Stepchild wants to see finances and money spent on his stepsiblings.

You can fall in love, no problem at all. Prioritise your new relationship nd children that aren't yours? Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where that will go. Do whatever works for you. Don't expect everyone to experience the situation in the same way.

I would absolutely kick that entitled little d to the kerb. What an unbelievable request.

The son has been massively spoilt and is entitled. I daresay most 18 year olds aren't so grabby about their parents finances. I certainly wasn't like that. And I'm no old biddy myself going on about the "good old days", I'm only early 20s myself. People are using this lad's age as an excuse for this behaviour and it doesn't wash with me.

I was supporting my parents financially at 18 - and I had married parents (married parents really does not guarantee a happy home or financial stability...). Once I left college, my parent's child benefit stopped and they began to massively struggle financially. I had to get a full-time job as a carer immediately. 40 hours a week at uni and then 40 hours a week as a carer. I was exhausted to the bone. I'd be the one paying to take my parents on a holiday.

I'm from a much lower socio-economic background than OP and her husband. Most of my peers were in similar situations to me at 18 - ambitious and out grafting to better our economic prospects having come from poor households.

I had friends who were paying extortionate rent on their own flats having escaped toxic family situations. I had friends who were supporting a parent financially. I had friends working 2 jobs around university to build up a modest house deposit. 2 of my friends were carers for their mums with mental health issues. Nobody was having big expensive holidays.

My disapproval of OP's stepson's behaviour does not come from "jealousy" about money. If that were the case, I'd be moaning about the OP's children too (who are also clearly very financially privileged). The reason I am making the comparison, is to make the point that being 18 is no excuse for this nasty behaviour. My parents made some awful financial decisions - my mum is a gambling addict and my dad burns all of his money on failed projects. It annoys me, but it's on them. The way people are demonising the OP's husband is disgraceful. He sounds like a very kind man who gives his children all the support they could ever possibly need in life and still has money left over which he's then used to give his stepchild a treat. The step-son is acting like this is some mortal betrayal and some posters seem to agree with this and think that his dad should get on his hands and needs to beg for his forgiveness, it's nuts.

This lad is trying to financially control his own parent - I can only imagine what a nightmare he will be with a partner in the future. This attitude needs nipping in the bud immediately whilst he is still young, otherwise the OP's DH may be very vulnerable to being taken advantage of financially in his elder years.

Someone's true character can absolutely begin to show as young as 18. When we were sat at my grandma's deathbed, my paternal cousin (who's mum's side of the family are very well off, incidentally) was sat in the hospital chair on her phone looking at penthouse flats in Manchester worth £500,000 on Rightmove - whilst our grandmother was literally agonal breathing. She was 19 at the time. She already had her eyes on her dad's share of the inheritance and she's got her penthouse now. My dad's share of the inheritance got spent on crap as I knew it would, but I kept my mouth shut because I don't financially abuse my own parent and because I never had any expectations that I'd ever inherit anything in the first place. I am glad I didn't come from big money because it can completely rot people from the inside.

He doesn’t live there, the new family do.

Kick the little scrote out!

I am also really struck that parents dont have to live their entire lives for their children. Seems like a lot of adult children on here still nursing grudges about things from their childhood. Sometimes marriages don't work out. Sometimes parents get new partners. Sometimes life is not the way you would like it to be. This young man is still very young so I would be inclined to give him a bit of a pass, while still having a conversation and setting clear boundaries with him. But at some point we all have to take responsibility for ourselves.

When I was younger my parents paid for a friend of mine to come abroad with us, in part because she otherwise would not have been abroad. Should I or my siblings tot that up against future inheritance?

and surely most married couples subsidise each others lifestyles in as much as a) the buying power of 2 is greater than that of one and b) if one half of a couple earns more they may wish to have a lifestyle that reflects that, and as such pay a greater portion towards it

I know when I was on mat leave I was putting much less into the pot, meaning I was being subsidised by my husband. At other times I’ve subsidised him - though neither of us look at it that way.

isnt that just normal? Why is OP and her husband doing the same seen as so strange? Or perhaps as she is a second wife, the husband must lower his lifestyle to what she can afford - even if he wants a 5 bed house, she can only afford a mortgage on a three bed house, so that’s what he is allowed?

You have way missed the point here. I took out the child of a friend recently - I don't know him particularly well but he was at a loose end and I was going with one of my DC somewhere fun, and he came with us at my invitation. I have two DC, only one came.

I bought the entrance fee, ice cream, a go on a ride, and other things. My other DC didn't come, but in no way should he be demanding I reimburse his inheritance on what I spent on his sibling and a random friend.

This needs calling out for what it is - pure greed. And unfortunately its been sown by the mum not the DC I suspect.

Someone said, the solution is to kick the child in the testicles?

Or was it more turn of phrase like "he needs a kick up the arse and sort his attitude out"

I find it odd that things that we deem socially acceptable. Op can move two children in with DH and have him subsidise them, but describes his own children as “staying” there which it seems only the younger one wants to do in any case.

Why would anyone do this to their child. What he could had in the short period of time his children took to grow up was a house with just him where his children could come & go without worrying about a whole other family living with them.

You don't think saying an 18 year old needs to be kicked in the testicles is nasty? Repeatedly calling him a scrote, little shit, dickhead etc etc, is nasty?

I think a lot of the commenters here (grown adults relishing talking like this about a young man, when they don't even have his side or the full picture) should be embarrassed of what they've said here.

Sorry - haven’t RTFT but… this seems a case of your husbands two eldest children (and especially his son) being a) brought up with too great an emphasis on materialism in general and money in particular and b) a child who clearly understands very little of life thinking that demonstrating his utter misconception and lack of class is actually a demonstration of adult behaviour.

This will escalate just as far as your husband and you let it.

The child’s attitude is unpleasant. But that is something to tackle over time - clearly he hasn’t struggled much in material terms and has not been able to comprehend the immense luxury he enjoys. conversations and activities which seek to balance that would be a good idea, but it may be too late to change his fundamentally entitled outlook. (Still very much worth trying with his younger sibling).

The request itself can either cause a furor or be, quite simply dismissed. Your husband’s father wished to help his children, and has helped ensure their financial security, as well as that of his grandchildren. Your husband just says something to the effect that: it was my father’s desire to help his children and also his grandchildren. You are fortunate to be a beneficiary of his generosity. During my lifetime I likewise intend to appreciate my good fortune and use the additional funds I am fortunate enough to receive in the ways I see most fit. That could include buying myself a fancy car, taking everyone on a nice holiday, supporting your academic endeavors and university education, supporting my nearest and dearest (which includes you, see previous point), and giving or lending money to those I feel need or deserve it, donating to charity or whatever else I see fit. The “trust” is irrelevant to you until such a time and my siblings and I are deceased and will continue to create a benefit for us (and by proxy you) during my lifetime and will benefit your cousins and you later on. I have no intention of jumping under a bus so you can benefit sooner. I have no intention of justifying my financial decisions to you and I am sorry if you have had the impression that you’re entitled to that. I love you and I am disappointed that you feel this is information you need for any reason. Your grandfather would be horrified. These funds are an amazing luxury which allows us to take some risk in life and enjoy many additional privileges, it is not a hoard to sit on or an excuse not to find your own path and support yourself financially as you grow. The only outcome of this question is that it suggests I have not done a great job at helping you to find your own path to success and desire for self sufficiency. That’s something we can work on together as you head into your final years of education as I believe in you and your ability to be resilient, be successful and, in time, support yourself and your own family, rather than just waiting for me to die so you don’t have to. we won’t speak of this again and you should reflect on what I have said and how you want your life to be, as you may find this attitude does not draw the people to you who might have most to offer.

At least, that’s what would do. And take this as an opportunity to reflect himself on why his child does not apparently understand either the terms of the bequest (which seem perfectly straightforward) or the privilege he has been granted as a result of his birth.

Your instinct to help is kind - but your finances have even less to do with it! This is between your husband and his son.

I don't think anyone's being nasty. The boy has made himself look deeply unpleasant with his attitude and demands, and people have called it out. But frankly, many of us were dickheads at 18, in some way or another.

I do think the history of our empire passed down to our family from dear grandfather, has engrained very strong views and entitlement in this young man. Without a little bit of perspective and life experience, he has a very black and white view of anyone other than blood family benefitting from association. This will be exaggerated in his head, because the non related children who are benefitting are likely already viewed as taking his and his sister's place at home with dad, and now they're "taking" this as well.

But surely the point is that he has and is continuing to support his biological children, he has just also paid for a ski trip for his own SS.

maybe if his own son is concerned about expenditure, he should be saving well already and making plans to get a job to supplement his parents financial assistance while at uni?

It's a nice amount. Not life transforming, but plenty to clear a chunk of mortgage, or clear uni debts and get a small buy to let himself.

And enough obviously to elicit nasty jealousy from plenty of posters on here.

To be honest though, that financial security will be when his dad dies - which is hopefully a long time off.

That's why I feel the grandfather would have intended his son to be using the income to provide for his gdc in the interim.

Also, if the monthly income from the assets is only enough for one of 4 siblings to live frugally, and subsidises earned income of the others, it's not a fortune each month.

Say the assets are 6 houses, at £200k each. These houses generate £8k total rental each month. £2k to each of 4 siblings.

Those siblings presumably all have to pass away in order that the houses are sold. That's £1.2m. This is split first into 4, because it was 4 siblings who have children. Then it's split between the number children of that particular sibling, so £300k becomes £150k to the boy and £150k to his sister.

It's a nice amount. Not life transforming, but plenty to clear a chunk of mortgage, or clear uni debts and get a small buy to let himself. Of course the houses could triple in value, or we could have a property crash at that time. If the last sibling is younger than the others, the boy might be a pensioner before this even happens. I can see why he's feeling protective of his family inheritance, what with the grandfather setting precedent with this family estate to direct members. He's just going all about it the wrong way.

I think due to the cost of living, the poor job market and price of property these days, young people are increasingly having to cling onto the idea of a future inheritance to ever have any hope of a secure future.

This. SS is insecure about his family position, the future, and he’s channeling cash anxiety from emotional anxiety.

You don’t need to show him the accounts but you do need to reassure him that’s he’s DH’s beloved and that at some stage he’s in line for a big whack of financial security.

Yes, I would assume he intended it to supplement the home his grandchildren were growing up in, not the home someone else's grandchildren were growing up in. In the absence of the exact expression of his wishes, there's nothing bizarre about that assumption whatsoever.

He also probably hoped his son would leave his estate to his children and even part to the DSS's children as he himself had done. Everything about the way he left his estate suggests a dynastic style of thinking.

No, it doesn't clearly demonstrate that at all.

First of all, we don't know what the wording around the son's share is, and he may not have foreseen the OP's dc in the picture to think to specify. It is disingenuous to maintain he would feel the same about the op's dc as his own grandchildren.

But the fact that he didn't say "this is not intended for the op's dc" doesn't clearly demonstrate that he didn't intend his grandchildren to benefit from enrichment of their father.

@Greenhairedmonstor couple of things....

You say you have a house in another country that you will return to. Why and when will you return to it?

You say you have this other house, that you have income through renting it out, that your kids father contributes far more than his share, and you work. So why could all this combined income not cover one school ski trip for your 11yr old?

Your kids are 9 and 12. You've been married 3yrs. So presumably living with your husband at least a year before you married. He's been providing a home and being the more present male in their lives since they were 5 and 8, likely even younger. Step children at now 15 and 18 were living with dad until at the very eldest 11 and 14 but probably less than that. Certainly your youngest is likely to spend more time living with your husband than either of his actual children ever did. A longer period of finer things and "multiple holidays a year" that you admit you nor their father would ever afford but your husband provides for your children.

Do you see why, the boy might be acting out like this? Yes he's being an entitled little shite about it. But he does feel he should have had a greater benefit than two unrelated children who've been moved into his home and will now live what he probably sees should have been his childhood, for longer than he did.

No. He thought it would be the end of the relationship if he challenged his son on this. SS is clearly very unreasonable and illogical. The chances of him falling out with his dad over this and going low or non-contact are very real.

He probably assumed his son would prioritise his children, as he himself has. Divorce didn’t used to be as common as it unfortunately now is. It's completely natural to look after your own children, but some men seem to only care about the children of the woman they're currently having sex with.

Yes, some people are just making up what the GF wanted here. None of us know, so talking about respect for it is bizarre.

I would urge your DH to tell his child that marriage is a partnership. That you and he have a partnership and he has willingly formed a family with your children, his children, and you as a unit. There is no "paying back" for familial expenses.

He does not have to include that child in his will.

I would suggest he not fully fund that child and urge him into getting a job while at university. It might curb the "entitlement" I sense he has.