Different Dads Different Prospects

[DelaneyDonkey]

I have no idea what I even want out of this thread.

When I first met my in-laws not only was I pregnant with their grandson even though I had only known their son for a few months I also had a three year old in tow whose dad was completely uninterested. I was quite a catch as you can imagine.

I thought everything worked out reasonably well. We got married and settled down. Broadly speaking they treated both boys well and my eldest had come into the family at an age where he knew they weren’t his grandparents so subtle differences in their treatment were accepted.

Now 17 years later things are beginning to change massively. Eldest dropped out of uni and in and out of work through no fault of his own, just the way it is with that kind of work. While youngest has had driving lessons given to him by in-laws, a second hand car, a course paid for, enabling him to get a part-time job. He has been told he will be supported at uni.

My in-laws are very ordinary people, who have worked all their lives but in the 1980s FiL had an industrial accident and built up a little property portfolio. Last week, completely casually younger son said that one of these houses la will be transferred to him when he is 18 of months. Apparently the two cousins have had houses given to them as well.

Elder son just became mute.

Husband and I are having to pare everything back at the minute but he won’t approach his dad to ask what is going on.

Youngest has his head screwed on but it is as if he has everything handed him on a plate.

Our mortgaged house is worth about £300,000 but husband will not hear of adjusting our wills.

If you had asked me 18 years ago if I expected in-laws to treat them the same I would have said no, it wasn’t their duty but I am just beside myself at the inequality, I didn’t expect it.

It is not up to the OPs husbands parents to make up for the fact that she had a baby with a dead beat. Where are people meant to draw the line with who they financially support if their blood relatives keep turning up with people they aren’t related to and expecting them to be treated the same as actual family.

If the OP was to split with her husband even now I doubt very much her eldest son would make the effort to continue seeing the Grandparents in question.

The really question at hand is why the OP didn’t try and maintain a relationship with the child’s paternal Grandparents rather than expecting other people to pick up the slack and fill their shoes.

Read the OP’s post. He got that (part-time) job as a result of a course paid for by his grandparents. They weren’t requiring him to have a job before they gave him the money. I’m sure having driving lessons and a car to drive to work helps too in terms of employment opportunities.

I agree. What do grandparents do when one child is adopted and other is biological?

The older child is in their lives since he was 3, even if they don’t want to give him a house, they could have helped him with driving lessons. He is also older sibling of their grandchild. Wouldn’t they want both to have a close relationship? Because when there is a great financial divide between two siblings, they are rarely close. Not just because of resentment but also due to difference in lifestyles. Of course, older sibling knows how much he means to his family including his step father.

The youngest isn’t even 18. Having a job has nothing to do with getting money from his grandparents. He’s in high school and choosing to work.

The oldest dropped out of uni and works temp jobs.

That is nothing to do with money from the grandparents. That’s work ethic. The oldest doesn’t have it.

This is a horrible almost inevitable consequence of blended families. I can see why the GPs of youngest have done this. Say you and DH were to split up or DH died, your eldest probably would never see his step GPs again. They’ve been fair to their biological grandkids. It’s just being practical, it’s tough and it’s sad, but that’s life.

I definitely wouldn’t change my will to favour one child, they’ve still got to get 50/50 otherwise there’d be a rift again.

You can only try to address anything you can change / do now to help your eldest. Address why he’s dropped out of uni / can’t keep a job. It’ll be better if he can feel positive about himself. Can you help with driving lessons, for eg? Can he start something to earn money / give him hope that he’ll be successful in something? Rather than pining for an advantage that was never his. He’s had opportunities and dropped them, what can he do now?

The OPs husband may well have committed to the step child but I doubt he went and asked his parents for their opinion before he started a relationship with the OP .

OP’s post is there on the first page of the thread if you want to read it.

As for your son being in and out of work because 'that's how it is'. Have a think about that. He's dropped out of uni and cant hold a job down. He would benefit from some tough love and a kick up the arse, not a hand out.

Precisely this.

It's not for his step grandparents to bail him out.

If his dad was a supportive millionaire, you wouldn't be writing a thread about how eldest DS was being gifted a house, and how wrong it was that your entirely non related (to that man's) children weren't being voluntarily gifted houses.

And it sounds like he needs a severe kick up the arse, as PP says.

Could you leave your 50% of the house to your eldest son, rather than half each? As I assume your husband would be leaving his half to your youngest. Then they’re both getting 50% each.

Is that the only part time job for teens in the whole wide world?

Getting a job during high school has nothing to do with grandparents paying for anything for you. The oldest could have worked during school if he wanted to. He could have stayed in uni if he wanted to. He could work a proper job now if he wanted to.

He’s a bit of a waster. Some young people. Hopefully he will learn. But it’s nothing to do with money from grandparents. He had the opportunities and wasted them.

It's very frustrating. Your youngest doesn't need to inherit a house outright at 18. It would be better for both if they were a little older, ie let your youngest finish school and get established at work.

Would the younger son let the older son live in the house rent free ( they would house share) for a few years as this would at least save the older son a few years rent and help him get back on his feet

The possibility of inequity is the reality of blended families. I have a friend with two kids in a very similar position. One’s dad is a waster, the others dad is loaded. It’s not going to be pretty later. It’s no one’s fault either, it’s just life. Some people have more money and have more to pass on if they so choose. It’s not the grandparents of the second son’s responsibility to treat both children the same, or their problem. Why would they leave money to the elder one who has other relatives who may or may not leave him something.

It was entirely unreasonable. Quite apart from anything else, we're always hearing on here that nobody should assume anything about inheritance. Then OP has also specified that there were always subtle differences in the treatment between the two boys, so any thought she gave to the matter ought to have taken this into account.

OP in terms of adjusting wills, I'm not saying you should or shouldn't, but your DH doesn't get to decide what you do with your assets. Any more than you do his. It's your call.

Can you reframe it as you have given your older son a good father-figure and associated family, who might help with advice and influence (if not free houses). Better than someone like his own father?

If you want to hand over things to your eldest, it’s up to you or his father to have early them.

I hope your sons don’t resent each other but I can’t fault your in laws for gifting only their grandchildren expensive items.

A PP said above that money isn’t handed out on a plate. I pointed out that for OP’s younger son, it has been.

You have no idea whether the older son worked part-time at school or not, OP hasn’t said anything about that.

If you were to split from your husband I doubt very much that your eldest would even see his parents again.

In this scenario, why would he? They never treated him like grandchild. But if he was accepted as part of family and had a relationship with them, yes even in split, he would have seen his ‘grandparents’. When they all met, he was 3, while grandparents were adults, so it was on them to decide the kind of relationship they wanted with him.

People even treat animals as part of family. He is their grandson’s older sibling, his half blood.
I am not saying, give him a house but they could have helped him with lower tickets items like driving lessons. But problem is dh, who doesn’t see him as a son.

I don’t think your husband and in laws have done anything wrong here at all. Your eldest isn’t their son/grandchild, and it isn’t their duty to level the playing field between your children. The playing field was uneven from the beginning.

Agree. It's a kind thing to do but would probably be better delayed a few years. A lot of 18 year olds aren't mature enough for home ownership.

I can see why the grandparents have made this decision but they should understand that by giving your second son such a different life to his brother, it will damage their relationship. This isn’t just some money, it’s financial comfort for life. If I was your oldest son, I couldn’t maintain a relationship with my brother given this disparity. I disagree with most people on here, I think adjusting the wills so your sons are on a more equal footing is fair.

I'm sorry OP, but it is what it is and if you (and your eldest DS) could accept it when he was three years old, you need to accept it now. I know it's hard to watch your eldest DS be left out after a long relationship with your in-laws, but your youngest DS is your in-laws' blood grand-child through your DH, your eldest is not. I wonder what your eldest DS's relationship is like with your in-laws? If it's good they may risk damaging it if the inequality between your DSs gets greater, but that's up to them.

What on earth do you mean by not only has he not had any hope of building a future? He may not enjoy the financial advantages his brother will have, but he will have as much chance of 'building a future' as any other person who did not get given a house in early adulthood, i.e. almost all of us. He can work, earn, save, get a mortgage.

You’re correct. The DH doesn’t see him as his son. And that’s because he isn’t his son.

People seem to have this unrealistic expectation that when you take on someone else’s child that you have to declare your undying love for them and score their name on your body in blood.

You can take on someone’s child, even love them and be happy to have them in your life yet be able to acknowledge that they’re not your child and that’s ok.

Eldest’s dad has periodically sent maintenance. They go out together periodically. So for example he might see him a couple of times a week for a couple of months and then not at all for five months. Last year he took him to his cousin’s wedding.

My son was unhappy at uni as the course wasn’t right and I understood this. The jobs that fall through are not my son’s fault. Shops close down . Jobs naturally finish in these sectors.

Our wills are mirror wills with both boys getting 50:50. My husband has not discriminate against my eldest as he had been in his life a decade by then.

Husband found out that his two brothers had help buying their houses.

I imagined the in-laws would leave money to their own kids not grandkids.

Husband doesn’t want to speak to his parents about this.

Younger one is matter of fact not boastful.

The house is not to live in but to rent out and manage. An older cousin has this already apparently and will guide youngest.

No dIscussion about this has ever taken place between husband and brother (father of 23 year old cousin).

I know I am naive but thought as they were treated reasonably equally as children I never thought the difference would show nearly 18 years later.

This is really common with blended families and kind of inevitable when you factor in each child having parents and extended family of different means and inclinations. If your eldest child’s father was very wealthy and so inclined the tables could easily be the opposite way around which is often also the case