AIBU that it's unfair to stop giving my children but not the other grand children??

[Mamabear101]

My mil and fil decided to give all of their grandchildren a small sum of money each year a few years back. At that time my dh and I had no children together though he had 2 children from previous marriage. His brother also had 2 children. We have since had 3 children. Our children have never received the money in the way that the others have - ie monthly over term time. Instead they have been given the full sum in cash. But here's the thing - our third dc was born months ago and to date has had nothing from them at all - not as much as a pair of socks to welcome him to the world. And none of out children have received the cash that they usually get at all this year. My pil are very wealthy - 4 foreign holidays a year, 2 houses, 2 cars etc (both inherited a lot of money). My dh raised the issue of the children's cash with them a couple if days ago (just before their fifth foreign holiday this year). His mum told him they can't afford to give out children the money so they won't be getting it. The other 4 children will continue to receive theirs. Aibu to be furious about this? They're not back until 23 Dec and supposed to be coming to us for Xmas day but given how they're treating my kids I don't think I can stomach it....

😥 - lots of mixed responses! Thanks for the advice. There is certainly no question of us feeling entitled - much more about fairness amongst my dh's children. We are painfully aware of it I.e same amount spent on birthdays, Xmas etc. loved the waste sees analogy - oi where's the baby's money??!! A million miles from the truth- think more downton abbey than Watford!! I probably didn't express things well in original post. My dh would never have asked for the cash!! He and his dm were having a conversation during which they were talking about eldest child finishing uni next yr. there was then discussion by mil about whether they would continue to give her the money she's been receiving. To which my dh said oh we didn't realise u were still giving the grandkids that cash. His mum then said oh yes we wanted to speak to u both about that - we can't afford to keep giving ur three the cash so won't be any more.... That was the conversation. No demands. But thanks for the thoughts. We are both professional people in professional jobs and can support our children no problems.

i wouldnt have them for Christmas dinner never mind staying over night tell them you cant afford to feed two more people

It isent fair, they should be stopping that for all grandchildren, treating them equally.

It's the lack of fairness, some are completely misunderstanding. Op does not want money from them, rather if they give to one sets of gc, it should. Mean all, or none at all.

If they can't afford it, they can't afford it. BUT, if they can't afford it for your three, they can't afford it for the others. Yes, it's their money, yes, they can spend it how they like, no, you shouldn't expect the money, but that doesn't stop it being unfair and hurtful. It would certainly affect my view of them as gps and I too would find it very hard to host then at Christmas knowing they value my children less than their other gcs.

But Aeroflot, the thing is the GPs probably think they are being fair. They are probably reasoning that it would be unfair to cut a regular gift to a struggling student in order to pay money to the savings account of an oblivious baby.

OP and her DH just need to understand a bit more about why and how they have come to this decision, and let his parents know that they feel hurt (reasonably enough) about it. The GPs probably have no idea that they have caused this kind of upset.

Aeroflot, you're making an error in thinking that because people don't agree with your view, they don't understand it. Fairness isn't just doing exactly the same thing regardless of circumstances. As far as I can see, they've held up their promise to the grandchildren they made this commitment to. They don't want to do it anymore, whether that's because of finances or because it's a pain in the hole at this stage with everyone going on about who gets/it's entitled to what is their business. They aren't obliged to spend the next 20 years repeating an expensive error to satisfy some very literal view of fairness.

I don't agree, surely the grandchildren have parents to support them. If they can't afford it, then they can't afford it for all grandchildren.

There is no chance of getting this sorted out before Christmas. And over Christmas hardly seems like the appropriate time to discuss it (though it would also be very Eastenders). I would put it out of your mind completely OP, for now, and return to it at a less loaded time of year.

I'd be wanting to show my children that I would always stick up for them by telling these grandparents to fuck off to the far side of fuck.

Otherwise, what happens years down the line when your kids find out that they were always the poor relations not only to their cousins, but also to their own siblings, and you stood by and said nothing about it. Sod that for a game of soldiers.

They may be prepared to see out what they started but not take more on. They may see that as fairer than telling the kids who have had this money and have commitments based on getting it that it's no longer available because of the smaller children.

Then they should stop giving money to the grandchildren, citing that they cannot give to each gc, so will be stopping the financing contribution to all grandchildren.

Yes it is their money, their choice, the decent thing is if they cannot give to all, they stop all together, it is only right and fair.

"I'd be wanting to show my children that I would always stick up for them by telling these grandparents to fuck off to the far side of fuck."

Meanwhile, back in the real world, OP's DH can have a chat with his mum when she comes back off her holiday, and she will likely explain that they will stop paying subs to the older ones when they leave uni and at that point give some money to the new children.

The GPs probably have no idea that they have caused this kind of upset.

Then they are either incredibly stupid or lack any form of emotional intelligence.

How would she not have thought that the OP's DH wouldn't have been hurt?

It was unbelievably crass of your husband to ask where the money was.

Indeed.

OP I can see where they are coming from. They are paying money to the same amount of children of each of their children, ie your BIL's 2 children and your DH's 2 children. In their eyes that is probably very fair.

My DM took out a policy for my Dsis 1st child and then my dc1. We both went on to have a lot more children who didn't benefit from this. I'm not put out about this at all, it is a gift and my ds (who is a mid teen) doesn't even know it exists yet. I took out an equal policy for my remaining children and hopefully it will work out fairly equally in the end.

DB has just had his dc1 and my parents have now retired and had to majorly cut back on birthdays/xmas etc. I don't think his dc1 will be getting a policy as they aren't in a position to be able to commit to it. Originally they got £40 each at xmas and now it is more like £20 so perhaps in dbro's eyes his dc will be getting less.

All this talk of how many foreign holidays they have had makes you sound resentful and entitled. If you want to back off from them then do so, but don't make it about the money lest you make yourself look greedy. I can see their point about giving the older ones and not the younger ones; they are more in need than young children. My DM gives more to her eldest DGC as he has just started university and needs it more, I don't have any problem with this, even though mine probably won't get at this stage.

Nanny - yep, the whole picture makes them seem a bit like that, IMO. But lots of people simply don't understand how people feel unless they have it explained to them.

have them for christmas, it will never resolve itself if you don't have them, more likely to aggravate the situation..

Maybe your husband could write to them/or raise it with them again after christmas, to say that you don't understand why they are not treating all their grandchildren in the same way...and that you feel its unfair and see what they say or how they respond.

Let's put some fake numbers in this, if it was say, £50 a month per older grandchild, so they are currently paying £200 between the 4 older ones. If they can't afford another £150 for the younger 3, then the a fairer choice would be to take all of DH's 5 DCs and split the £100 they are currently spending on his oldest two to be £20 each DGC on that side of the family.

It would be very entitled of the OP's DH to insist on his parents finding another £150 per month for his younger DCs, it wouldnt be entitled to ask them to split the money they are prepared to spend on the DGC between all of his children, not just giving it to 2 of them. For the OP's DH to say "treat all my children the same, or don't give any of my children money. Don't play favourites." Wouldn't be 'entitled'.

OP - do your step-children know their siblings aren't getting any money from the grandparents?

It's their money to spend as they please.
You need to respect that first & foremost.
Then maybe your DH can talk to his parents about how it doesn't seem very fair. You do not want to fall out over money, whatever their decisions.

My dad & his 8 surviving siblings have had mutterings over what money other siblings got. Ditto my mom & her 4 siblings. Now I don't like how my step-siblings will get most my dad's estate... but hey ho. I don't think any parent ever really does get things fair.

Get over it. The first few kids have been lucky.

Don't be spiteful nasty adults and try and limit the money the teenages/you get adults get. That is not going to make them give the youngest the money, if the grandparents were into compromising they would have done it by now. They obviously thought about it and come pick with this situation.

If the kids were very similar in age eg . the newest kids just a couple of years younger I could understand the whole it's not fair argument but in reality the only people moaning about this is you and your dh. Your kids will be unaware, id just hope you entitledness doesn't rub off onto them!

It's the lack of fairness, some are completely misunderstanding. Op does not want money from them, rather if they give to one sets of gc, it should. Mean all, or none at all.

But they are giving to both sets of GC. They are giving to 2 children from each set of GC. The OP's children are not a "new" set. They are from the same son. One son has had 2 children and the other has had 5. I think it is only complicated because the youngest 3 are from a different mother and from the OP's perspective none of her dc are benefiting.

I would be really grateful if my DP's were subsidizing my eldest 2 dc, that would mean I had more money to spend on my other dc. OP said that they are both professionals and do not need the money, so if they are worried about equality they should just pay in the same amount for their other children.

If the GP's then said they can't afford to pay for all the dgc so they won't pay for any, OP's BIL would be annoyed because his DB chose to have over double the amount of dc he had, so his dc would be missing out. Someone will always have an issue here. I think many GP's start off with financial intentions but cannot keep it up when they have large amounts of dgc, which is fair enough.

The more I think of this the more I think that the GP's are being fair. This reminds me of the poster who wanted her newborn child to have money back dated for several years so that the older dgc wouldn't have got more money than him

Woe - If it was the extra money that was the problem, the obvious solution was the money for the OP's DH's side to be split between all his DCs, it used to be just 2 DCs, now he has 5, so they get less each, the BIL has only 2 DCs so his children get more. Seems all fairer to say "there's 5 DGC to split the same budget between so everyone gets less" than saying "we will only give money to the oldest 2 then nothing to the younger 3 rather than less to all."

The OP could make up the difference themselves in their DCs savings, it doesn't change the fact that when facing a budget limitation, the grandparents have chosen to play favourites and treat the grandchildren from their DS's 2nd wife as lesser than the children from the first wife.

The grandparents are entitled to do what they like with their money, but after obvious favouritism against my DCs within the family, I'm not sure I could play dutiful daughter-in-law.

Yes I agree that the fairest thing to do would be to split it between the 5 dc, however there is the supposition/assumption that the OP's children are being excluded as they are favouring the "first" dgc, but I don't think that is fair. i gave my example where my DP's give more to certain ones than the others because the need is greater, not because they are playing favourites.