Who is being unreasonable in this situation?

[WotATwot]

Husband and wife, they share two children and husband has two older children from a previous relationship that wife has known since they were 5&7 and they are now teens. The two shared children are young still.

Wife gets a large payout for an accident she was in (no lasting issues but pretty horrible at the time) and says she wants to keep it aside for help toward a house deposit or uni each for their two children so puts it in their bank accounts.

Husband thinks this is unfair because they are very unlikely to be able to do the same for his older children and neither is their mother. He thinks even if it's not a similar amount, DSC should be given some help if the younger DC are going to receive so much.

Husband thinks there is a theme ongoing in the relationship where his wife shows little care for his older children since hers were born and wishes she would want to include them more with things and thinks it's upsetting that she's never seemed to care or shown an interest in DSCs going to uni or having any savings for their futures.

YANBU - wife is right. She should prioritise her own children and is entitled to give what she likes to them without having to even it up.

YABU - husband is right. Wife should give DSC something even if not the same amount to make it fairer.

I wouldn't give my own DDs any money from compensation for personal injury, I would spend it on what care/support/bills from not being able to work or having to change jobs. They would benefit directly from anything left over but I would not be making any gift of the money.

I don’t see how that’s at all the same though. OP’s biological children don’t live with the DH’s ex. They have no relationship with her whatsoever. Considering OP has been in the lives of her DH’s children since they were young and lives with them part of the time the relationship is obviously entirely different.

But they are not OPs DC, they already have a mother, it would be different if there was no mother in the picture

Both women are not responsible for the other's dc..
Quite simple imo.

YABU. Don’t your SC mean anything at all to you?Such selfishness.

And yes, our Will splits our assets equally between all the children.

No I'm not DSCs mum, I'm the wife. Thanks for the replies!

It's not the same. All of the children are biologically his.

I would do exactly what the mum has done here and prioritise my own children. DH can feel sad about it that he/his first wife can’t do the same for their joint children, but that’s life.

If the first wife won the lottery, she would prioritise her own children.

I suppose neither are unreasonable really, you get to decide what to donwith your money but I can see where ges coming from.

From my personal point of view, I have a DSD who I have known since she was 5. I also have DD. If I came into money I would definitely give some to DSD and she is included in our life as a family.

Mumsnet never fails to make me extraordinarily grateful for my actually nice stepparents who loved the small children who came into their lives. It boggles my mind that you could not care about them when you have known them since they were so small.

The issue isn't this money, the issue is that your DH sees that lack of care

Remember that DH’s older DC have been effectively disadvantaged by their DF’s choice to have 2 further DC, splitting his resources x4 instead of by x2. He’s allowed to recognise the unfairness, and be sad he can’t do much about it

Could you not say this about any sibling though? DSC1 therefore has been disadvantaged by DH and ex having DSC2, my first child was disadvantaged by having my second and so on.

I don't think the disadvantage here comes solely from the fact they have 2 extra siblings, it's probably moreso because those siblings have a different mother than they do and may therefore be given different opportunities or experiences just as they may be by their mother.

In regards to finances, these have always been separate apart from bills which are paid from a joint account and the rest then in separate accounts. I prefer it this way and yes having DSC is one of the main reasons for it, I wouldn't want to be getting involved in maintenance payments etc..

And DH seemed pretty happy for this when he got a £15k inheritance and put it down on a nice car for himself (which I didn't mind). I think he'd actually have been fine if I'd spent it on myself, it's moreso because it now means the DC might have different opportunities in the future that he's objecting to it. But he got to choose what he spent his on, this is what I want to spend mine on.

And DH seemed pretty happy for this when he got a £15k inheritance and put it down on a nice car for himself

And there it is. He had the opportunity to do something for kids . He chose not to and to put himself first and now he's expecting you to pick up the slack.

Just read your update Op, I didn't think you were in the wrong before and now I'm sure you're not. He was happy to blow £15000 on a car, no thought to his DC future then, but now you've shown him up by saving your payout for your DC. I'd make sure your money is tied up in higher interest accounts with no access until your DC need it.