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.

What if the oldest DS relatives were minted but still deadbeats - so emotionally the older DS was raised by OP’s ILs and getting an inheritance from bio dad - would you expect the ILs to stump up as well?

Equally your DH by going 50/50 with both boys could have been penalising his own bio DS if yours then went on to inherit from his DF and their family.

If your ex is an addict his parents may survive him - so he won’t be able to piss away his inheritance from your DS bio grandparents.

Again, disagree it was inevitable. If you think so, you should sell your services as a psychic.

Yes, I know he did not, but that doesn’t mean the current situation was “inevitable” or that it cannot be remedied.

I am basing my replies on what happened as well.

Where we are today is usually the product of both chance and choices.

Saying it was inevitable is saying there was no other way this was going to turn out. Which is both unhelpful and untrue.

You have no idea either how the grandparents would have viewed an adopted son either, but we do know that he would have a right to inherit from his adoptive father (that side of the family) so if grandparents are skipping a generation to do early inheritance they would be more likely to include an adoptive grandchild than not.

If the OP split up with her current partner, the in-laws won't see her or her older child ever again, they have no right or expectation to stay in touch with the child of their son's ex partner.

How can anyone expect them not to think of the children differently? Of course it DOES matter if it's your grand-child or not. Step-grandchildren are not family, even if you are as welcoming and kind as you can.

Adoption is completely different, adopted child IS family.

In terms of inheritance, yes - this was pretty much inevitable. He has his own parental family to inherit from. Just because they won’t have as much, doesn’t mean anything. That’s just differences in family. If you choose to have children with more than one person, there are going to be differences thoughout their lives. You can expect others to make up for this difference.

I can understand you being upset by your children not being treated equally but it was probably likely given the circumstances. However, I agree that your IL should have spoken to first about this sizable gift as they must gave been aware of the disruption it could cause. I would put my efforts into supporting your first son to get him into secure employment and pay for additional training. It seems strange your IL are lavishing funds on grandchildren but not their children.

We’re talking about people that haven’t been anything other than consistent with how they’re considered OP’s eldest. A situation that Stevie Wonder could have seen coming didn’t require a psychic to predict.

Well I would be feverishly saving money in secret for my eldest but I don’t know if I could defend that ethically. The muteness would set me off.

I would talk to both boys about it, but not blaming ILs or youngest. Maybe ask youngest if he thinks it would be fair if you try and support his brother more. Ask eldest if he would accept it.

Nope, not even for inheritance. I can leave my money to anyone I want. The eldest son can still be left inheritable by his stepfather or his step grandparents. Adoption would make it more likely. But the idea that no inheritance is inevitable is simply not true.

I think many posters do not know the meaning of “inevitable” it means an outcome that is impossible to avoid or prevent; certain to happen.

Otherwise I wouldn’t be getting this responses. It seems like people are thinking inevitable means unlikely or differently.

The majority of people are never gifted a property.
I believe that this is infact unusual circumstances

I don't think it's fair to put your own kids on the spot, and as a mother, YOU should treat them fairly and equally.

They can't expect same treatment when people are family for one, and nothing for the other , but you the mother are the same mother for both!

And my view is that behaviour can be influenced and changed over time given the right stimuli.

@DelaneyDonkey

OP, think about it like the Norwegian royal family. Mette-Marit’s eldest son (by a loser man) is not going to inherit a kingdom, is he?! Her children by the Crown Prince are going in inherit much more from their father and paternal grandparents.

Stop thinking that this is unfair, and stop letting your eldest son think this is unfair.

It’s perfectly fair.

Why?

He will be an adult when he receives this gift from his grandparents. If OP knew what would she do - try and get her in laws to gift the same to her son?

This happens so frequently. OP wants to define family for her in laws. Unfortunately they don’t see her son as their grandson - and strictly speaking he isn’t. As hurt as she is for her son this is all outside her control.

OP does your son call them granny and grandpa? Does he visit now he is an adult? Does he have a relationship with them outside you and your husband?

The current situation was inevitable, given that the hypotheticals you postulate didn't happen. It's clear from the last few posts that people talking about inevitability mean in this situation, not other ones you've decided to assume could've happened but didn't. You just seem to have got confused about how much value other people are assigning to flights of imagination.

Also, you're wrong that DS1 would've had a right to inherit from his adoptive father had that happened. There's never any guarantee of an inheritance, could all have gone/still go on care and funerals anyway.

Would you feel this way if your eldest father was gifting him a house and therefore better off than DS2?

Woul you be questioning your ex and expecting him to provide for a son that isn't his?

Your eldest isn't your in-laws grandson, they have no responsibility to him.

Those who give, do so out of choice, it's not a given OP.

What if you had 2 or three kids with ex, would you expect them all to get houses too?

Because it's a substantial and life changing asset to give to someone who was a child yesterday. It's something they need to be prepared for. If it's being given over fully, there's nothing to prevent him selling it and frittered the money away. There's a reason why trusts often have provision to hold back some of the control until a person is older, say 21 or 25.

If you read my posts, you'll see I don't disagree with you that OP was wrong to assume DS1 would be treated equally, but this is a different point.

This may be controversial but OP if your DH also had a child that wasn’t yours then would you expect your parents to buy them a house?

my parents would move the earth for my DD but don’t even send my 3 SC a Christmas card, even though they are lovely people and have nothing but good to say about them.

i feel for you and your son, I really do. But in reality they were never going to buy him a house.

I’m sorry, but I think you were being hopelessly naive. Obviously your in-laws are not going to give the same to your son as to their grandchild, and similarly obviously your husband is not going to disadvantage his son to benefit his stepson, the fact that your husband is willing to split his will 50:50 is amazing and well over what I would expect.

It seems like the issue is not so much what your eldest has not had, but that the youngest is getting much more.

As an extension of that, the issue isn’t so much what you have and haven’t been able to provide, but what people unrelated to your eldest have provided for your youngest.

Best thing for your eldest now is an honest conversation about how he’s going to have to provide the things he wants for himself, because you are unable to and he doesn’t have rich relatives. Is he still going to be precariously employed in shops in 5 or 10 years, getting increasingly bitter about what his brother has?

One of the things his brother has is a tax and time burden, if he’s going to become a landlord at 18.

I don’t think that their choice of paying for the health and safety and a first aid course to enable their grandson to make money from a job built on a hobby he had has anything to do with him being given a house .

What a dismissive way to talk about your son. I'd be proud of him. At 16 he has the initiative to make a hobby into a part time job with a couple of courses. That speaks to a work ethic and drive. The grandparents see that. Since their other grandkids have been gifted rentals, it looks likely to them that he's got character to be successful with it.

I know it’s not the same but from my two DSs, one chose to go into a highly lucrative career and the other an artistic career. Hence one is minted and one is not. Inequality between siblings is very common and it might help to focus on that, not the gifting element. You can’t expect everything will be the same.

You might also consider that your DH is choosing in his will to give your eldest (who isn’t his own son) the same as his own son. His son might feel that was unfair. That’s another way of framing to your first DS that he is being ‘advantaged’ not disadvantaged.

I really think this is up to you to present it in a reasoned and equitable way - take the emotion out of it. There is no way your DH should have to speak to his parents about it - it is entirely their right to choose what to do.

Lol, okay.

“This is all their fault for not changing something I fully accepted both at the beginning and throughout the years of our relationship. I’m definitely not responsible for failing to heed their words and consistent actions, so it’s totally reasonable for me to be shocked and angry at this outcome!”

Your update that your eldest son does have contact with his father changes things for me.

If he had no contact then I would think it harsh however he does have his biological father in his life.

Its probably quite a normal situation where children with different fathers inherit different amounts from their respective biological families. It's unfortunate that eldest son does not have the level of inheritance available to his that youngest does, but I feel this is just how it is with blended families and I don't think you and your husband should change your own will to reflect this

It isn’t about shaming her, I’ve children with different fathers and my now DH, each set of children have had different lives/ opportunities/ monetary gifts etc. My step children have had regular holidays, trust funds, driving lessons and cars paid, my DH pays towards university expenses, while at the same time my own adult children had to pay their own way although 2 of them had small inheritances. Our own children again, have grown up with different lives and opportunities, although my grown up DC said to me that she’s glad I had her young as will get to spend longer with me. At the end of the day it comes down to the individual’s mother and father and yes I feel desperately sad not so much for the monetary opportunities my different children have had but regret not being more selective with who I chose to have them due to the lack interest, love and time from their father’s which is what hurt them the most, although at the same time for myself I don’t regret having them, I wouldn’t swap any of them for the world. Just to add though, if we’re talking about grandparents coming round with Christmas presents for children then yes it would be mean to come round presents for only their biological grandchildren, while they are still only small children then they should be treated equally if they are not receiving anything at all from the other parent