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.

My DM pays for my DC to be privately educated. My DF passed away a long time ago, and that’s what she wanted to spend the life insurance on, as their mortgage was already paid off, etc. She does it for all the DGC. We are exceptionally lucky, but of course, I would rather still have my DF.

SDC were privately educated to primary level, paid for by DH, but the divorce order stated DH’s ex was to start contributing if she wanted private secondary. She didn’t get a job, so they went to state.

If DH ever suggested DM should have paid for them, I think I would have left immediately.

If someone chooses to have more DC with a second partner, then they need to accept all their DC might have differences in living standards at different times. Thats on them if they want to resolve it; no one else.

And? Would the OP, or would she not, help to keep all six children in the same private school, if they had all been attending it, or would she happily pay to keep her biological grandchildren there but let the other four be pulled out, because they are not her problem?

It’s all very well helping to keep the status quo. It’s easy to see why this seems logical to the OP. I’m simply interested in how far the logic stretches, and whether the OP would go so far as to tell her dd that she made her bed by marrying a man with four pre-existing children and now has to lie in it; or would help create a toxic situation where two of the six children stay put in school and four are pulled out, because she thinks people she (probably) doesn’t know and hasn’t met should be able to afford the fees and, if they can’t, then that’s the step-grandchildren’s problem.

This!

Who in their right mind would expect the mil or mother to pay for children that was from another relationship.

The children live with their mother read the ops posts. What you are saying is impossible it's up to their mother where they go to school. I would be fucking livid if another woman's family took over my children.

If the step-grandchildren’s mother would actually be livid to have a step-grandparent paying her children’s private school fees, then the OP’s problems are solved. 🤣

@betnet why won't you tell us the ages of all 6 DC?

sorry beg to disagree. Every situation is different. In my case My grandparents were fab. I didn’t need any more. I met my step grandparents and they were very nice and kind but I never ever saw them as my grandparents and didn’t expect anything from them at all. We were just connected strangers really with no bond.

You would take it? I guarantee it's a good way to end a marriage.

I wouldn’t marry a man with four children of his own and then have two more with him.

I can assure you I’m definitely not.

If the decision was made to send my stepson to private school, we would contribute to that, from our household budget, because he is part of that household. I wouldn’t separate that off into something not my issue and make it come out of some mystery other “pot”, because where does that end.

Do we do separate shopping because I’m not paying to feed him, do we all pay separately on days out?

We’re a family, and we behave like one.

I think the mistake was treating the kids differently to begin with, I genuinely think it’s hurtful that 2 kids get the educational benefit and 4 don’t.

My honest opinion is that from the outset, it should have been all of them or none of them.
If SIL’s ex didn’t want them privately educated, fair enough, but money for tuition should have been set aside etc. This was unfair on his existing children from the off.

I agree.
Not in a million years.
I would absolutely question the judgement of any woman making such a choice.

Does your SC have a mother?

Of course he does. But unless she’s going to start transferring us food shopping money, that’s not how life works?

We pay to raise him (50% of the time before anyone assumes we’re EOW) from our money.

If, for some reason, the decision was made to privately educate him - 50% of the funds would come from her (she’s a single parent), and 50% from us. The pot that we share, as a whole household.

I wouldn’t make him find the money from some separate fund he keeps for him and his son, we would pay for it out of our money. I just cannot imagine separating it like that to begin with.

This thinking is an example of people wanting their cake and eating it. The dh/sil was not in a position to start again with a new family, he just grew his family in a way that was inconvenient for all concerned. The SC now have two mothers - a biological mother and a stepmother. Both should contribute to their children’s lives, and that includes the step-children.

That's how most households run finance from one pot. I am guessing he's an only child you don't have any with him?

Would you expect your mother to help pay for private school fees if your husband and his ex wife wants him to go?

I said to OP earlier I wouldn’t expect my mother to pay, full stop.

Neither would any of my siblings for their children.

My parents separated when I was 7, and by the time I was 12, both of them had remarried.Look8ng hck, i was too late for me to ever be part of a blended family but still young. I had to grow up very fast. I always remember my DM telling me to remember that my Stepmum had chosen my Dad, and I just sort of came with the package. Therefore it was likely that her family would resent me, and do little more than tolerate me, but as long as they were not unkind or abusive, everything was good. She never actually said the same about her new husband and his daughter, but obviously the same applied. As for the grandparents - there was no pretence that I was family

It felt very lonely at the time, but it meant that I had no expectations of anybody, and when they did nice things for me it was a bonus and appreciated. My step siblings on both sides were more needy, but I learned that the way to get people to like me was to be very emotionally self sufficient and independent.
When my Dad died, my stepmum was furious that I was even mentioned in his will, and my step grandfather wrote me the nastiest letter I have ever seen in my life. I would not have expected anything from them, but I can't believe they expected my father to cut me out of his will because of my mother. I know I was an imposition on them for years, but I am finding that letter hard to forgive.

So your SIL was fine with your DD treating two of his children differently for years but now isn't, is that right? Sounds like they've created this problem, not you. They have set the precedent of treating them differently.

Maybe he just doesn't want them to go to private school any more and asking you to pay for all is about preventing them from going?

It sounds like this isn't even SGC's primary residence / they spend more time with their mum's family, he doesn't even have them 50 50 and they are already treated differently so you do you and don't give it another thought.

In your situation no I wouldn't treat them as my own.

I'm sorry that happened, that is awful and your step gf should be ashamed of himself.

Ops DD should like I said to the poster I was replying to one pot household pays for everyone living in the household. The op should not be expected to pay for them to go to private school. If sil and ex wife wants their children to go then they need to work it out. Ops DD needs to agree as well because it will affect her and their joint finances. Op did say her daughter is becoming more financially better off and can afford the fees herself. It's up to them not the op if they want all children to go to private school.

Your SIL is a gold digger. I would be very careful and ringfence all inheritances to your DD and GC very carefully.

Did he contribute to your two grandchildren’s school fees? No

And if he didn’t, then why are you not questioning why you are doing so? I did it to help not disrupt the GC education when DD ran into financial difficulties

Does he not have the responsibility to care for your biological grandchildren, rather than expecting you to step in? Yes. It was me who offered. He didn't ask me to step in for the biological GC. He asked me to step in for the step GC

And by asking the question you have, are you going to claim your answer would be different, depending on whether or not he had contributed to all 6 of the children’s fees in the first place? I offered to help DD. The arrangement is with me and her not on whether he contributed or not.

Would you suddenly put your hand in your pocket for all the children if he had been helping to pay the fees for all of them? No. I can't put my hand in my pocket and find school fees for 6 children,

Which goes back to my question, which the OP hasn’t answered. What if all six of the children had been going to the same private school, then a change in the financial position of the dd and sil meant that none of them could go to that school any more, unless they could find someone else to contribute? Would the OP want to pay to ensure her biological grandchildren could stay there and only the step-grandchildren had to leave, or would she want the status quo of all six children being educated in the same place to be kept, which would mean all being moved to a state school, because that was the precedent that had been set? Is she just responding to her dd’s set-up and helping to maintain the status quo to keep the situation stable, or does she fully buy into the notion that grandparents shouldn’t have to make any kind of major emotional or financial investment in the lives of step-grandchildren, regardless? And what if all six spent weekdays (ie schooldays) living with the dd and sil, and weekends at their mother’s, instead of the other way around? Would she view her relationship with those step-grandchildren differently if that were the case?

When my husband and I got married my son was 14. My father in law made a speech and said how great it was that he and my mother in law now have a new grand child . In total they had 7 grandchildren, 4 were biological and 3 were step grandchildren. If anyone asked about grandchildren they replied that they had 7. As far as they were concerned there was no “ step” anything, they had 7. 7 at Christmas, 7 on bdays, 7 at Easter and 7 in their will.

Tbh, my reading of the situation is that to pay the step-grandchildren's school fees would require the OP to have a greater emotional attachment to the step-grandchildren than her own dd has to them. The OP’s relationship with these children is through her dd, not separate from it, so the dd set the tone, and the tone that was set from the start was that her biological children were more important.