One child has inherited AGAIN

[EWAB]

A decade ago my younger son benefited from a massive inheritance.

Essentially my MiL bypassed her three children and left everything to her 6 grandchildren.

The grandchildren: 2 siblings, 3 siblings and my younger child.

SHE WAS ENTITLED TO DO AS SHE PLEASED. IT WAS HER MONEY.

The fallout was quite seismic for lots of reasons. My partner felt that as he only had one child the family of the brother with 3 children benefitted disproportionately.

It was said at the time and I believe this to be the case that the will was designed like this. to stop my elder child from a previous relationship from benefiting as he might have done 40/50 years later if the money had gone directly to my partner.

As for my relationship, my partner refused to consider changing our wills leaving more to elder child who was at the time very unlikely to inherit from his own father. He is now on property ladder but any inheritance will pale into insignificance compared with younger child’s

Well it’s happened again!

Late MiL’s half brother has left his entire estate to the MALE grandchildren of his siblings. Younger son and partner’s nephew and we think 2 or 3 others.

HE WAS ENTITLED TO DO WHAT HE WANTED WITH HIS OWN MONEY.

I genuinely can’t contemplate my two sons having such vastly different lives.

I want advice to come to terms with it . I have disabled voting. I can’t talk to anyone.

Sure, but it’s up to the youngest if he wants to talk about it, and potentially open himself up to emotional blackmail. His finances are his business, it’s not for OP to share that info with her eldest.

He’s not wrong to decide not to share with his sibling. The inheritance is his, from his relatives, and he has zero obligation to consider himself responsible for putting his brother on an even footing.

Socially recognised by some but again not all.

Thanks Soupfiend 😁

My interpretation is in line with InterIgnis' post.

Recognised within their family. As in stepdad can say "these are my sons". But outside of that, no one else has to consider a stepchild to be family. Such as in this case where the stepfather's extended family does not recognise the older child as a grandchild/nephew. He's part of the stepfather's family, not theirs.

This. If your older child’s paternal family don’t have much in the way of assets that they can inherit than that’s just the way it is. He wasn’t your MILs biological grandchild.

We don't even know if the man considers the eldest to be his son or if the eldest considers the man to be his father. He has his own father. This man might just be "mum's partner" to him.

That's the theory, not real life.

If there's eldest discovers later in life what happened he'll feel utterly betrayed by not knowing. The secret being kept will be a far worse wound than the financial difference. If he is told now, it will likely be OK.

Sometimes you just have to do the least bad thing.
Edit: this should absolutely not lead to the youngest being expected to share his money. I don't see why it would unless the eldest is a bully.

Jesus, the amount of histrionics on this thread…

Understandably It’s an emotive subject for the OP but some people almost vomiting reading the opening post, get a grip!

The uncle who bequeathed only the male family members, that’s his right, perhaps culturally from his generation that was considered the norm. Females generally married into their spouses family who would be benefiting from inheritance from that family be it via their husbands and/or children.

Secondly, suck it up, buttercup, your son is of no blood relation to your partner’s family. Just like the uncle of your partner only recognised male heirs for inheritance purposes, your MIL only recognised blood grandchildren for her inheritance purposes.

You can look to redress the balance by leaving more in your will to the eldest but to try and manipulate a man of no blood relation to leave more than presumably an equal share amongst the children is quite simply a reflection of your character.

Most people do consider step-children to be part of the nuclear family.

This is why there is an uproar when one child is given a Christmas gift and a step-child is not.

That’s not to say the step-child should inherit from their step-parent’s family. It’s simply saying that when two siblings grow up together, seeing one get opportunities and material possessions that you’re not getting hurts. That’s human nature. A compassionate person would acknowledge that.

People are attributing adult rationalisation to a child.

But it’s nots the ops, her husbands or her other child’s business frankly.

If he inherited from his granny and granny’s brother at 25 there would be no need for anyone to know. It’s his money. His finances. He will be an adult when he gets the money.

Id feel betrayed if someone who had zero right was telling people my funds when it’s not their business. They are not his financial advisors not trust holders. It’s not his half brothers info to know.

I've not read the full thread as there are a lot of posts. It must be difficult OP knowing that potentially your children will have such a stark difference in lifestyles. The only thing you can really do to ofset it is to leave all or the majority of your own estate to your child who doesn't inherit.

My mum left a will and my brother assumed I wasn't in the will. My brother wouldn't tell me if he had the chance. I stand by what I said it's up to the ops son to tell his older brother. No one else should make that decision. It's bordering on coercion.

Both the sons are adults. The OP doesn't have the right to discuss her adult son's financial business with anyone.

I genuinely don't mean this in a horrible way - this is one of the risks with blended families. You will have biological children who inherit differently. It's also a general risk with inheritance - people can leave money to whoever they like and may do that unfairly. I've heard of biological siblings inheriting unequally. You say your partner refuses to change your wills but you do have your own individual will. If you hold a share in your family.home as a joint tenant rather than survivorship you could always have your own will written to only benefit your eldest and write and expression of wishes letter explaining to your youngest why you did this in an effort to even things out.

Sorry @HowdyDoody2025 the first paragraph is quoting Boggins, not my own words, but for sone reason didn’t highlight

For the love of God - why would the non blood child feel slighted if his mother and step father equally left all the children equal shares?

the disparity would only be that the younger son received more from his paternal extended family.

Those that choose to have multiple children with multiple men must surely have considered this?

And that’s your theory^

Why would he feel betrayed because his mother didn’t share his brother’s personal information? it isn’t her information to share, and not something he has a right to know.

The youngest could very well feel betrayed if she told her eldest, and what about the damage that could cause to her relationship with him? The damage it could cause to the relationship between the brothers? The damage it could cause to the relationship OP has with her partner?

🤣

I agree it is up to the younger son. I've said the money belongs to the younger son. I haven't suggested talking to the older son about it at all.

You classy person, good comeback

It’s always money isn’t it.

If the youngest son had a not deadly and invisible medical condition people wouldn’t be saying the older sibling must know. But when it’s money it’s not fair, they must know, no secrets.

Yeah so little bro.. big bro got clap 🤣. Somethings don’t need sharing as it’s not their business. It doesn’t affect their own life. It’s not other people’s info to share.

The people who get in an uproar about this are mothers who have children with different fathers. They want their children to be treated exactly the same because they feel bad when their children are treated differently. But they can't force unrelated people to treat those children as equal to them simply because they are not. The OP can feel hurt all she wants, but step and half-siblings who aren't misled to think that everyone will treat them equally aren't going to be shocked when their step/half siblings get different things.