to think grandparents do not have to treat their step grandchildren exactly the same way as their blood grandchildren?

[betnet]

Firstly, I am not advocating for step children to be treated badly in anyway.

But I think it is fine if grandparents do not give gifts or gifts to the same value to the stepchildren as to their grandchildren. If there was a divorce the stepchildren would generally not be seen anymore anyway.

People generally would not expect grandparents to give their non related stepchildren an inheritance. Those who advocate for stepchildren to be treated exactly equally, do you think they should inherit from non related grandparents?

I am talking about stepchildren in this instance where ones DD or DS has married a partner who has children from an ex partner.

Same for family holidays. Often grandparents will pay for a family holiday and want their grandchildren to join them. They should not have to pay for the step grandchildren also.

Stepchildren can end up with four sets of grandparents.

I think every circumstance is different - maybe if the children became 'step' when they were adults things might be different - but the 'step' kids (I have two 'step' nephews) in our extended family came into our family when they were under the age of 5 - we all absolutely treat them exactly the same as biological kids; I fully expect and support their non biological grandparents treating them in the exact same way they treat my kids (who are their biological grandkids). Children are innocent - they have no choice in whose families they join - we have chosen to make all step kids as part of our family. My step nephew's parents divorce and he went to live with his mum (not biological family) but we still consider him part of our family - and his mum part of our family too if she wants to be.

Yes. All will pass to their children/ stepchildren (so me and my siblings, and my stepsiblings) equally. Again, why wouldn't they? My parents children are my step parents stepchildren and vice versa.

My parents have left nothing to their grandchildren or step-grandchildren in their wills.

Everything is shared between their children, following open and lengthy conversations.

My parents have divided their estate between the children based on of how many dependents each has (and in one case, more than an equal share because one grandchild has and will always have significant and expensive extra needs).

The child of theirs that has no children and only stepchildren is getting the least because they have no dependents: the money is for that child to do whatever they want. Keep it, give it away, leave it to step-children, whatever they want.

The other children are doing whatever they think best with their shares, which I believe is spending it on education and housing.

It's all down to who my parents consider as their family and therefore who they believe themselves responsible for. They don't consider their step-grandchildren family, because those children have a family of their own. Whether that family is as rich/poor as my parents is no more a factor in this conversation as their decision to go on xyz expensive holiday given how many people in the world work three jobs in war-torn countries just to put food on the table (stark, and true).

As they aren't all living together I don't see you doing anything wrong by paying just for your bio GC fees. Would be different if they lived together full time but as they don't I think you're being incredibly generous! Do your your bio GC benefit from their step grandparents in any way??

There's so many variable, it's not a question with one answer. What's right in one case, could be horrendous in another.

For example, inheriting a step Grandchild who is 14yrs old, is not the same as inheriting one that is 2yrs old.

Whether they have Grandparents already

Whether they live full time in the house with the Grandkids

All these little variables impact on outcome.

They're all just kids though - so I think the prevailing feeling should be - limiting the perception of unfairness.

Just take these 2 set ups;

Your son marries a woman who has a 2yr old. The child lives with them full time. It is several years later that they have a baby of their own. During that time you see that child on a weekly basis.

Now just this variable can change this alone.

The 2yr old has 2 sets of very involved and very loving Grandparents already who they spend a great deal of time with vs a child who has no present Grandparents.

In the first example you might be worried about stepping on toes - the child already has a 'Nana and a Grandma' who are both very involved. You'd probably adopt an 'Aunty' persona.

But in the second - the toe stepping doesn't exist. The child might look to you as a Grandparent. You may get invited to Grandparent day at nursery - that's a whole different relationship.

One variable and it can change the whole characteristics of the relationship.

I just don't think you can answer the question with a sweeping yes or no generalisation.

You've not read what I wrote, I'm talking about before you were paying school fees.

It's obvious really, you pay for horse riding and school trip and holidays, but can't afford to pay for the other 4 children, that's fine.

But NOW you are also paying school fees for the 2 GC, yet before you 'couldn't afford' to pay for anything for the other 4.

My point is it is okay to say you don't want to pay for things for the SGC, but saying you've never been able to afford it (then suddenly finding money to pay for tuition) is disingenuous.

Yes my GC get perks. I can't stop doing things for them because the SGC night think it is unfair.

This is the crux of it for me, they are children at the end of the day and to see their half siblings getting lots of things they don't must be quite hard for them to understand, I'd like to think you are sensitive to that and are discreet about the perks you give your GC, but I'm not sure?

Well I'm afraid the plot thickens here. These four children are not step children they half siblings. Very different in law for things like inheritance.
I understand your daughter wanting the best for her two children but that was not very kind tbh. I assuming the four other children are now teenagers?
You don't have to pay anything to anyone op but if you leave your estate to your daughter her husband can claim half of it.. Then if she dies before her husband he inherits and latterly his children. All of his children!
Many people challenge wills these days and although I am not a solicitor I have a law degree. I've also been an executor many times.
You tried to help and you've been stitched up by a grabby man.
My DC had private schools but I paid for my siblings DC too. Wealthy days!
I'd just maintain you don't have six sets of fees and 'Mr Lover Lover' needs to earn his own money. Situations like this you're dammed if you do and ditto if you don't.

@betnet I think any man who has 4 kids and then decides it’s a good idea economically to go and make another 2 with another woman but then expects his new mil to fund his lifestyle needs his head examining. Personally I would give them the choice of funding 2 or none if they want “ fairness”. Or are they tallying up a spread sheet with all they are receiving via the ex wife’s family?

If being means not pay 6 lots of school fees then I will be mean!

You don't have to, and many people will say it's fine to make those distinctions. But IMO all children in a family should be treated as equally as possible, stepchildren, biological children, whatever. I'm not a grandmother but I am a stepmother and that is how we operate. And yes, that would of course extend to inheritances.

If the children can grasp that they don’t share the same parents with all of their siblings, they can grasp that they don’t share the same grandparents. Presumably they don’t think their maternal grandparents are the grandparents of their half sister, or that their stepmother is in fact their mother.

I imagine ‘can’t afford it’ means that she can’t afford it without taking away from other budgets, and/or that doing so wouldn’t be sustainable. She may of course wish to make financial sacrifices to benefit her own grandchildren, and that is a generosity she’s extending, not something that should be expected, and certainly not something that should be expected for her daughter’s stepchildren.

I think the part I struggle with is the fact that your 2 GC are obviously getting perks that their parents can't afford and to the SGC it must seem like they are being treated unfairly, they are only kids and they wouldn't really understand why they are being treated differenlty.

I think most step children understand they live across 2 households and have different relatives to the GC in this scenario

Even if they pretend to like you as much and treat you the same, you always know. I’ve had a lot of step grandparents. My grandmother was married three times!

@betnet
What are the ages of your GC and SGC?

Have your 2 GC always gone to private school and your SGC always gone to state school?

If that's the case, that really is down to their parents - they must have had that discussion that they were comfortable with treating the 2 sets of DC differently so that's on them. Your DD & SIL started it and you are merely facilitating it now they can't afford it (which is probably a whole other thread)

I would treat GC & SGC the same with things like Easter Eggs, Christmas presents, meals out etc

Hobbies - I would probably not support very expensive past times e.g. horse riding. Better to take them all to the beach or go on a walk, go to the park etc.

How long have you been SGC lives? Are you de facto GP?
Wills - I have known SC be in wills and treated like blood DC as that is how they were brought up. You need to decide what kind of GP you want to be. Most people I know have left money to their DC rather than GC in wills

It’s certain that Grandma makes her own personal financial sacrifices so they she can pay school fees.

It’s all personal choices - for everyone involved.

Do they all live together in the same household? I think that makes a difference.

I accessed my savings to pay for schools fees for my GC.

It is hugely expensive to pay for 6 children for days out, meals out, horse riding and school trips out. Just because I pay school fees for two does not mean I can cover the cost for 6 children. I have my own retirement to think about which I have already delayed.

Children see others treated differently all the time in life. That is just a hard fact of life. I don't mention to the step GC about the perks my GC get. The step GC families are welcome to treat them and give them whatever perks they choose. It is not my role to pay for additional 4 children.

How is this different in law, genuinely interested? They are half siblings in their relationships to each other but still the step children of OP’s DD and her step grandchildren.

TBH based on the potential scenario you outlined, if I end up in this position when my daughter has a family I’d probably pass the bulk of any inheritance to any biological grandchildren rather than to my daughter. I wouldn’t want to risk a scenario in which my daughter’s partner’s children (with some other random woman) ended up with the wealth I have built at the expense of my own daughter’s children. I imagine many people would feel the same deep down. Of course I’d treat them in a similar way in the day to day and never be cruel. But these complexities are for the parents creating blended families to consider and manage - you cannot expect grandparents and the wider family to feel bonds that aren’t there (wonderful if so of course, but it can’t be forced).

Every weekend and the holidays.

That is lovely if that is how you operate but I simply cannot afford to provide the same for 6 grandchildren.

The biggest problem here is that your daughter and SIL aren’t on the same page re their children’s lifestyles. They are a family unit. Some of the children may not live with them full time, and may have another mother and grandparents, but they are still children of their family. It’s utter madness that the first 4 children went to state school and then they decided (as a couple??) that the youngest two would be privately educated, have riding lessons etc.

No, you shouldn’t pay for your SGCs school fees and riding lessons, school trips etc. But you shouldn’t be paying for the other 2 either, just because they’re from your bloodline. Your daughter and SIL shouldn’t be accepting it from you. They and you are creating a two tier family where some kids have immense privilege and others do not.
Of course you want ‘the best’ for your GC (though it saddens me that you don’t feel the same about all of the children in the family unit). But that’s blended families - there has to be fairness. You are favouring some children over others, and crucially, so are your daughter and SIL.

The penny has finally dropped for your SIL and he’s realised he’s not being fair on all his kids. Of course it’s not for you to pay for the children to go to private school. The solution is that none of them go to private school and have riding lessons etc. If you still want to gift the family money to go towards the children’s activities, then it should be given to the parents to share out. If you’re not happy with that (and it sounds like you’re not), then you don’t give them money.

Would you expect your biological children to inherit from your stepchildren’s family?

My god, what a mess. You having to take six children out on meals and trips. Why on earth did your daughter marry this man?
I feel for you.

I think your son-in-law is being unreasonable in expecting you to pay private school fees for his four older children. You also wouldn't be unreasonable to leave an inheritance to your biological grandchildren and not your step-grandchildren.

However, where you biological grandchildren are concerned, you do seem like Lady Bountiful with their school fees, holidays, outings and expensive gifts. This must make the difference in treatment between the two sets of children (who are half siblings) particularly stark and be very obvious to the unfavoured step-GC.

You have literally repeated this same question and “So should step GC inherit??” About 500 times so far on this thread.

You say it’s because you can only afford to cover the fees for those two children, who do not go to the same school as the other children and who could not be uprooted to move schools. That’s fair enough, cover those fees to keep those children as they were.

However, it would be cruel for you turn up in Christmas with two large gifts and 4 empty sacks for the step children. What you can afford should be divided equally.

As for inheritance, I believe you should pass anything on to your children themselves. If they choose to share with their own children, great. Otherwise, if you insist on specifically naming your grandchildren and your step grandchildren have been your step grandchildren presumably for decades (by the time you die) and throughout their childhoods.. yes, of bloody course they should get the same as their siblings.

Stop asking why PP are saying it’s cruel to divide and “other” siblings that are living together as a family, and start by explaining why YOU think it’s justified to leave them out entirely. Go on. I’ll wait.