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?

She shouldn't have. But tbh, I judge the new husband even more harshly for exposing his kids to someone who would never prioritise them for "anything" ever, in a blended family.

'She shouldn't have. But tbh, I judge the new husband even more harshly for exposing his kids to someone who would never prioritise them for "anything" ever, in a blended family.'

Totally agree. They're a nc family just waiting to happen.

I feel like this was a very clear situation with each parent responsible for their own children until now.

Im sorry to say but I think the last thing the situation needed was a “joint child” brought into the equation. Now there will be a lot of blurred lines and reasons to call unfairness from many sides.

But in answer to your question, yanbu not to feel what you don’t feel.

Im sorry to say but I think the last thing the situation needed was a “joint child” brought into the equation.

100% agree.

Also this. ? It makes no sense how your former husband was wealthy so his kids are taken care, you run the business now so your new child is taken care of but apparently your step children live in your home with your kids upto 50% of the time & they're not getting shit as they're unrelated.

Like obviously there not inheriting & presumably none of the kids have day to day access to family finances but why arnt there general lives alot more even day to day wise & what's there father & mother's stance on this - are you all on good terms, are they working towards building wealth for their kids (this would be an interest of mine if I came from a good background & was getting with a man who has kids of his own) or has your husband accepted his lower down place & expects his kids to accommodate it equally ?

Not necessarily, no. It is quite possible to keep her business from being considered a marital asset. It’s very common for couples not to blend assets, when said assets are substantial.

A blended family does not have to operate as one financial unit, married or not . Those in nuclear families don’t have to join finances either, for that matter. It’s only an issue if a couple aren’t on the same page, which isn’t the case here.

I'm interested to see your explanation for choosing a show over taking your step child to a doctor's appointment when they were sick enough to be asked to picked up by the school - this was a big issue that many posters have picked up on.

I find it weird that you don't discipline your step kids - but even more weird that your husband doesn't discipline your children whom he lives with 24/7? So if he was watching the kids and they were being unreasonable, did something silly repeatedly and causing trouble... he'd do nothing and perhaps let you know later? And you would do the same when it comes to your step kids? If they were seen picking on other kids or annoying a neighbour, you'd just stand and watch?

You keep mentioning how your relationship is a fun aunt/uncle or how you would treat your best friend's kids... but a fun aunt/uncle/mum's best friend doesn't see the kids half as much as you presumably see your step kids/ and definitely wouldn't live with the children as your kids' step father does - it doesn't make sense to live with kids but only "be there for the fun parts" and literally nothing else?

It sounds like you're downplaying your husband's role in your children's lives to make you look better/on equal standing on how you treat his kids to be honest. (Not saying he's the perfect father to his own children for the myriad of other reasons other posters have listed, but that's not what we're discussing here - we're discussing your apparent indifference to the kids who are legally part of your family even if not by blood).

Also, please stop saying "but life is unfair". Yes, we know this adults. But you're almost deliberately causing this divide between CHILDREN - the oldest is 9 and the other 3 are 7? Are they reasonably expected to understand and go through "life is unfair" right now when you with your own money can actually afford nice presents for them too?

How doesn’t this it make sense? Their finances aren’t joint, and each party is responsible for their own children. What her husband and his ex do regarding the financial interests of their children is for them to sort out, it’s not something OP needs to make her business.

You sound horrendous

Do the step kids also receive material things from their mother?

I’m a step mum and a mum. Blended family of two kids a piece and DH and I. DH earns considerably more than me. He contributes more for housing, bills and food and if we go out as a family accordingly. But things like Christmas and birthday presents are paid for separately for our respective children (in my case in conjunction with my exh as we are amicable). My children probably get more for Christmas as it’s just the way we always did it before we divorced and possibly a bit more for birthdays, than his. His might get more expensive things bought for them outside of this-clothes etc. Again this stuff is paid for separately. It all evens out and all kids understand their respective parents position on this.

so in terms of life experiences (going out, holidays etc) they are all treated equally which I think is important. Presents/bigger purchases possibly less so.

your example of choosing the show over the Dr’s wouldn’t have happened here I don’t think-I probably make more sacrifices for dh’s kids in terms of time etc than he does mine. And I would have prioritised the child’s health. Again my own kids would have got that as they understand that sometimes in families sacrifices have to be made.

I don’t love my step kids as I love my own. But I do love them and act like their parent when they are with us and in that I don’t treat them differently to my own.

You were left grieving and alone with two babies depending on you. I don't think anyone would expect you to have the same bond with your SC now.

I think the private school stuff is ok.

The Christmas presents is just horrible though and I am judging you massively for that.

What happens about private school fees for the new baby. Is the husband due to pay half for this as it will impact how much he has left for his other 2 children.

Your twins have lost their father, and it is right that his money is used for their benefit only. The bit I’m struggling with is that your expectation is that your husband’s resources are split equally on his two children and your shared child (who will have a significant share of your resources) and you see him paying more towards his first two children as you effectively subsidising them and depriving your own financially priviledged children. I’m afraid at this point I lose sympathy for you, as you seem to see these children as budget heads rather than children in a blended family and I think you come across as cold as a calculator.

This thread is beginning to raise my blood pressure! So many posters still arguing that the twins shouldn't have to share their inheritance (has anybody said they should?), piously pronouncing that Blended Families Don't Work (a favourite on MN, you'd think the smuggery could be a little reined in given the vast volume of threads showing that nuclear families often don't work very well either), and worst of all the odd poster insisting that it is actually impossible to love non-bio children as your own (just fuck off with that, how insulting to non-bio parents can you be to insist that you know their feelings better than them?).

But the worst is the unrelenting focus on getting the formula right, as if we could just agree the exact limit of each adult's responsibility, and where the financial streams should sit, and which parent has managerial responsibility for what, the job is done and the children will be fine. Why on earth wouldn't they be, with a parent allocated for that?

You see the same kind of thinking in the endless threads about, say, room allocation for step kids. The fallback on simple rules and formulae, the absolute black and white thinking ("you should never have married a man with kids if you couldn't guarantee no one would ever have to share a room!"), the instant assumptions (that stepmothers don't really like their kids, that children of divorce can't and won't fully recover).

The OP has expressed that rigidity in thinking, and so many posters have completely affirmed her approach even if they prefer a different formula. But surely what the OP needs to take from this thread is that her thread title is asking the wrong question: she doesn't need to love her sdcs the same but she does need to commit to making the family work for everybody. That is absolutely the job of a stepparent. You have to want your sdcs to feel your warmth and interest in them, and you have to want the family to work as a whole, and not just for the bits of it you have ownership of.

Ground rules and consistency are important, but so are flexibility and alertness to nuance. The idea that you set everything up at the start and then the kids just have to deal, regardless of their individual personalities or needs, is weird to me. Family life is a journey, not a spreadsheet. And at the heart of it is adults who care about children and want to support them, not always on the clock, even if "they have their own mother for that", and not thinking that money and bedrooms are the only meaningful way to do so.

Are you saying he should pay less towards his youngest child compared to what he pays for his older two? He chose to have another child and that child deserves equal support from him, the same as his older children.

She asked the question she wanted to ask, so no, it wasn’t the wrong one.

She doesn’t ‘need’ to do anything other than what she’s doing, and sticking to the boundaries her and her husband agreed upon, and have no desire to change. Taking on a responsibility, financial or otherwise, for his children is not something that would work for her, and nor is it something her husband expects her to do.

This post is hard-hitting but I think says what some of us were trying not to think.

There were some really pertinent observations here, in particular the fact that saying “ life isn’t fair” kind of works to explain general inequality but shouldn’t be used to justify what @TaraRhu has aptly described as a “two-tier”‘family.

I do understand you wanting to set your own Dc up with their father’s money down the line and think that is fair. But by then the children will all be old enough to have some comprehension of the reasoning. As young children, having two different piles of gifts - the haves and the have nots - is a bit stomach churning within a “ family.” You don’t need to be differentiating between them at that level. You can well afford to even out the sorts of things children notice - not houses or fees, but Christmas bikes and trips to the theatre. Or if you can’t, you really aren’t as wealthy as you are making out, To do otherwise is creating a Cinderella and the ugly sisters situation. Yes it will hurt the SC, but ultimately it will impact far worse on your Dc who will approach life as the sort of people who feel financially entitled to more, or to the best seat, the best treatment “just cos.”

I think the real problem is you haven’t wanted a family with your Dp, you’ve wanted a relationship for yourself and have only given lip service to really liking or wanting to embrace his Dc as an integral part of a blended family and not just small cameo roles for lesser actors. It really upsets me that there are children growing up in these sorts of set ups.

It’s also hard to believe your Dp won’t get hurt as well by the inevitable envy. Your treatment of your Dc/the shared Dc makes him look enfeebled in his own DC’s eyes and creates plenty of motivation for resentment of him - which doesn’t seem to be a loving thing on your part,

I’d just buy them the same. How much is it really going to cost for the next, what, 12 Christmases and birthdays? I know wealthy people who set aside a thousand every Christmas to gift lovely toys etc to charities collecting for presents. I think they actually enjoy it. And you know what they say about charity: starts at home - yes, even blended homes.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

I think yabu tbh.

It's the part where you said you don't love them I struggle with. I get not like your own but to actually say you don't love them I find odd. People love their dogs but you can't find it in your heart to love the children of the man you love?

If I was your H I would plan my finances to make up the shortfall for the sc. It'll just breed resentment otherwise.

In the incident you mention, one of their parents should have taken them, work commitments or not. I think what you describe is ok, but he shouldn't have had a child with you, because now they will be lower down than their own sibling and a can of worms will be opened.

Differing financial situations arel aways going to cause problems anyway. If they bought the sks fancy things their mother would probably feel bad and complain that he got to shower them with treats while she did all the day to day stuff and paid more of her money providing food, shelter etc.

You should’ve lived apart until the children were out of the home, and how awful to bring another baby into this hot mess.

It’s vile to see that you’re forcing four children (plus one new one) to live with randoms, when you have no intention of acting like a family to the tiniest possible extent.

The children have every downside of a blended family and none of the potential benefits.

They could’ve all benefitted from strong relationships with a wider set of people. Instead, they either have a weak father, calculating mother, or disengaged step-parent, and they will see exactly whether they are first class, second class or third class status in the family.

Colour me unsurprised when the children end up on a stately homes thread.

That's the impression I get too.

If the new baby is going to have the same lifestyle as the older ones despite not being entitled to the inheritance then clearly there's money available to ease the disparity with the SC

I wonder if the OP's aim is to damage the future relationship of the SC to their half sibling so that her own kids are preferred?

This..its a mess really. I wouldn't like this arrangement at all.