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.

But OP may choose to justify or criticise the decision to leave the money to nephews only. We are not privy to uncle’s motivations. I think he was sexist but l but I don’t know this. I guess I could have used justify or criticise, but I didn’t think anyone would be pedantic enough to decide what OP’s view should be and the terms she should use to discuss it here.

It's not pedantic to point out that you used terminology that meant something completely different. It's also not pedantic to be critical of OP not pointing out the sexism. By all means disapprove of me and others doing that, but it's not pedantry.

I think you were disingenuous because rather than answer the point about sexism, you fixated on the terms justify vs criticise.

Again, you wrote something completely different to what you meant. It's not pedantry to point that out. The multiple mentions of OP not having been involved with the will, which we all know, suggests a lack of understanding or even, dare one say it, a fixation here.

Of course the uncle was criticised by posters. What you were doing was holding OP to higher standards by complaining she hasn’t rejected the sexism displayed by her H’s uncle. Even though it was nothing to do with her.

Higher standards than who, and how? If you're setting up a comparison, it needs to be done clearly. Show evidence based on what's already been written. Her stance on the will is literally everything to do with her, btw. It's one of the few things here she's in total control of.

🏳️

we live in hope 😂

Just when I thought this thread couldn’t get more complex 😳 If this is an ongoing saga, we just got to the ‘surreal distraction’ section. Ding ding 🛎…time for the next round? Roll up, roll up…

Subject: Unfair Distribution of a Financial Legacy: A Modern, Multigenerational Approach, with Particular Emphasis on Biological Determinism and the Gender Dialectic

Ready, steady…go? 😁

😂

That two brothers could be so financially different by inheritance it’s unfair but in modern day families it’ll become more norm than not I’d think.

First of all, I understand why you are upset as nobody likes to see big differences being made between their children.

So I am going to try and give a view in the hope it helps you process and deal with this:

1. you can only deal with what is in your control ie you can’t change what has been given to DS2 or even DH view. The only person that could do something here is DS2 and his age and own views are unknown.
2. most people do not inherit anything meaningful, so DS2 is not at a disadvantage from most other people ie in his peer group.
3. even if DH agreed to a different split in your will, is it not likely to be a very long time before they might inherit - circumstances could be very different by then and treating your two children unequally feels dangerous.
4. is it the house deposit thats bothering you most? In which case could you and DH support money now to DH1 on basis of keeping boys the same in terms of enabling a house deposit?
5. I wouldn’t tell DS1 abt DS2 inheritance if they don’t know, and if you help DS1 now, I wouldn’t tell DS2 - feels unnecessary

Honestly dont over think it, DS2 could have had a big win on the lottery and therefore have a very different life, you haven’t caused or enabled any of this.

They are half brothers.

Lottery winners have siblings, no real difference.

Yep! You don’t pick your parents

Just saying this is "normal in a modern blended family" is ignoring that circumstances vary hugely between families- just because you think it is fair in your situation does not translate to others.
I was directly addressing the OP's situation rather than spouting general aphorisms.