One child has inherited AGAIN

Sounds sad, OP

My older stepsister (who is estranged from her father) was treated exactly the same as the blood grandchildren when my grandmother died and my dad treats her as his own, as he does with her children. I know that's rare.

I would 100% have an honest and empathetic conversation with your older son. That's your right and will help him accept the differences in privilege better I think

When does a child of your new partner become a step child to them or you consider them a step dad.
When does your child from a different father from their son become a step grandson to your new partner's parents.
If you chose a new partner and he choses you does that mean all his family should now consider your children with someone else as part of their family.
That's the reality. These choices were between you and a partner who isn't the biological father of all of your children. His family have no connection to your children with a different man.

I didn't do anything. See my later clarification. Im in the 'younger' generation though we were all adults at the time, I just worded it badly. I don't know what discussions were had etc and it wasn't my place to ask, my cousins were similar ages to me (30ish), the will skipped to us and to my cousins because we had both lost the parent who would have benefitted, but my grandparents had included the 'children of the whole blood' clause that used to be so standard (may still be I don't practice in private client).

Potentially there may have been a reason for this though? And it's highly unlikely a mother would skip all her own 3 kids to make sure it goes to the grandkids instead, purely to ensure cutting 1 step child out?

Far more likely the will was drawn up to be simply - "I have 6 biological DGC I would like my estate to be split to benefit them'...

Not, oh! There's this one from marriage, and then can we reflect if someone splits up? And XYZ...

I have a similar issue with my adult children which I'm mentioning to show that imbalances can happen in other ways too, DD's boyfriend has just inherited millions and will be buying a house for him and dd to live in before they get married.

Ds however will never own his own home despite earning a decent salary.

It's not fair and as a parent my heart breaks for ds. Absolutely nothing I can do about it other than alter my own will.

My dh is my children's step dad and treats them financially the same as his children. There is absolutely nothing way though, under any circumstances, that he would change his will to leave mine MORE than his own to even out an imbalance. This would be completely unreasonable, and it wouldn't occur to me to ask that of him.

The implication, I think is not that MIL should have included the older son in the grandchild-inherit list, but that MIL avoided leaving money to OP's husband because that money would, she thought, eventually be split between OP's two sons, one of whom was MIL's grandson and one of whom was not.
It is fairly clear, I think, that OP thinks she and her husband should be treating her two sons at least equally (or, as far as their own assets are concerned, her husband should be leaving more to his stepson than his biological son). MIL might very well have decided to leave the legacy directly to the grandson if she didn't want that to happen; OP certainly thinks this was a motive, anyway.

And if Bro then pisses it up the wall and comes with hand held out for more?

Not really.

Hey bro… I just inherited a load of money, so I’m giving you ££. Enjoy!’

The reason they are going to have vastly different lives is because you chose to have different fathers for them. This is a consequence of your choice.

Yes. I totally agree. There is no reason stepchildren should inherit. But MiL could have left her estate to her DC rather than her DGC. That she did not suggests she wanted to impose her will on her descendants by making sure they did not have access to her estate, and generally this is considered unreasonable. It's her money and she can do what she likes, naturally. It's not what I and my late DH have done and it was not hard to do.

That would be quite a lot to put squarely at the feet of an 18yr old. Even more so when the money was first inherited as an 8yr old!

If your younger son ties it all up in investments and there is no noticeable effect on his spending ability then I would agree with this. Your older son doesn't need to know.

However, if younger son suddenly has a car and designer clothes and is planning a year long backpacking trip then that changes things. We don't just say things with words and by spending money he would be indicating to his brother that he had money to spend.

Your older son can just be told "DS2 inherited some money from a distant relations and is using that to fund xyz." It removes the secret without breaking any confidences as you don't need to go into details.

The important thing is that DS1 doesn't think you are bankrolling DS2 in a way you didn't fund him or try and keep up with DS2's spending and end up in debt.

I think that's understandable when it's only 1 generation down. In the OP's situation it's grandparents who want to split their estate between the grandchildren. If the grandparents had chosen to leave it to their own adult children, then it would be then up to the adult children to spend/save/gamble away/invest that money however they want to. And to then leave their OWN estates however they wish ie. to their biological children and their stepchildren.

You are entitled to do that. It doesn't give you the moral high ground over someone that only wants biological children to inherit.

I get it. Thanks. Forgive my obtuseness.😔

Still tight. I will be splitting everything 4 ways between my 3 biological children and 1 stepchild.

It isn't your youngest sons responsibility to compensate his brother for the fact that his brother's father's family will not be in a position to leave his the same sum as inheritance. Nobody is entitled to an inheritance. That's a grabby mindset OP.

So many family secrets@EWAB, that never ends well.

Are your children close? There is no way if I inherited a large sum of money and my brother didn’t, that I wouldn’t share it.

If your younger son keeps this secret… and the money…to himself, I think that says a lot about how he views his brother.

Does that mean the younger pair inherited as beneficiaries, but there was a deed of amendment which shared their inheritance with the older pair? It's to be hoped the younger pair who gave up half their inheritance to the older siblings were both adults and had independent legal advice, because otherwise there could be very expensive trouble coming.

Look at what you quoted. SOME definitions allow for step/half-siblings. Others consider only biological parents and full siblings. It's personal preference. I and many other people stand by the original and traditional definition because there are fundamental differences between the two setups. As can be seen by the OP's situation.

I genuinely can’t contemplate my two sons having such vastly different lives

They have different fathers, of course they will have different lives.....

Many children from the same families have vastly different lives. I know a very wealthy CEO who lives in New York whose unmarried sister works in a newsagents in her local UK village.

I know two siblings, one emigrated to Australia twenty years ago and lives on a ranch with numerous horses, holidays and a lovely lifestyle. The other rents a budget flat in a grey and grim UK town.

I understand that inherited wealth isn't earned but it is what it is. My already well off step sibling inherited millions from an aunt from her side of her family. While I envied them, it honestly did not cross my mind to wonder if I was getting any of the millions (and nor was I offered any) and why on earth would I? I find it really odd that you think your eldest child is somehow entitled to get some inheritance from people who aren't related to him?

Agree with this. You can’t even out their life chances to be the same when they have two different fathers and families and the whole thing will never ever be identical in both cases. It would be a nice gesture for your son to gift some money - if it’s a vast amount - to the other. But he’s not obliged to.

And what happens if OPs house is worth much more than what DS2 has inherited now? What if DS2 has a couple of kids who could do with a helping hand financially in decades time, and DC1 has none? What if, what if, what if?

Life is full of uncertainties. Personally I'd just be happy that DC2 having a nice windfall has hopefully eased some financial pressures on the family unit as a whole. If you can/want to try make up a bit of balance between your two boys, I'd do it now OP. Not be aiming for it in 40yrs by which point hopefully both your sons are doing okay for themselves in life, and it would just be hurtful to cut one out in the last breath.

Except it is (and one source claiming the opposite does not change that), but even if it wasn’t, that’s the clearly how it’s being used in the context of this thread.

I am sorry you are hurting - I would feel exactly the same, and I don't know how you can get over it - I hope in time your eldest has some good luck of his own. This is one reason I am gutted that my children't father has remarried and had another child with someone else, and a big reason I would never have a child with more than one man - I am sorry this advice is of no use to you, but perhaps it will be to others. It's just a mess. Are your boys close?