To only financially provide for my own children?

[tinyboxtim]

DH and I have been married for three years. Together we have eight (yes, eight) children. I have two (Ds11 and Dd9), he has three (SD10, SS9, Sd6) and together we have three (DTS2 and DD4mnths).

Our all entire relationship we have kept our finances completely separate. We do have a joint account that we each put our proportion of household bills and money for our childrens together needs in to. Besides that, I have always provided for my own children, and he has provided for his children/payed their child support. We live in the house that was gifted to myself and my first late husband. It has always worked well for us.

Because of our respective careers, the money my late husband left behind, and the amount that DH pays in cs, I have a lot more disposable cash than my husband. Because of this, my children have different lifestyle than my stepchildren.

Over the last couple of months, my eldest SD has been very resentful about this, making passive aggressive comments about how DD1 has something she doesn't have, etcetera.

WIBU to explain to her this weekend that we all have two parents in life that are responsible for providing for us, and just like how her dad, and to a much lesser expense, her mum (didn't say this) provide for her, I am responsible to provide for my children the best that I can? And to tell her that in the future she will need to bring it up with mum and dad if she wants something, not me, as, financially, she is not my responsibility?

tiny what did your DH say about his older DCs when you discussed extending your family by having joint DCs?

You did discuss the impact more DCs would have on both your grieving, and his older, nonresident, DCs, before conceiving your DT and your youngest, didn't you?

I think it's perfectly fine for children to set aside a few special toys they don't want to share, as long as it is done subtly and not in a "the step-kids are here so we need to hide the nice things" sort of way.

What's the story with the children's bedrooms that a few people have mentioned?

I think that when circumstances change, it is imperative to be flexible and allow for those changes. All the children in the OP have been through a great deal of upheaval in their short lives: bereavement for some, parents' divorce for others, new stepparents, new siblings. It would be unrealistic to expect that their lives will be exactly as they might have been without this upheaval. When a family grows, through remarriage or the birth of other children or whatever, adjustments and change are inevitable. Unfortunately, it sounds as though this particular blended family hasn't really blended at all, that it is really just two families living side by side.

Wow what a piece of work you are. Did DH hide his kids in a cupboad and spring them on you years later? No. You knew.

NEWSFLASH: IF YOU DID NOT WANT TO FORM A FAMILY WIH SOMEONE WITH KIDS, DONT GET WITH SOMEONE WITH KIDS. DUH

Op you have not answer the question about whether your dh makes provision tgat is equal to what he pays for private school for your kids together. I don't think he does, that is the problem.

Has no one noticed that the OP said her DH only offered to pay half the school fees AFTER his ex complained about the issue of schools. He probably offered this knowing that she couldn't afford to pay the other half.
I have seen a situation play out like this in real life. All the children were hurt by it. Some of the children no longer speak to their father.

Roar, I don't know what he does with his money, besides what he pays towards bills/our children/joint savings account. He could be building a time machine for all I know or care. It isn't really any of my business, just like my money is none of his.

Morage he needs to save that half for his kids towards uni, car, house etc of their mum can't afford the other half,

The op must be the hated stepmother. I bet when they all go out to eat hers has venison and the step gets get a burger

If your husband was giving less to his children from his first marriage than those from his second and/or your children I'd be asking you what you see in the callous bastard. But he's not. He, rightly and respectably, is providing for the children from his first marriage just as he should.

He does intend to give less to his older children. He is currently not intending to fund private schools at all for them, while intending to pay half the cost for his younger children. He could easily rectify this and pay the same number of years fees for all his children.

Also, thinking about it, I presume that OP's older children have been in private education for their whole school careers? As well as ridden ponies etc?

Despite understanding that the young stepdaughter feels left out and resentful, I think the far worse 'crime' would be to 'reduce' the lifestyle of these other children who have already lost their father to match that of their stepfather's children.

I teach in a private school and, a couple of months ago, two of our children tragically lost their mum. They are a very wealthy family, do lots of horse riding, music, gymnastics and probably other stuff, live in a lovely house, probably have loads of lovely toys etc. But they have lost the most important thing in their lives. If their father was to remarry I can't imagine anything more destabilising for him to say than that they have to leave our school and stop their hobbies because his new step children don't have that kind of life. How upsetting would that be!

OP, will you be some spending any of your deceased H's money on your new young children?

Oh come on. Why take them all horse riding for two kids to have to watch that's rubbing their noses in it and really cruel.

I think when it concerns both your kids, it is your business. Yes you do not sound blended at all, but two families living side by side. Don't you communicate?

We keep all of our money seperate as well. My OH earns twice sometimes three times more than I do, he pays all the bills then his money is his.

I pay my own Direct debits and then my money is mine. We don't justify what we spend to the other.

It's not a common way in marriage but it works best for us.

So I can understand how you have no idea what he does with his money.

You are having to problems regarding finances, it is your concern what he does with his money.

I like Morethanpotatoprints post way up the thread. That seems very workable. The fact is OP, you've contributed to this situation. You married somebody with children and have had more. You must see how this dynamic is going to be very difficult with existing step-children?

To be honest, I can't see how you and husband (and he and his ex) didn't talk through all of this at the start.

I would put the inheritance away as a nest-egg for your late husband's children. Bear in mind that you can't use it for your second 'set' of children though either. Start using the existing family money pooled together for all of the children and your husband can put in his share to make it fair. You/he don't have his first children that often so I'm sure between you, you can act in a way that isn't gauche and obvious.

Look for a solution rather than reasons 'not to' - and absolutely, all conversations are between the adults, the children shouldn't hear so much as a whisper.

Op you have not answer the question about whether your dh makes provision tgat is equal to what he pays for private school for your kids together. I don't think he does, that is the problem.

I think that is the most important point.

There is no reason why the OP's stepchildren should expect to benefit from a pot of money left by unrelated children's late father - although it's not clear whether the OP's younger children are benefitting from that money at all - but they do have the right to expect equality with their father's other children.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way to resolve this to everyone's satisfaction. Three children are a big addition to a blended family consisting of five existing children, and thought should really have been given as to how to reduce the impact on the older children. However, the children are all here now, and there are two issues to think about. One is the appearance of scrupulous fairness between all children who share a parent, and the other is the more general issue of how to create a happy family in which all the children feel equally valued and invested in.

The father making an effort to spend, as far as possible, equal time and money on all five of his children would be a big step towards both goals, if that isn't what is happening already.

ELK - I have a five bedroom house, which was gifted to my first husband and I on our wedding day by his parents. All bedrooms are close to the same size (nice sized doubles). My two oldest children have their own bedrooms, that were hand painted/decorated by their father before he died. My twins share the third room, my stepkids use the forth, and then baby DD was in with DH and I, which was going to be for a couple of years. However, due to complications with my multiple sclerosis, DD2 may need to move in to a separate bedroom sooner than expected, so were trying to sort out arrangements.

I have dubbed this type of not really blended family "time share family". Sadly, we are likely to fall apart over this issue-as DP think DSSs are
NOT HIS FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND HE IS NOT OUR SLAVE same thing, genders reversed, the resentment caused has finished an otherwise wonderful partnership.

I think that when the step children are around it would be prudent to not do fancy activities that all the kids can't engage in. It's really cruel I couldn't do it. I would only do things all the kids can do. I couldn't treat my kids friends differently let alone step singlings. The step kids didn't ask to be in this position and when they are all together should be treated equally.

YABU. If it's not your place to financially provide for DSD, it's not your place to be talking to her about money matters either. Your DH should be doing it instead.

As for the rest, I can understand your desire not to financially provide for someone else's DC, I'm not sure I'd be up for that either. But with that in mind it wasn't a very bright idea to have a relationship with a man who had them already. Let alone to set up house with and marry him! You can make whatever logical arguments about this you want, but you have a family with 8 kids and 3 different financial footings, and you're a solid gold fuckwit if you think that's not going to be a recipe for resentment and aggro from the DSC. Justified or otherwise. I appreciate there's nothing to be done about the eldest standing to inherit from their father, and after all life has dealt them a bum hand in other ways, but that doesn't mean componding the situation is sensible.

Aeroflet also makes a good point about your DH's obligation to provide equally for all his DC. The money he's not spent on his older two's schooling should be used for them in other ways. Higher education maybe, or a property deposit. That said, this is obviously his responsibility rather than yours.

"I don't know what he does with his money, besides what he pays towards bills/our children/joint savings account. He could be building a time machine for all I know or care. It isn't really any of my business, just like my money is none of his."
Actually it is your business, because it affects YOUR children, not just his. A wedge is being driven between the children; and the ones who will probably be affected most in the long term will be your three youngest, growing up with fractured relationships between them and their older paternal siblings.

OP, do you actually like his children? Your posting style is so cold, it is hard to tell where your emotions are.