Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Marriage law is outdated given the increase in second/third marriages

109 replies

Itsmyaccount · 28/07/2025 15:12

I'm really interested to get people's thoughts on this as a friend has recently been through a very difficult situation with her dad and his decision over his will and it's got me thinking.

Her dad remarried when he was in his early sixties after having been married to her mum for 3 decades. Work wise he's a very successful man and as with any high flyer quite a lot of sacrifice had to be made by her mum and by extension my friend to facilitate him being able to build that career. Things like moving abroad when work dictated, limits on the amount of time he was around when she was growing up when the hard graft had to go in, all for the long term intention that the hard sacrifice would pay off in the end for the family. Sadly the pressures from it contributed to the eventual divorce.

That then leads me onto the current situation. As said above he went onto re-marry shortly after the divorce. Her step-mum has kids of her own but all kids on either side were young adults when they married. They were in very different situations financially and at the time he had made sure my friend knew that his will would be such that his wife would be looked after if he pre-deceased her but that the lions share would be protected for her (his daughter).

Her dad has continued on with his financial success, a few years ago even came into a large sum of money when he sold a company he started when my friend was younger. That triggered him to re-visit his will and he has since decided that his current wife is entitled to 50% of everything due to the length of marriage (of which the law agrees), he briefly had it that his wife would inherit everything trusting that she would divide it equally between her kids and my friend when she then passed (assuming he predeceases her as he's older). This has caused a great deal of upset. My friend isn't close with her step-family and is finding the idea very hard that they are effectively profiting off of something they've not themselves made a sacrifice for as by the time they married kids were already grown up and the hard foundational work requiring the big sacrifice had long since passed.

This brings me onto the thread title. I've tried to put myself in her shoes and honestly I think I'd feel exactly the same way even though the sums in my case would be much smaller.
It feels to me that the laws on marriage and inheritance were written at a time when second, third (fourth even!) marriages were so uncommon it didn't need to account for how you can legally protect assets for your children (or whoever) without having to do a serious amount of mental gymnastics to achieve it. I do actually know of another friend whose dad thinks it's so important to protect his finances for his kids he refuses to even live with his long term partner, let alone marry her. That to me seems sad that actually should he want to marry her (which who knows maybe he doesn't want to), he is choosing to not as the complication it would cause for him and his kids inheritance is so great.

YABU - yes the law is fine as it is
YANBU - things have changed a lot and law needs modernising to better protect everyone given blended families are on the rise, not just your spouse

OP posts:
Aimtodobetter · 29/07/2025 14:45

Venalopolos · 28/07/2025 15:28

He probably could write his wife out of his Will though? Or at least leave everything to her on trust so most of his wealth is protected for his kids. There are mechanisms to allow this.

Divorce law and inheritance law are very different.

What do you propose would be a better legal solution than the one we already have?

I’d also observe there’s no requirement to marry again after divorce. If you’re unhappy with marriage laws then don’t get married - that’s the beauty of our legal system, you can choose whether you want to opt in to marriage laws or not.

There is a right for a wife under inheritance law to not do worse than a divorcee - my stepmother sued my fathers estate under exactly that and we ended up having to settle even though 100 percent of his wealth had been created before he met her.

TonTonMacoute · 29/07/2025 14:41

The law is that you can leave your money to whomsoever you choose. How do you think anything else can be enforced?

crisppackets · 29/07/2025 14:39

WitchesofPainswick · 28/07/2025 15:21

My siblings and I been 'disinherited' by my father (he's not dead yet, but has shared his will) - weirdly we get on really well with him, but his position is that it will all go to his wife/stepmother and then her children.

It's his money and his decision and he's making it with his eyes wide open. No one is entitled to their dead parent's money - their parent can make the decision about who this goes to.

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

So he made it clear that it would go on to his stepchildren in the end? What a strange man to wish his step children better than his own.

especially when it’s so easy to create a will to protect your second spouse until their death but preserve it for your dc afterwards

WitchesofPainswick · 29/07/2025 14:35

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:23

so your children are not your family?

No, but I don't want my husband tied to my family if I drop dead and he has another 40 years to live. Lots of people say that their spouses can live in the house until they remarry. But we have no assets apart from a (small, cheap) house. So it massively limits our options. I don't want my husband having to stay single or rely on another person economically after I'm dead.

R0ckandHardPlace · 29/07/2025 14:31

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:24

Because in this case its normally both parents of the children. I trust my DH to look after our dc if I go first, and vice versa - its the second etc marriages where the new spouse is not linked to the first marriage dc is where the issue comes from

Presumably the assets of the first marriage will have been split fairly on divorce, so there’s a potential inheritance from the mother too.

In the case of a second marriage, there’s an extra person so children can’t expect the same inheritance as they’d have received previously. Not forgetting it could also work in their favour. If their stepmother dies first, she could leave everything to her husband who will then leave it to her stepchildren upon his death.

I’ll say it again - it is extremely misogynistic for everyone to assume that the male is the only person who has brought assets to a relationship.

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:24

Mustbethat · 29/07/2025 14:14

Presumably she sees her spouse as family?

why would you actively disinherit a spouse?

why is it ok to leave everything to a first spouse, and nothing to children, but not to a subsequent spouse?

if you actively disinherit a first spouse and leave everything to your children, that’s bad. But actively disinherit a second spouse in favour of your children, that’s good?

my dad effectively disinherited me
by leaving everything to my mum. is that cold? If not why not, it’s exactly the same.

Because in this case its normally both parents of the children. I trust my DH to look after our dc if I go first, and vice versa - its the second etc marriages where the new spouse is not linked to the first marriage dc is where the issue comes from

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:23

WitchesofPainswick · 29/07/2025 14:11

My husband is my family. My children are adults with their own careers. I've discussed this with them and they understand the situation.

(Maybe it will encourage them to look after him in his dotage!)

so your children are not your family?

Boutonnière · 29/07/2025 14:22

I’m puzzled by the ‘50% as the law agrees’ . This isn’t a divorce nor an intestate situation - there is no set figure for making provision for anyone in a will , no matter how long the marriage, but a widow/er can make a claim against against a will if there has been financial dependence or interdependence. (There are others who can do this as well but just referring to the spouse here - also not referring to Scottish law)

JHound · 29/07/2025 14:15

Ddakji · 29/07/2025 12:29

Marriage isn’t relevant - FIL didn’t similar leaving 50% to his partner (not wife) thus basically giving her children and grandchildren more of his money than his own children and grandchildren.

He didn’t give it to her children and grandchildren.

He gave it to her.

Mustbethat · 29/07/2025 14:14

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:04

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

Fucking hell, thats cold. I know no one should expect an inheritance, but to actively disinherit your own children. Don't you want YOUR family to benefit from your estate?

Presumably she sees her spouse as family?

why would you actively disinherit a spouse?

why is it ok to leave everything to a first spouse, and nothing to children, but not to a subsequent spouse?

if you actively disinherit a first spouse and leave everything to your children, that’s bad. But actively disinherit a second spouse in favour of your children, that’s good?

my dad effectively disinherited me
by leaving everything to my mum. is that cold? If not why not, it’s exactly the same.

FairKoala · 29/07/2025 14:13

*WitchesofPainswick *so you have disinherited your children

WitchesofPainswick · 29/07/2025 14:11

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:04

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

Fucking hell, thats cold. I know no one should expect an inheritance, but to actively disinherit your own children. Don't you want YOUR family to benefit from your estate?

My husband is my family. My children are adults with their own careers. I've discussed this with them and they understand the situation.

(Maybe it will encourage them to look after him in his dotage!)

FairKoala · 29/07/2025 14:10

Mustbethat · 28/07/2025 15:33

Oh and my own dad died when I was 7. He left a large estate to my mum. There will be nothing left when she dies.

Have I been fucked over? should she have been forced to put some of that money aside for us children?

Mustbethat
It’s tricky.
dh walked away from his first marriage with nothing (her affair). The kids were young and there was no way to keep the house without just signing it over to her.
so his kids have already had their “inheritance”- he worked hard for that house, paid a huge deposit and nearly 20 years of the mortgage by himself

If you say that your husbands children have had their inheritance then by the same thought process you too had your inheritance from your father.

Your father left everything to your mother he didn’t leave you anything and your husband gave his wife a divorce settlement he didn’t give his children anything

You and your dh’s children haven’t had any inheritance and only when the mothers die and their wills read will there be any sign of you or these children getting and inheritance.

ReservationDogs · 29/07/2025 14:04

WitchesofPainswick · 28/07/2025 15:21

My siblings and I been 'disinherited' by my father (he's not dead yet, but has shared his will) - weirdly we get on really well with him, but his position is that it will all go to his wife/stepmother and then her children.

It's his money and his decision and he's making it with his eyes wide open. No one is entitled to their dead parent's money - their parent can make the decision about who this goes to.

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

Fucking hell, thats cold. I know no one should expect an inheritance, but to actively disinherit your own children. Don't you want YOUR family to benefit from your estate?

WitchesofPainswick · 29/07/2025 13:54

MorningLarkEchoes · 29/07/2025 13:30

I bet you would feel a lot differently if there was going to be a big estate left in his will. This is what my husband is facing. His mum decided to cheat on his dad many years ago and he remarried. His wife is Irish and the family is very tight knit. I guarantee that not a single penny will go to my husband on the event of his death - it all will go to his wife (who has no children of her own) and then onto her siblings/ nieces and nephews.

It’s for this reason that my husband and I will never remarry if we ever split up/ one of us dies.

Kids growing up these days face a lot more financial difficulties in adulthood compared to the boomer generation for example and like it or not, won’t have any decent future or security without some inheritance to fall back on. It’s all well and good to say no one is owed anything, but it’s a simple fact. I would hate for my money to go to some random person I’m not even related to because I chose to remarry.

Edited

There is a very large estate in my father's will. It would be life-changing for me. But it's his decision, not mine.

Ddakji · 29/07/2025 13:45

Mustbethat · 29/07/2025 12:36

He’s not giving her children and grandchildren anything though?

he is leaving his money to his partner. Presumably to support her and make her old age comfortable, as you would any spouse/partner.

if I cut dh out of my will and left everything to my kids, he’s have no home and no money heading into retirement. How is that fair?

this is the issue. People are seeing a wife’s/spouses money which will support them, mean they aren’t left homeless etc, and seeing it as money going to the next generation. It may filter down, but it’s not being left to them and there may well not be anything left after care fees.

if her children care for her themselves instead of losing it all to a home, then why shouldn’t they inherit? I’ve seen many a post on here where a child caring for a parent is deemed entitled to a larger share of inheritance, if not all, than children who don’t assist with care.

There is a lot going on here that I’m not going to put down here but suffice it to say that this woman (who didn’t live with FIL and did the bare minimum of caring for him during his final years with dementia, including never visiting him in his retirement home that she encouraged him to move to, away from his home town but nearer her, and that she said she would move into as well, something that became clear was a flat-out lie) will almost certainly end up giving more money to her children and grandchildren than FIL did to his own.

She would never have written a will like this, not in a million years.

Point being - marriage is irrelevant to the OP’s point.

Mustbethat · 29/07/2025 13:35

MorningLarkEchoes · 29/07/2025 13:30

I bet you would feel a lot differently if there was going to be a big estate left in his will. This is what my husband is facing. His mum decided to cheat on his dad many years ago and he remarried. His wife is Irish and the family is very tight knit. I guarantee that not a single penny will go to my husband on the event of his death - it all will go to his wife (who has no children of her own) and then onto her siblings/ nieces and nephews.

It’s for this reason that my husband and I will never remarry if we ever split up/ one of us dies.

Kids growing up these days face a lot more financial difficulties in adulthood compared to the boomer generation for example and like it or not, won’t have any decent future or security without some inheritance to fall back on. It’s all well and good to say no one is owed anything, but it’s a simple fact. I would hate for my money to go to some random person I’m not even related to because I chose to remarry.

Edited

My dad left a big estate. I never saw a penny, it all went to my mum, and there is nothing left.

you can also never guarantee a previous spouse will not remarry. Life happens.

MorningLarkEchoes · 29/07/2025 13:30

WitchesofPainswick · 28/07/2025 15:21

My siblings and I been 'disinherited' by my father (he's not dead yet, but has shared his will) - weirdly we get on really well with him, but his position is that it will all go to his wife/stepmother and then her children.

It's his money and his decision and he's making it with his eyes wide open. No one is entitled to their dead parent's money - their parent can make the decision about who this goes to.

I've also got the same arrangement with my not-first husband. Everything will go to him and he can pass onto my children and his children IF HE WISHES but there isn't much anyway, and he needs a roof over his head. I've made this clear to my DC.

I bet you would feel a lot differently if there was going to be a big estate left in his will. This is what my husband is facing. His mum decided to cheat on his dad many years ago and he remarried. His wife is Irish and the family is very tight knit. I guarantee that not a single penny will go to my husband on the event of his death - it all will go to his wife (who has no children of her own) and then onto her siblings/ nieces and nephews.

It’s for this reason that my husband and I will never remarry if we ever split up/ one of us dies.

Kids growing up these days face a lot more financial difficulties in adulthood compared to the boomer generation for example and like it or not, won’t have any decent future or security without some inheritance to fall back on. It’s all well and good to say no one is owed anything, but it’s a simple fact. I would hate for my money to go to some random person I’m not even related to because I chose to remarry.

Hankunamatata · 29/07/2025 13:20

Marriage isn't the issue. Its the people who dont make proper wills

tesseractor · 29/07/2025 13:17

UpDo · 29/07/2025 12:46

Basically the issue boils down to whether you think we should keep the current testamentary freedom or do as they do in some countries and require parents to leave children a certain amount of their estate.

Though that wouldn't prevent people spending their money as they wish and/or on care in their lifetime.

And would be people to be willing to have other obligations - in France children can’t be disinherited but the children also have legal obligations to support their parents financially if they need it.

FairKoala · 29/07/2025 13:17

If he wants to leave something to his child then he needs to write it in his will otherwise he has effectively disinherited his daughter

There should be a national campaign to point out to everyone whether they have children or not, even those parents who are still married to the mother or father of their children that if they want to leave something to their children or pretty much anyone they need to write it in their will and not expect others to do their verbal bidding after they have gone. Apart from this idea that someone is going to give away money and assets that they legally own to someone else because someone said that was what they wanted (if they really wanted this it would have been written in their will and if it wasn’t then that just says they didn’t really want to) But if someone does follow the verbal wishes of the now deceased person it leaves the recipient of these gifts open to having to repay it if the person who inherited goes into a care home or dies themselves.

If the father in this case hasn’t mentioned his daughter in his new will then he just needs to come to terms with the fact he has disinherited his daughter and doesn’t believe she deserves anything from him. Stop pretending he is a nice father and hiding his real feelings behind a fantasy scenario

UpDo · 29/07/2025 12:46

Basically the issue boils down to whether you think we should keep the current testamentary freedom or do as they do in some countries and require parents to leave children a certain amount of their estate.

Though that wouldn't prevent people spending their money as they wish and/or on care in their lifetime.

Mustbethat · 29/07/2025 12:36

Ddakji · 29/07/2025 12:29

Marriage isn’t relevant - FIL didn’t similar leaving 50% to his partner (not wife) thus basically giving her children and grandchildren more of his money than his own children and grandchildren.

He’s not giving her children and grandchildren anything though?

he is leaving his money to his partner. Presumably to support her and make her old age comfortable, as you would any spouse/partner.

if I cut dh out of my will and left everything to my kids, he’s have no home and no money heading into retirement. How is that fair?

this is the issue. People are seeing a wife’s/spouses money which will support them, mean they aren’t left homeless etc, and seeing it as money going to the next generation. It may filter down, but it’s not being left to them and there may well not be anything left after care fees.

if her children care for her themselves instead of losing it all to a home, then why shouldn’t they inherit? I’ve seen many a post on here where a child caring for a parent is deemed entitled to a larger share of inheritance, if not all, than children who don’t assist with care.

UpDo · 29/07/2025 12:35

Ddakji · 29/07/2025 12:29

Marriage isn’t relevant - FIL didn’t similar leaving 50% to his partner (not wife) thus basically giving her children and grandchildren more of his money than his own children and grandchildren.

Exactly. The OPs point about blended families makes no sense given that people blend families all the time without getting married.

Ddakji · 29/07/2025 12:29

Marriage isn’t relevant - FIL didn’t similar leaving 50% to his partner (not wife) thus basically giving her children and grandchildren more of his money than his own children and grandchildren.