It's an inheritance one

[Pupdate292]

I'll just type out the scenario and leave it to the vote, I'm a relative to someone in the family and I'm kind of stuck in the middle of it all. Just looking for an outsiders perspective.

So the man has 2 daughters from his first marriage. He re marries a divorcee who has a 2 year old son. His girls are around 8 years old at this point. They all have a happy upbringing, the man is close to his girls and also treats his step son as his own. His 2nd wife does the same with her step daughters.

Fast forward to today. The daughters are both happily married to very wealthy men, want for nothing. The son is also happily married, not as wealthy but has a mortgage on his own home, is in a good job, enjoys holidays abroad etc.

The man has sadly died and left nothing in his will to his daughters. It's all been left to his 2nd wife and son.

Yanbu- that's wrong, he should have left something to the daughters even though they are now very wealthy

Yabu-the daughters don't need the money, he was right to leave everything to his 2nd wife and her son as their need is greater.

Everything does not automatically go to the widow if the will stipulates otherwise. That's the point of the will. My lovely dad died this year and his will outlined what he left for my mum and all his children (with half siblings included in our case). The wife needs to do the right thing and address his children's concerns over how his will has been structured leaving them out. Is it not more likely open to being contested as there has been no token gift given to his children?? I am not a lawyer but I think for ease in the long run she needs to hear them out and look for ways of smoothing things out. Just to do the right thing.

Speaking from personal experience. I would say the money should be split equally.

If the daughters really don't need the money & their brother is struggling I'm sure any kind & caring sisters, would offer some of there share to him.

Also regardless of what the daughter's situation is now, who is to say there situation won't change in the future? Marriages breakdown all the time/people lose their jobs/get cancer or another horrible illness. Just because they are in a good situation now, doesn't mean they necessarily will be in 10 years time

Unequal inheritance can lead to a lot of hurt and resentment and its something that never leaves you. My husband and his sister haven't spoken in 8 years due this very situation, it is incredibly sad & if I was a parent of adult children, I would hate to think of my children not speaking to each other after I'm gone

My husband is perfectly capable to take care of himself, my children are not. If I die tomorrow it is my job as the mother to protect my children, not any future wife of my husband and their children. I'm leaving all the money I have saved and my half of our home to our children. It is mabye important to say I have earned that money before I met my husband.
As I said, I also expect my husband in his will to protect my children, not me. We talked about that and we're on the same page. For both of us, our children come first, everything else is second.
I understans from this thread most people do not feel the same as I do and it is all right.

She also needs to remember that they lost their dad and that their grief is no less than hers.

He’s done the right thing in this case.

It’s fair enough everything was left to the wife BUT as she has said she loved girls and brought them up as her own she should have said when she passed away it will be a three way split.

The right thing according to who, though? As can be seen on this thread alone, there are varying opinions as to what the right thing is. The right thing legally is to carry out the wishes of the deceased, as set out in his will. Which is what his widow is doing.

I think it depends on what his 2nd wife decides in her will and it kinds of make sense for him to leave it all to his 2nd wife as she was his partner and is living. It that make sense.

When my dad died he left nothing to me and B, and all to my mum which is correct. Although he did leave me as executor of his will.

I dont see inheritance as money that's due, if I get some that would be wonderful if I dont, then I don't. I do treasure the recording I made in his last days of him laughing and calling me by the nickman he had for me.

OK then the morally right thing even if legally she doesn't need to. @sammylady37

If it's a long marriage, and they did loads together - she will feel his loss more that two daughters who have husbands, children and large homes of their own. She will have acres of time to miss him and they will be busy, busy, busy.

I haven’t read all 6 pages so m not sure of anyone has already mentioned this.
I’m all in favour of people leaving money to whoever they want. However, if you are making a division of assets based on who has what at a specific point in time, you’re not considering that it could change.
The daughters could get divorced and be left with little assets (as we see all the time on these boards). One of their husbands could become a gambler and lose all their money, or become ill and lose the high income. The son could win the lottery or divorce and remarry someone wealthy.
There are all sorts of scenarios that could happen in the near or far future that would drastically change everyone’s situations and there’s no way to know what those might be, so the best thing to do is leads to split equally.

my cousins would never have expected their step mum to sell the family home while shes alive, rather a 3 way split in her will.

Maybe that would have been considered if things hadn't blown up?

Perhaps their father should have left them his half with her allowed to live there?

Either way he made his decision & I don't think that they should be angry at her for not going against it.

But that’s my point.. there are differing opinions about what’s the ‘morally right’ thing to do. Some people think the ‘morally right’ thing to do is an equal split, others think it’s ‘morally right’ to leave more to the least well-off and others again think the ‘morally right’ thing to do is to honour the wishes of the deceased.
The law is clear, the moral high ground is less so.

Exact scenario played out with my FIL’s widow - but alas without his DC already being wealthy, and without having been ‘raised as her own’ by his second wife.

She could not or would not accept that it wasn’t the money itself - although it would have been put to good use! - it was the hurt caused by a final kick from beyond the grave, saying his children & therefore also his grandchildren weren’t as important to him as his second wife (& therefore her children). She said all the ‘carrying out his wishes’ stuff as if that made it OK. But it made the kick harder.

I know people who have done similar but they told all parties in advance along with the reasons why. It’s totally unreasonable to let them find out after his death.

Yes, that is fairest. But if you're looking at it very strictly, after the 2nd wife's death you should split it 50-50 down the blood lines. So 50% of the estate (ie. the 2nd wife's) to the 2nd wife's children (however many that may be - in this case there is just the stepson), and then the other half (the husband's) should go to the deceased husband's children (and THAT amoutn split equally between however many of those children there happens to be).

If you just start splitting it between the children equally in a step family situation then the woman might have brought 5 children to the marriage and the man might have only 1. It ends up too lopsided. I guess, though, you'd have to also factor in the length of the relationship, and what assets were brought into the relationship.

But current state of wealth of any of the parties really should not come into it at all. It should be ONLY about fairness. I mean, if one child is poorer than all the others because they've had to stay at home caring for the surviving parent long-term, and couldn't move away to make a better life for themselves financially, then that should be taken into account in my view.

I think when I die I'm going to write a covering letter with my will to explain my reasons for what I've put in it. No-one ever does that, and it causes so much heartache in some situations.

oh sorry, @stripesorspotsorwhat , i just reread what you wrote slower and that's basically what you said, I think.

I’m from a first litter and am not expecting anything from my father when he dies. Yes, it’s not fair, but then life’s not fair 🤷‍♀️ I don’t want his money (he has lots) but I’d quite like him to take some sort of interest in me and my children. I’m not sure he could pick them out in a lineup 😞

Agreed it’s a total kick in the teeth for the older sisters, they don’t need the money but will feel unvalued and second best. It’s shitty.

When my dad died he left nothing to me and B, and all to my mum which is correct. Although he did leave me as executor of his will.

I think it’s so hard to understand if your parents were happily married that this scenario where everything is left to a partner isn’t really the same when it’s a second relationship with children from a first relationship involved.

My FIL’s second wife also said similar, that her own father left everything to her mother and that didn’t mean her father didn’t love her - of course it didn’t. But she didn’t understand how it was different.

I disagree with posters who argue that different amounts of money equate to different amounts of love, even if I understand how it could feel that way for people on the receiving end of getting less. Treating children and stepchildren fairly does not mean treating them equally. Some people just have more need than others.

Maybe the dad made a mistake by not speaking with his daughters about this -- maybe they would have totally understood and accepted, had he spoken with them, and so maybe all could have been well. But, maybe his daughters are really grabby in addition to being wealthy, and maybe he did not want to deal with that, in which case, it is tough on his widow and stepson, but unlikely his conversation with them would have made a difference in how his daughters treat them now. We just do not know.

Some views on this thread regarding second families are disturbing. As part of a second family with half siblings, I frequently encounter peo

People of a certain generation believing that the second family is less worthy of anything - including manners.

all circumstances are different, obviously, but to have this view after nearly 50 years of marriage (five times + the length of the first marriage) and to voice it - as has been my experience- is just depressing.

yes all children should be treated equally, yes second wives should not have their bones ripped away from them, but sensible people can do their research and there are practices in place to ensure that the predeceasing parent can treat their first family fairly. Many just don’t.

This is precisely why I drill it in to my adult DS never to expect an inheritance. And I say that to him as our only surviving offspring with no half/step siblings.

Not everyone has enough money that tax planning is an issue.

I think he should have left most of it to his 2nd wife since she is still alive? With an equal amount for his children?