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?

so the OP pay more for her own children so freeing up money so he can spend it on his other children? so that the OP doesnt have to spend any money on them?

Why shouldn't the OPs husband spend an equal amount on each of HIS children. I don't think OP expects him to fund HER children (the ones from her late husband) so why should she fund his (those with his ex)either directly or indirectly?

The one thing I do think is that your DH should be putting away money for his other children equal to what his half share of school fees would have been for them. They are not getting the (assumed) leg-up of the private education, so they at least deserve the nest egg to help them through uni / deposit on a house or whatever.

I know you say it is none of your business what he does with his money, but the inter-sibling relationships will affect you all, and at least when they are adults his first children will understand that he has done his best to be fair to them.

He could also spend (a bit of) it to give them more material things so they feel less disparity between themselves and your children / your joint children.

When children are not treat the same by those closest to them it causes resentment to build deep and that resentment will always manifest itself somewhere negatively.

I do not think the step children are your problem but your husbands, their father. Now any good father would want to ensure equality amongst his children as far as is possible. He truly isn't doing that because of the situation that is occurring.

If we are talking a computer or some extra curricular lessons - he can afford to give extra treats if he was going to pay half towards schooling.

He is clearly making a choice not to do it.

Why you have asked if you should have a talk is beyond me. It should be their father dealing with this, not you.

Alternatively, you could show some kindness towards the children and make their life more equal to that of the dc who reside with you.

It's true that you don't have to or even seem to want to but kindness is such a wonderful trait.

I think a lot of people are being unnecessarily harsh on the OP here.
I don't think she's being unreasonable, other than I think she needs to get her DH to address the problem.

There is no way to make this absolutely fair- her SC do have 2 parents to provide for them, as do her youngest DC with her DH. Her eldest have only her, and what has been left to them should not be spend on SC.

It sounds like their father is paying maintenance (assuming this is not the bare minimum) and has offered to pay 1/2 school fees, which seems fair to me. Their mother can't afford it, and that's just life isn't it?Perhaps her DH could put the money he would have spent on school fees aside in a savings account for his older children.

I wouldn't say the answer is to prevent the younger children attending private school, if that's what both their parents want and can afford.

The only thing that can be done is to spend roughly equal on things when SC are with you, and I'd agree with previous posters that if the other children are doing an activity, then the SC should also get to join in. But if it's a case of things they do when the SC are not there, then this is harder to "equalise". Ultimately, though, it's up to their father (OP's DH) to equalise the amount spent on hobbies/extra-curriculars/toys, not the OP.

As for the toys thing, her DC are allowed to have special toys they don't share, and as long as they are put away and nobody plays with them then there is not a problem with this. I had toys like that (one in particular given by the great-grandad who died shortly after he gave it to me)- nobody else played with it, including my brother and cousins.

We blended 5 teens, 2 of mine and 3 of his. He had one at private school funded by their dgp. No one minded. Apart from that we have. Been one family since the day we married. Dsc lived with us. We gave them3 bedrooms and they sorted themselves with 3 boys in one, two girls in another and a 'den/study'.
The op doesn't seem very compassionate at all. Mine had a share of the money their dad left but that was saved till they were 18. I am very proud 26 years later of five lovely couples, 9 dgc an a real family.

@IanHislopsLawyer

I thought that personal attacks weren't allowed?

They're not. Do report any you see.
Sorry to have to delete you as you repeated this PA, m'learned friend.

I don't think the OP has had a tough time.

She asked if she WBU to only provide financially for her own children. Lots of people have posted extensive and thoughtful posts about why they feel this wouldn't work, or why they believe the Op's current arrangements don't seem to be in the interests of all the children.

For her part, the OP has popped in to the thread occasionally to post curt comments in response to a select few posts.

For someone who wanted advice, this seems a very odd way to interact with the people she's sought advice from.

I guess I can see where OP is coming from. I'm a single parent now, and if I were to meet and marry a man who had children from a previous relationship, there would be no way I would pull my DD out her current school, sell her pony or stop her doing the extra-curricular activities because my new partner and his ex-partner could not afford to do the same for their children.

If I went on to have any more DC, I would want them to have the same opportunities as DD, if it could be afforded (and if it couldn't, I probably wouldn't have any more). The SC's schooling wouldn't really be up to me- it is a choice to be made between their parents and the costs of their upbringing split between the two of them.

The OP has said that her husband has offered to pay half the school fees for the children of his first marriage just as he's paying half the school fees for the other children he's produced.

Offering to pay half (but not actually doing so) is not the same as actually paying half.

He is treating his two sets of children differently when there is nothing stopping him from treating them exactly the same.

It doesn't matter that his ex can't pay half, he just pays the full amount for half as long. And pays for the same number of years for the children he shares with OP. Then he is treating all his children the same.

If his offer was insincere, and he can't actually afford to do it, then he halves the total number of years funding he supplies to his three younger children and use the money for his three older ones.

The argument that his ex not being able to contribute to his older children stops him doing so is a red herring.

And he only offered to pay half, when his ex complained that he was treating his children differently. He did not decide himself to offer to pay half.

I don't think the intricacies of who spends what on whom are the issue here. As many posters have illustrated, there are ways to allow for blended families with complex financial circumstances which don't result in the children of an earlier relationship feeling hard done by. In this case, that has already happened, and the OP and her DH must address this if they wish to raise eight happy children. OP, if you don't want to do so then of course you don't have to, but I hope some of the posts here have at least given you some insight into how your stepchildren are likely to end up feeling if nothing changes.

Personally I cannot understand how a married couple keeps seperate finances. To me once you get married you share everything.

As a step child myself the 4 of us who "joined together" are ALL treated the same by both parents. This has given us a closer bond as a family as there's no resentment between us kids or us towards the respective step parents.

I don't think YABU to only spend your money on your kids. I definitely don't think YABU to ensure your 2 eldest children have their own rooms & financial benefits as provided for by their dad & paternal grandparents.

I do think your current dh needs to speak to his children about their questions about financial unfairness that they see. You said in a post that he owns a property too, so I'd assume if he died his biological kids would get it not your two eldest? Your husband definitely needs to think about how he is supporting all his children, any possible unfairness issues & how this may affect his future relationship with them as teenagers & adults.

I do think it wouldn't kill you to do something as a nice gesture with your dsc & children (a day out somewhere free/ pizza/ something they could all play with e.g. Supersoakers for all!) and make it clear its from YOU not dh as you enjoy spending time with them all.

sadly Mrs Amaretto if he died the OP would get the lions share of his assits even if will said otherwise (marraige and all that)

Each time I read a thread started by this OP about her set-up, I am astonished by how many kinds of messed-up her choices have been.

There are so many ticking time bombs in this family, it's almost unbelievable. I just don't know how anyone can lead this life and ever sleep soundly.

I wonder how the OP's stepchildren will feel about the their father's new children going privately. Have I got that right?

tiny you need to sort this out not just for the sake of your stepchildren, but also for your own children who are likely to be negatively affected by growing up in an unequal household and by the anger and resentment of their step siblings as they get older. By trying to save money for your children you are impoverishing everyone's emotional lives.

Your DH should put aside half the school fees he's not paying for each of his first three children into an account every year, then they would probably be able to buy a property outright when they are older.

That way, it would address their disadvantage somewhat.

Wow, complicated!

I think your older DC should continue at private school as they're dad is paying for it.

Are you planning on paying for your 3 youngest with your oldest DC's father's money? That I don't think right. I think the inheritance should be kept for them as all other kids will inherit from two parents, they'll now only inherit from one (sorry to be so frank).

Your DH cannot pay half for 3 youngest kids without doing the same for his 3 oldest. As Theoretian worked out perhaps he pays for fewer years for all so they go for secondary and/or sixth form not from primary.

Your DH must treat his 6 kids exactly the same. It should be made clear to all that your oldest DC's father has died and this is the money he left them. I don't think they can kick a fuss up about that.

If they're happy at state school and wish to keep the money that would have been spent on private for university or a house deposit or to blow it when older I think they should know that money is put aside so that all 6 kids of DH are being treated equally.

I don't think you should insist your youngest 3 with your DH go to private from primary unless he can afford to put all his kids in private immediately. I think you need to compromise on that so that he can treat all his kids fairly.

I think your kids as far as possible should have their own rooms as this is their primary home whereas presumably the step children have their own rooms at their house. I think all your kids must accept that there will be times that they all have to share. However, I think the step kids need to realise that these aren't their rooms and they need to be respectful of their step brothers/sisters belongings - after all they have their own rooms at their mother's that they don't need to share with step brothers/sisters. All kids must be told they have to get on and make this work.

I think you need a play room with a stock of toys that are everyone's. Each kid then has their things that they don't need to share.

Xmas I think you need to compromise. If you're buying your kids and ipad, all kids get one, regardless of what the step kids' mother is buying them. It wouldn't harm to have certain years they get certain things - reaching secondary a new laptop or iphone etc so the 11 year old gets this and the 9 year old knows when he/she reaches that age that is what they'll too have.

Most important thing your DH has to treat his kids equally- even if that means your youngest 3 don't get what the oldest have. You need to compromise on that. By talking this through with the kids they'll at least feel you've made an attempt at fairness. I also think you all need to sit round and discuss it a bit if possible or they know they can bring things up with respective parents.

Could you also not think of extending/loft conversion with all this money so you have more space for all of you?

OP you are not responsible for your sc education costs - that's up to their father and their mother to sort out between them. I think the father needs to sit down with his kids and explain the reason your kids go to private school is because they don't have a father and their education is being funded by what's been left behind.

Given you have provided w home for the family and buy them bits and pieces when they are with you etc. I think you have been more than generous.

It's amazing other people think the SC should be supported by you when they have two parents already supporting them - speak about feeling entitled.

P.s. Sorry to hear you lost your first husband - I'm sure you would rather have him back than have the money/house and I'm sure you kids miss their dad like mad.

It sounds like our sd has a few issues, which probably don't have anything to do with the material things she is not getting.

I don't have sc, but I am a child from a massively complicated blended family. My mother always felt like you, that she had to provide for her own dc, the difference is that sf was much wealthier than her.

He has always been very generous with us, treating us almost like his own (even though he is not with my mother any more). It has always meant a lot to me, not because of the money (although in some cases, eg. paying my uni fees it was life changing for me), but because it always made me feel like he really cared for me.

He still provided considerably more to his own dc, and I will not be inheriting anything from him whereas his dc will inherit a lot, and that seems fair and right to me. I did not receive anything from my father but that is just the luck of the draw, my father was not wealthy so left nothing when he died.

So I see where you are coming from, but where possible, providing things for your sc which are not that trivial could mean a lot to them.

Having said all that, I lived with sf, I never expected (nor received) anything from my df's wives as I never lived with them.

Has the OP said whether she uses her late husband's inheritence on her new DC ?