To not love my SC the same way I love my biological children?

[annasdltn]

I have 7 yo twins. Sadly, their dad, my first husband, passed away when they just one.

My husband has two children from a previous marriage, aged 9 and 7. While the official custody arrangement is every other weekend, he has a good co-parenting relationship with his ex, so we usually see them more often—about half of the school holidays and most weekends, at least for a day. We’ve been together for four years, lived together for two, and got married this year, so I’ve known his children since they were small. They’re genuinely lovely—kind, polite, well-mannered.

I’m now pregnant with our first child together.

Here’s the honest part I’m struggling with: I often see stepparents saying they love their stepchildren the same as their biological ones, but I just don’t feel that way. I care about my stepchildren, I’m happy when they do well, and I want good things for them—but it’s not love, and it’s certainly not the deep, instinctive love I feel for my own children.

There’s another layer to this. My late husband was very successful and left a substantial inheritance to me, with the understanding it would go to our children. That includes a property portfolio which I still manage (same business he used to run but on a smaller scale) and other assets generating income. Because of this, my twins attend private school, have private healthcare, access to more expensive extracurriculars and a very comfortable lifestyle overall. Each of the twins will have access to a very substantial sum of money to buy their first house in their early 20s. They will not be taking a loan for university. These benefits do not extend to my stepchildren. Of course, I contribute to shared family time—holidays, outings, housing, weekends together—and the stepchildren do benefit in that sense.

So, AIBU for not feeling the same love for my stepchildren? Isn’t it biologically normal to feel more love for your own children? Or are other stepparents really managing to bridge that emotional gap in a way I just can’t?

All families are different. If your family arrangements are working for you and all the kids, OP, then crack on. I just really hope that IF this becomes an issue for any of the dc in the future, you don't tell them that life is unfair or admonish them that at least their parents are still alive. Because although both statements are true they are also crap responses to a distressed child or teenager. Far better to explain that your late dh left that money to his dc, but you and all the other parents involved are here to support you all in making the best life for yourself, sort of thing.

Look I'm not a smug nuclear and I don't believe blended families never work. My own dcs are in very different life positions. One has always lived with her mum, is NT, doing well at uni. The other spent her early weeks withdrawing from heroin, has no birth family, has complex psychological and learning difficulties and is on track to achieve zero GCSEs. She also, paradoxically, is likely to inherit a sum of money that is nowhere near as much as your twins, but a significant sum for us.

Family life has been complicated and often difficult. But my girls love each other and are really bonded as sisters. I worked hard at that, because that's what they both needed. Never once have I thought they can't be expected to love each other because they're not related by blood. Never once have I expected dd1 to step back because she has not experienced the trauma that dd2 has.

I'm not having a pop at you, OP. Feelings can't be dictated (though adoptive parents often say 'fake it till you make it' which is very useful). I'm not for one second suggesting you should share out your late husband's inheritance to his dc. But your kids are still young, mine are entering adulthood, and I can promise you that you are in the still waters now. It will get choppier later, so now is where you put in the groundwork.

And you and your dh may handle it all amazingly. I think you should just reflect on why so many posters have taken issue with the tone and language you have used to talk about the children in your family.

Eeeesh! I think it was all fine until you decided to have another child with their dad.

Completely understandable that you don’t love in the same way as your own children - but by marrying their dad and now having a baby with him you are their family. When it was just your children benefitting from your first husbands success I guess that kept things pretty black and white, but now it comes across that there will be financial “tiers” across the five children with the half sibling falling somewhere in the middle.

I really don’t see the issue here, if in 18 years time your step children say to there dad.. Why did Katie get a Mercedes for her 18th and me and Johnny only got a second hand runaround then your DH can tell them.. If I’d had the money I’d have loved to have provided you both the same lifestyle but I can’t, Katie got the Mercedes because her mum brought it for her.

Where does the fairness start and finish though. What about children on the mother's side, or future sc or children on her side? Do you then have to even things up again. Money isn't love anyway, it's just money. Your sc have both parents and by the time they grow up and notice these differences they should understand that. Is their mother remarried? What happens if she marries a rich man or her fortunes change? Even in nuclear families things aren't always fair, as some people need more parental help than others.

Op sorry but you aren't talking about general 'unfairness' here. You are talking about a two tier system in one family. And you ARE one family now. You say you are very wealthy and your kids will all have flats without mortgages. With that amount of wealth it would hardly be any skin off your nose to even things out a bit at Xmas? Few hundred quid? Really, you are coming across as very mean and tight. Almost like you enjoy seeing your kids get more.

You just don't want to and want to ring fence everything for your kids and the new baby who will enjoy many more opportunities than their half siblings. In all honestly, I think now that you simply don't like the step kids and are trying very subtly to make them feel unwelcome. This is totally unfair. Your husband loves these kids and deserves to have them welcomed into your life. He is a fool and will loose them. Especially when this new baby comes and they watch it being completely spoiled and Given all the material advantages. You should care about this. You should absolutely ring fence everything your twins inheritance but your income from this 'vast business' you own is family money and your husband should be able to access it and use it for everyone.

Can you imagine if this was the other way around? What would you do if your husband was the rich one and sat back as your twins unwrapped a lump of coal for Xmas as his ones opened mountain bikes? Or when your kids were struggling to get on the property ladder and he had the means to help but just saved it all for himself? Or when YOUR kids asked why did our half bro / sis get to go to the best schools and get a flat bought for them, and we got nothing? Would you really just say ' life is tough - get over it?

I think these poor step kids are being cut out either way. You don't like them , never mind love them. Your partner is also just as selfish just thinking about himself and his new life not caring about his own kids. You might as well re title this post 'AIBU to just pretend my step kids don't exist and focus on my bio kids only. They aren't my problem'

What prompted you to post this thread asking whether you are unreasonable for not loving your SC in the same way as you love your biological children? Most people have answered that particular question to say that you aren't being unreasonable but, having read further posts about how your family finances work, have criticised your stance and behaviour relating to the treatment of your step-children.

I judge your husband more than I judge you as you just seem quite typical of very wealthy people in your reluctance to share your wealth with anyone outside your biological and nuclear family, which, for you, doesn't include your step-children. Your children's dad doesn't seem bothered at the stark differences between the two sets of children with things like Christmas presents, with his own children being very much the obvious 'poor relations'.

As he doesn't seem to care about it, I'm not sure why you posted this thread, as normally people only do this if their behaviour has been challenged in some way.

But where does your way of thinking end.. If the step childrens mum won the lottery should a she hand over a chunk to ops new baby because her children will now get a house brought for them and ops child might only get a flat?
Im in a position where my step daughter is always going to have it easier financially then my bio son.. Her mum is worth millions.
Is my son abit jealous.. Yes, so am I to be honest, but it ends there. There’s no resentment. If me and my husband chose to have a child together there is no way on earth I’d expect my husband’s ex wife to share her money.

Your situation is different from the one described by OP. Your step-daughter's mother has no connection to or responsibility for your children.

OP is the step-mother to her DH's two children so the relationship is closer and they share a home when the step-children visit. No-one is expecting some huge transfer of wealth from OP to her step-children. That would be very unreasonable. Posters are responding to her determination not to help her DH mitigate the stark differences between the two sets of children at Christmas. OP has made this very clear in her response to a poster asking her whether she would be OK with her and her husband's financial contributions being proportionate to their very different incomes so that her husband could afford to spend a bit more on his own children. Her answer was very clear:
'
'Depends, would you be happy for your new husband to channel a little more of his income towards reducing the lifestyle gap for his kids? By you picking up more of the costs for your shared kids perhaps?'

'No, I wouldn’t. Because that’s effectively me paying for his children? Mathematically him underpaying £1000 towards joint child’s expenses (which means me overpaying £1000) would be exactly the same as me just paying £1000 directly for his kids. Which I wouldn’t do.'

OP is not coming across well with this response.

People lie out of guilt. They will never love a child that isn’t biologically theirs the same as their own blood. I am comvinved of it
hence why a lot of blended families don’t work imo

It’s not different, every other Christmas my stepdaughter is with us, birthdays, Easter’s, future weddings ect she will always have more. She’s very lucky to have been born to a very wealthy mother, should my husband underpay his child maintenance every month so he could provide more for my son who he lives with.. Of course not.
Spin this around.. Let’s say you own your own home and are married with kids, your husband leaves and moves into his new girlfriend’s rented house and she gets pregnant. Should you let go of whatever money your ex husband now provides so that your children’s new step sibling doesn’t grow up filled with resentment.
It is ops husband’s responsibility to provide for his children, if he put £20 per week aside he’d have £500 each to spend on Christmas, my guess is he probably does what most men do and waits until the last payday before Christmas and then moans that he can’t afford it. It’s also worth bearing in mind that ops step kids will get two lots of presents because they have two parents, ops only have her.

What about if your husband was the extremely wealthy one and you wanted to try to even it up a bit for your kids?

The stepchildrens mother didn't choose to blend her family and become involved with other peoples kids....(well maybe she has...but not the OPs).

I don't think YABU... they have a mother who should be providing what you are providing for your twins, so that role isn't absent. You sound like you are a good, supportive presence in their lives and not openly cruel or anything. It would be different if their wasn't a relationship with their own mother, but in this instance, that sounds normal (haven't RTFT so don't come at me if there is another story there).

I have 3 half siblings who have the world and it is heartbreaking. My dad really fucked up and I am still therapy about it now.

Thankfully my husband loves and treats my daughter as his own and she is treated exactly the same and written into his will exactly as our shared child is. His children might pull away from you and their dad and sibling as they get older. I guess that something you need to prepare for as that may well affect your relationship with your husband.

Not to sound awful but what if you pass away? Is your DH going to responsible for the twins? Will he inherit everything?

In many years to come who inherits what from the house? If DH part owns it then his DC will be part of that inheritance? Does your biological child with DH get more of that since it's both their parents house? Have you made arrangements for all of this?

It all sounds very messy.

No judgment from me because I am a step mum myself but we're all on a pretty level footing with finances and we're all clear where we stand. I do worry for the struggles you face with having such different lifestyles for the children.

I think that inheritance and gifting things like houses is different from day-to-day life.

You can’t share space and holidays with two ‘classes’ of children. Otherwise, as a PP said, it really is Cinderella! Are your current 7 year olds, as teenagers, going to be paying their step siblings to skivvy after them?

Schools are harder. If the steps are happy at their current school, private school might not actually be better for them. But, if they are struggling, would you really prioritise your children’s private ski instructors over your step children’s education?!

I do think that it will be a hard road for all the children to navigate, to avoid a feeling of being either a 1st or second class child. I don’t think you can balance your husband dying with giving them financial privilege. It is a false equivalence. One is bad fortune and another is through choice.

I agree with OP. Her twins had a wealthy father and they will benefit from that for the rest of their lives. It’s money for them. It’s not money for any of the other children. Her income from her current job will of course benefit her youngest as she needs to provide for her child.
I don’t see why OP should pay more for their joint child so that it frees up more money for him to spend on his older two. It doesn’t work like that. He’s a dad of three and he needs to provide for all of them. What shouldn’t be happening is him paying less for his youngest as a way to make up for something.

And your comment about the SCs mum having nothing to do OP’s child. You’re right. But OP’s late husband had nothing to do with OP’s stepchildren so his wealth shouldn’t need to influence the SC’s life in any way. Their dad doesn’t need to try and close a gap for example. Especially if it means him not paying a fair share for his youngest child who he chose to have. One man was rich and the other one isn’t. The children are never going to have the same.

I should hope you don't treat them any different but I think it's normal to love your own more as you have birthed them but the problems come if you treat the stepchildren badly or try and exclude them, your husband probably feels the same way about your children that aren't his

There are many posts from women who earn significantly less than their husbands, but who are being required to contribute equal amounts towards the mortgage, bills, child care etc, meaning that the higher earner has loads of disposable income while the other earner is broke. The advice is always that their contribution should be proportionate to their incomes, which should be the case here. Certainly, as OP's children are with them 100% of the time while her DH's children split their time with their other parent, this should be taken into consideration when agreeing the amount each of them should contribute to the family finances.

I would treat them similarly to my best friend’s children - I’d pull them from a burning car or save them from drowning if I needed to, but I wouldn’t sacrifice my own children’s anything (time, money, enjoyment etc) for their benefit.

you shouldn’t have partnered with a man who has children. Plain and simple. Why can’t you just find a child free man?

That advice is normally given to those in nuclear families, not blended ones. There have been many threads about a woman thinking of moving her partner in, with or without his own children, the advice is usually to protect the financial interests of herself and her children.

I also suspect that the people advising combined finances and proportionate contributions are not the same ones those taking no issue with OP’s situation here.

There’s no ‘should’ about it, it’s up to the individuals in the couple, and as a couple, how they choose to manage their finances. In this case OP and her husband are on the same page, and he hasn’t even suggested OP taking on more of the financial burden to enable him to put more towards his children.

I'm going to be honest.
This baby sounds like a recipe for lots of adult resentment.
Twins resent the stepdad who didn't parent them, while being a hands on dad for the younger sibling
OR your partner thinking he can just do what he did for the twins (the odd bit of play and defaults to you for the rest) and you're left feeling resentful.
Step kids resent the youngest for having both parents and massive financial security.

Essentially dh has put his need of a shag above the children he already has .

i wonder how much 1-1 time he has with his children now without the twins being involved? Even before baby’s added to the mix

I don't mean this insensitively, but isn't the money generated now from your business family money? Isn't it shared with your current husband? I've honestly never heard of one half of a married couple earning a small fortune that their spouse can't access! But maybe I'm just clueless

The way you've described your set-up sounds like two families operating separately, which I guess would make sense if you were just dating? But being married and expecting a new child surely makes you all members of one blended unit

Noo apparently it is all still late husband's wonga even though he sadly died 6 yrs ago. Only for his dc to benefit though the new baby would surely put a spanner in the works with that rule.

Perhaps the op will have a spreadsheet for the baby's costs? So, perhaps late husband's business <that she is now running> pays for half private this and private that and current dh days for the other half?

I've no doubt it has all been costed accordingly.