I can see both sides because I've been on both sides, well almost. At bottom, it comes down to how a couple makes decisions about handling the couple's assets when there's a special attachment to the source of a particular asset or fund. My wife of 32 years, the former divorce lawyer who suffers from an occupational hazard of tracing funds, likes to tell me that it was her separate CD account (funded from her separate earnings before she met me) that was tapped as the downpayment for our first home purchase and that it was the income from her law practice that, in one fell swoop, killed the mortgage on the residence where we raised our kids. And when there was a modest piece of property she inherited, the proceeds from the sale went initially into a separate CD account -- I wasn't even listed as a beneficiary. This rubbed me the wrong way a bit, but I understood her view and the need for her to lay claim to "owning" a major piece of the financial picture in our relationship. That separate CD was in her name for many years and she's added others as separate CDs but recently we moved to having all CDs entered as joint accounts. My wife still needs to lay ownership claim to some things and that's all right with me, especially because she wants to retain a certain degree of financial independence separate from me.
When my wife points out that she paid the downpayment for our first house and her income paid off our mortgage, I start tallying the other numbers and it's clear to us that my financial contributions over the years dwarf her contributions. My steady income over the years and one big financial award I received around ten years ago have anchored our financial situation and all of it has gone in joint accounts. In fact, my retirement accounts and stable pension will provide us with most of the financial security when we both retire (and we are literally "3 bad days from retirement"). Two years ago, I inherited a valuable piece of real estate along with my siblings. The value of the property is quite considerable -- even in this downturn. I view this property has "joint property" with my wife but decisions over its use or sale, like the property my wife previously inherited, simply rest with me -- I consult with my wife about this because she's my partner in life and I hope she agrees with what I doing -- but I view this matter as solely within my decision-making realm, as long as it doesn't implicate the use of our joint funds.
I think Jambo's wife is entirely right in solely deciding what she wants to do with her inheritance which has special significance to her. Give her more space; let her have her say on this one; let her operate freely on this. It's only money in the end, right? Eventually she'll come around, and 32 years of history would suggest that her inheritance will likely, according to her own schedule, be used for the common benefit.