To not side with Sis over her ex

[PrFi]

My sis & her ex (bil) were together 22 years & about 2 years ago they separated, they never married & have 2 DD 17 & 19. Prior to their separation we were always together as a foursome & saw each other several times a week plus my DH & he are very close friends. Their split was amicable & mutual, both just decided that relationship had run its course but we were all naturally upset about it. Bil moved into a flat that he owns & sis stayed in house, the house is bil’s (inherited from his parents) but he wanted kids to stay in their home so he moved out. My sis doesn’t work & bil has been paying bills, all child expenses, her credit card, her private pension & healthcare since he left but he now says once DD leaves for uni this will all stop as he’s not bank rolling her anymore & he has told my sis that once youngest DD turns 18 & leaves for uni he wants his house back. He has also met someone else which I did know about but didn’t say anything to sis as he said wasn’t sure how serious it was plus it’s not my business. Anyway all hell has broken loose now & my sis is threatening all sorts but main problem is that she has asked me to cut him off completely, he’s not to come to our home or speak to us on phone, we’re not to meet up socially or invite him to any functions etc. I don’t agree we should as he is my niece’s Dad & has done absolutely nothing wrong & he is very much part of our lives still but if I don’t I could lose my sis..I’m torn but I don’t think she’s right to expect this from us

I didn't say that she wasn't responsible for her choices too or that she was perfect. He isn't perfect either and yet you are saying that he has done nothing wrong while criticising her. It's pretty clear where your loyalties lie and I don't blame her for being angry with you about it. Most people wouldn't side with their siblings ex.

Why do posters keep pointing she raised "his" children? I presume they're hers as well?

And also she "enabled his career". If something had happened to her his career would have carried on the same anyway. He would have used nannies/au pairs/nurseries or some other childcare provider.

When my partner's first wife left him with two young children his job didn't change at all. In fact he worked more to pay for childcare.

"Most people wouldn't side with their siblings ex."

It very much depends on the circumstances and given that after 646 votes it's 88% - 12% in the OP's favour you're clearly wrong.

The women I know who “wanted” to give up work were with partners with crazy work schedules who refused to compromise and they got dumped with everything while having to work around the other person in the house.

I’m not her sister.

i’m judging based on this situation, and yes, imo she’s firmly in the wrong. That doesn’t mean he’s perfect, it means I don’t believe he’s behaved badly towards her here.

He enabled her by funding the choices she freely made knowing full well they weren’t married. He paid for childcare, for her lifestyle, her pension, her housing, her debts - everything. He has continued to pay post their split, and has offered her free housing while she gets herself back on her feet. What more do you think he owes her here?

Someone being a relative doesn’t mean you’re obliged to support them if you think they’re being a twat. It doesn’t mean you have to cut off someone who is also friend in his own right, who has done nothing wrong, because your sister is having a tantrum.

Whattodowithit88
Sorry but he has shafted her. Good enough for her to leave her job to raise the kids whilst he continues to earn, but not good enough to marry her so she doesn’t get the half she would have been entitled too, to actually stand on her own two feet. He cut her off at the knees and is trying to come across as the good guy!

This.

OP youve made him sound like a saint. I very much doubt he is. When did he meet the OW, with his saintly self?

If they were married she'd be entitled to more. He k ows it. Women here are speaking as if she's a nobody because she's a SAHM of 2, so she deserves nothing and a womans value is only defined via whether she works outside the home. Ridiculous. & how do we know shes not tried to get a job? Do you even care how shes feeling now, after her relationship breakdown? I cant imagine shes feeling great.

Theres 2 sides of a a story then theres the truth. You are far too involved, and critical of your Sister. As is your DH - telling BIL he's being taken for a mug? Sexist nonsense. & I note BIL is taking the house back when he's ready. Its all going his way isnt it. 3 against 1.

Both of you dislike your Sister and she'd do well to cut both of you off as you’ll help to bring her down if you can. Get on with welcoming your ex BIL & his new woman, I give you 1 year max to see that he's human, not a saint of a man.

Apologies if it's already been suggested but ...could she move into the flat when the girls are off to uni? Then he'd have the house

How in the name of all that's holy is it sexist?! 😂😂😂

It is actually irrelevant who is right or wrong here. Is your relationship with your sister more important than your relationship with her ex? Decide that and act accordingly. It is entirely up to your DH what he does. Depending on what you decide, you could suggest a compromise once the dust has settled a bit.

Agree with the other posters who have pointed out that if married she would still have a roof over her head. Yes she needs to work but if she have up years of her life to have and raise children with him then morally he does owe her more than she’s had.

She's been very foolish in giving up work without being married, but he's essentially trying to fuck her over by saying that her non-financial contribution to their life together (and this is a long-term relationship) is completely worthless. After all the hard work of having and raising children has been done. Of course he's not legally required to do so, but if he was a decent individual rather than pond scum, he'd suggest a reasonable split of the assets which have accrued during their joint life together.

The ‘taken for a mug’ comment is sexist. Because of the assumption that as the man makes the money and works outside the home, the woman is grasping if she needs any financial help after the breakup, despite him benefitting financially from her back up for years.

He would have said it to a woman if she was in same position, it’s not sexist

Complete and utter bollocks.

Feom what you say, OP, he’s totally loaded. If he’s prepared to leave the mother of his children with nothing (because you’re presuming a lot about what he wants to do, other than shag about after 22 years of relationship) then he’s a cunt. That’s it, as I see it.

You and your H seem very keen to be on his side, and I expect it’s that disloyalty to your sister that is triggering her style of contact with you.

If you had read it all I never said he is leaving her nothing but that he is withdrawing the payments of her credit card (approx 120k) in 2 years & he wants his house back but is offering her the flat to stay in. I don’t know what his plans are after that. My sis has been shagging about since he left does that make her a cunt as well then?

I think it is nuanced and may be lost on some people.

It’s not nuanced its just not sexist

OK you seemed to know so much about the in's and outs of their relationship and finances I thought you were the sister. In fact you only have information third hand by someone who is very keen to take his side, rather than her sisters. In contrast to what you say the sister would probably have got half the house given the length of relationship and the fact they had children if they had been married and she's not being a twat for being upset about being left with very little. Most people would feel that way and really obnoxious to call it a “tantrum”.

If he’s prepared to leave her with nothing (you don’t seem to know he’s giving her the flat or not, unless your story is changing to make him seem more reasonable) then he’s a cunt.

The shagging about was referring to what you definitely know he’s doing. Weirdly.

Go away you haven’t even bothered reading the thread properly

You are right, the connotations are not that nuanced as it is pretty obvious why some people might think it was sexist. You don’t and that is fine.

Honestly your sister is being unfair to ask you to cut him out, but if you genuinely think you will lose your relationship with her over it, then it doesn't really matter if she's being unreasonable or not. If it's a black and white issue, you choose one. You say cutting him out could affect your relationship with your nieces, but losing your relationship with her would presumably impact that a lot more.

You say you can't tell your husband who to talk to etc. all fair and reasonable. But you can not invite him to anniversary parties and the like.

How do you know so much about their finances OP? It's not the sort of thing people normally talk about and given the bias it sounds like the information is coming from the ex rather than your sister.

Yes, I’m taking a poster at their word, which is generally what people do on forums. Unless of course they don’t like what that word is, in which case they make up alternative scenarios more to their liking (based only on their liking, as opposed to actual evidence).

No, not necessarily. Again, we’re talking about generational wealth here, passed down through bloodline. In such cases it’s not unusual for assets to be managed in such a way that they can’t be touched in divorce.

The sister, although she freely made bad choices, has in fact been treated very well by him. On top of spending two decades paying for her, something he has continued, and will continue to do until their youngest goes to uni, even after they split, he’s paid off her debts and provided her with a good pension and level of savings. He’s also offered to house her. What more do you think she is owed, exactly?