Would you be offended if your spouse did this?

[PiecesOfPie]

I am an only child, my parents have quite a large estate which is in trust. I am the sole beneficiary of this (with them life time beneficiaries). The amount would be quite substantial.

My husband and I share one DC, he has 2 with his ex partner.

I have not yet discussed the situation with a solicitor but I want to broach the subject with DH and then get legal advice for when this happens. As far as I am aware, there are times when inheritance can be viewed as a marital asset in the case of separation?

I'd like to see a solicitor about essentially ring fencing this so that it can be left solely in my will to our 1 DC only. Essentially, I don't want any of the funds going to my husband and then onto my step children if we were to ever divorce.

Would you be insulted if your spouse suggested this to you? Yes it would mean that our DC would have the chance to inherit a lot more than my SC but it would be from me (my parents really), not their dad.

I must admit I'm not hugely clued up on all the rules and law surrounding this sort of thing and to clarify I have not yet sought any legal advice so this is entirely hypothetical right now.

It's not about what they 'mean' to you. FFS. It's about how you treat them. And adults should treat all the children living in their home equally. Same rules, same privileges. Because that's fair

First, thats not what the pp said, that's your interpretation. Secondly...bollocks. You don't have the same rules and priveliges for all children in a house wven when they are all yours, fairly obviously. A 4 year old has different rules than a 14 year old. And when they are not yours, its for their parents to decide most of the rules and privileges. And its for their parents to leave them money in their wills.

Nor is the OP’s child going to starve if she doesn’t get ALL of it. So that clearly isn’t the criteria, or the OP would cheerfully will it to all the children in her family.

Obviously not, it's a gift she wants to give to her daughter. My point is that your guilt trip laden comments about her needing to check her step children will be alright before deciding what to do with her money are ridiculous, this isn't about whether any of them will be "ok".

@LoveandHateWhatABeautifulComb

It isn't 'naive and silly' to be saddened about it. Because it is possible to have a strong attachment to a stepchild. I know my DSiis's relationship with her DSS different from the norm, and is very much down to the fact that she was his main carer during his teens. (She only came into his life when he was nine, however.)

It isn't realistic to expect extended family to feel the same way once the stepchildren have grown up, clearly. We were always very careful to treat him the same as our other DNieces and DNephews, but we don't have the same bond with him as we have with my DSis's own DC now that he's an adult with his own family.

But to mock it as 'naive and silly' is unnecessary. Surely some effort should be made to form a bond with your partner's child, especially if they're still children and you're involved in their upbringing. The two come as a package. Not that you have to love them the same, obviously, but they shouldn't feel like second class citizens in your eyes.

And it's also completely normal for SPs to be expected not to tread on toes, not to act like mum, not to get too involved, not to go to this play or that parents evenings, not to have any legal responsibility over the children or any opportunity to see them again if they split tomorrow, to keep out of X Y or Z because it's none of their business. But sure, when there's money involved it's all hands on deck right.

But this doesn’t appear to be the issue here. The OP is doing this because she wants to. It isn’t because she doesn’t feel able to because of disapproval from her DSC’s other parent (which would be more understandable).

It isn't 'naive and silly' to be saddened about it. Because it is possible to have a strong attachment to a stepchild

Not as strong as to your own child, is the point.

Obviously not, it's a gift she wants to give to her daughter. My point is that your guilt trip laden comments about her needing to check her step children will be alright before deciding what to do with her money are ridiculous, this isn't about whether any of them will be "ok".

But “ok” doesn’t mean “not penniless” when it comes to the OP’s biological child? Just her DSC?

Okay. 😂

There is also a big difference between inheritance and getting someone a Christmas present, don't be obtuse.

Don't be ill-mannered. As I've said, from my perspective it isn't about the money (much to the derision of some on here); it's about the attitude. You either treat the children who live in your house the same or you don't.

And this 'her parents' money' is such a red herring. The parents plan to leave it to their daughter; that's the only point it has anything to do with OP, at the point it becomes HER money. Not her parents' money.

@VeniceQueen2004

Do you? How naive and silly of you. It's bizarre to imagine that unrelated to you kids that you only met as teens, for example, would mean exactly the same to you as your own children.

It's not about what they 'mean' to you. FFS. It's about how you treat them. And adults should treat all the children living in their home equally. Same rules, same privileges. Because that's fair.

Fair is not equal ffs. It is not the same thing.

Is it fair that DSC have the potential to inherit from 3 sets of grandparents whilst OPs child only has 2?

Is it fair that DSC can potentially inherit from 4 adults (OP, her husband, their mum, her husband), but OPs child only from 2?

No... Because fair is not always the same as equal.

Everyone involved has an equal amount of people to inherit from, their parents. 2. Mum and Dad. And if they wish, grandparents or other family members. It so happens that some of the children have a different set of parents than the others. It's just the way it is.

Thinking about it actually, which I hadn't before because it wouldn't even occur to me to be so entitled, I have a step dad. I'd never dream of being mad that inheritance he received from his mum, who I've met about twice was reserved for his kids, her grandchildren, or bypassed him and went straight to them. She's their grandma, it is absolutely nothing to do with me. I'd have to be a pretty selfish adult to consider it mine just because he was married to my mum.

@AbsolutelyCrackin

This surely depends though how that particular family operates.

My child's step mother doesn't view my children as equal (to her) as her own. They are treated fairly and kindly day to day but I know (and completely understand) that her children are her top priority just as mine are mine, in the same way she is not an equal parent to them as me and ex. She has never played mum, the children barely see her side of the family and they don't consider them 'their family'. They still get on very well with her though and they love each other in their own way. No one is upset about it, everyone understands that there are some differences between the children's particular family. They have grandparents here with me so they don't need to feel aggrieved or upset that their siblings have a different set of grandparents with their mum.

It becomes risky in my opinion if people pretend or force the whole 'everyone is equal' when they aren't. If your step children are made to feel by your wider family that they are very much equally part of it then yes of course it would be upsetting to later find out you weren't. If they have never been made to feel that way or had those types of relationships then why would it be surprising all of a sudden? Especially older step children. Older step kids don't always want another mum/dad/set of grandparents. It's very different to meeting a toddler for example who doesn't yet have the understanding to differentiate.

This is exactly how my family are. Even though my step mum came into my life when my siblings and I were really young she has never been a mum figure to me. I have a mum why do I need another? We have a pleasant and caring relationship but not a parental one.

Even if her family were millionaires and my mum’s family were not I would never expect a penny from them as they are not my family and I wouldn’t be expecting my half siblings to share with me

First, thats not what the pp said, that's your interpretation. Secondly...bollocks. You don't have the same rules and priveliges for all children in a house wven when they are all yours, fairly obviously. A 4 year old has different rules than a 14 year old

Haha I knew someone would try this one. Yes obviously; but it would be unfair when the 4 yo becomes 14 to allow them liberties you didn't allow the 14 yo when they were, and vice versa. How often is it said on here when parents say 'My ex lets my children stay up until midnight when they go there' that in your house, it's your rules that apply? So the idea exes will politely work out a set of rules that apply to JUST the joint children in BOTH their houses is not exactly realistic. Usually the children fall in with the rules that apply in whichever house they're in, and this is just ANOTHER way they are expected to be flexible and adaptive in a way that would be beyond most adults.

@LoveandHateWhatABeautifulComb

Although actually my DSis genuinely does love her DSS as much as her own (2 bio and 1 adopted). She was always careful not to step on his own mum's toes, but she really doesn't love him any less). So it obviously is possible for that to be the case, though I accept that she's unusual. Not many women become a bio mum, stepmum and adoptive mum.

I'm an adoptive mum, not a stepmum, but it has shown me that you can form a strong bond with a child who isn't biologically your own. (And yes, I'm aware that it isn't the same thing, but some people don't want to adopt for the very reason that they don't want a child who isn't biologically their own.

And it's also completely normal for SPs to be expected not to tread on toes, not to act like mum, not to get too involved, not to go to this play or that parents evenings, not to have any legal responsibility over the children or any opportunity to see them again if they split tomorrow, to keep out of X Y or Z because it's none of their business. But sure, when there's money involved it's all hands on deck right.

And I think that's utterly wrong too; not because of the stepparents' poor hurt feelings (let's remember we are talking about adults who made choices here), but because it's utterly dysfunctional for the children, who have already experienced a major disruption in their home life, to have another adult join their family, assume authority, form a relationship, and then disappear totally out of their lives again at the whim of an adult. This is why it's so hideous when separated parents move straight in with new partners, or after a ridiculously short space of time (all the more so when the children are young).

So little thought seems to be given to the children of broken relationships; it's all about the parents and step-parents, what they want, their rights etc.

I'm obviously very wicked as I think it's entirely normal for someone's children to be their top priority. And yes, I do think inheritance and things of that nature are different from day to day household fair treatment i.e. same bed times, same Christmas presents blah blah.

If I'd raised a child since they were very young that's different. But if my husband has kids and they have an involved mother and father then yep, to me my own kids are my priority, my DSCs are their parents.

It doesn't mean I don't buy anyone Christmas presents or make them sleep in the cellar whilst my kids sleep in a double bedroom each. But yeah when it comes to things like their financial future, my kids are first and foremost to me. They are my priority and I don't feel bad about that eirher. Their parents are welcome to prioritise them, as I'm sure they would do.

It's hardly mind blowing stuff that a parent would prioritise their own children.

It's hardly mind blowing stuff that a parent would prioritise their own children.

It doesn’t blow my mind in any way. It doesn’t even surprise me. But I don’t think it’s a great dynamic. It’s certainly not a perspective I would take into a second marriage.

*Is it fair that DSC have the potential to inherit from 3 sets of grandparents whilst OPs child only has 2?

Is it fair that DSC can potentially inherit from 4 adults (OP, her husband, their mum, her husband), but OPs child only from 2?*

'Potential to inherit' means absolutely jack shit as many of those ranting on the many 'stolen my inheritance' threads on MN daily will attest.

Inheritance as a system is inherently 'unfair', this is obvious (we wouldn't have the wealth inequity we do in this country if it wasn't!). All any individual can do is try to be as fair as they can within their own remit. The OP has three children in her blended family - the one she made and the two she chose when she married her DP. I would say the fair thing would be for her to treat those children equally, as she has no idea what they will ACTUALLY inherit from anywhere else nor can she control it. Any more than she can control whether one of them will get a chronic illness. The only thing she can control is how SHE treats them. And she feels she wants to treat the SC as less. Which is her right. But it isn't what I would do.

Thinking about it actually, which I hadn't before because it wouldn't even occur to me to be so entitled, I have a step dad. I'd never dream of being mad that inheritance he received from his mum, who I've met about twice was reserved for his kids, her grandchildren, or bypassed him and went straight to them. She's their grandma, it is absolutely nothing to do with me. I'd have to be a pretty selfish adult to consider it mine just because he was married to my mum.

Did he marry your mum when you were a child? Did you live in his home? Did you have to defer to his authority?

If not then we are not comparing like with like.

It's hardly mind blowing stuff that a parent would prioritise their own children

Those claiming it is awful are, I suspect, thinking theoretically about this and have little practical experience.

I haven't yet had time to RTFT but I do tend to agree with @AbsolutelyCrackin.

I'm prepared to have my opinion changed when I read other comments though!

let's remember we are talking about adults who made choices here

The step children will likely be adults when any of this happens. I, as an adult step child, would not he so entitled to have expected my step dad (who I have a great relationship with by the way) to leave his mum's money to me equally with his own kids. I am capable, as an adult of understanding that, my status as a step 'child' is irrelevant. I'm not a child, just as these children likely won't be when anything actually happens.

I don't have a relationship with my Step dads mum, my half siblings do. Even if it went to my step dad first and he 'ring fenced' it for his kids. I would never dream of having a problem with that. She was their grandma, not mine and as much as I get on with my step dad, he is their dad, not mine. I have a dad. No one misunderstood who's parents were who's.

@VeniceQueen2004

Thinking about it actually, which I hadn't before because it wouldn't even occur to me to be so entitled, I have a step dad. I'd never dream of being mad that inheritance he received from his mum, who I've met about twice was reserved for his kids, her grandchildren, or bypassed him and went straight to them. She's their grandma, it is absolutely nothing to do with me. I'd have to be a pretty selfish adult to consider it mine just because he was married to my mum.

Did he marry your mum when you were a child? Did you live in his home? Did you have to defer to his authority?

If not then we are not comparing like with like.

Yes actually.

He married my mum when I was 12. I still never saw him as my dad. He was my mum's husband, my step father but I was not confused as to who's parent he was or by association, who's grandparents his parents were.

And as an adult, I would not expect anything from him equal to his own children. Maybe he'll leave me something, who knows, I've no idea. If he leaves his share of everything to his kids then fine, I have my own dad to inherit from if he wishes to leave anything to me.

And I would never in a million years blame my half siblings if they inherited from him and I didn't... Because again. I'm not entitled as fuck.

Those claiming it is awful are, I suspect, thinking theoretically about this and have little practical experience.

I have the experience of being a step-child in a blended family, and knowing that my step-sister (from SM's previous marriage) and me and my sister (from Dad's previous marriage) were treated very differently to my half brother (both their kid - and it has had a knock on effect on all three of our self-esteem, and on our relationship with our brother (even though it's not his fault).

I have taken refuge in having very low expecations and not comparing, as it's the best way not to get hurt. Unfortunately this learned behaviour carries into many areas of life; there's a lot of talk about SC being 'entitled' here; as it happens, one of the things that happens to you growing up in an unequal family is you feel entitled to very little, and this can affect all your relationships going forward without a lot of emotional work. Especially when the inequity is totally denied or explained away as 'people do things differently'.

And this is not about money ('hahahaha sure it isn't' from the peanut gallery). It's about feeling equally loved, equally valued, equally protected, equally settled as a child. Not hanging between two homes neither of which you are fully part of, two newly-formed nuclear families to which you are an occasional add-on.

If the OP's SC were all in their 20s when she met DH, and her child was a toddler, I wouldn't give a monkeys how she wanted to mess around with money.

But these are kids, who have grown up together at least part of the time.

And I would never in a million years blame my half siblings if they inherited from him and I didn't... Because again. I'm not entitled as fuck

Exactly! Do the people saying "this will cause arguments/resentments/rifts" are presumably thinking of how their own family would deal with it...do they not realise that they're basically saying "my kids are money hungry buggers who would stop speaking to their step siblings if they got an inheritance from their own grandparents"? It's not reflecting well on them!

nd this is not about money ('hahahaha sure it isn't' from the peanut gallery). It's about feeling equally loved, equally valued, equally protected, equally settled as a child. Not hanging between two homes neither of which you are fully part of, two newly-formed nuclear families to which you are an occasional add-on.

You either feel like that or you don't, inheritances dont change that either way.
I think you have an idealised notion of how things should be that isn't realistic. You're not going to feel equally loved by a step parent than a parent, you're not going to feel equally settled when you have 2 families instead of one. That's the reality of "blended families".

But these are kids, who have grown up together at least part of the time

I'd say very part time tbh. The youngest was 11 years old when OPs child was born. And that's the youngest, so there are more children even older than that so likely in their teens. I'd not consider that growing up together for any huge amount of time personally. That's quite a big age gap.

It's not like OPs child is 2 and the DSC is 4.