AIBU for giving my step-niece less than my nieces for 17th birthday?

[OnTheWatersEdge]

It was my brothers step daughters 17th birthday this week. We gave her £50 and a few gifts. My brother also has 2 biological daughters who are older and a step son who is younger.

When my 2 nieces turned 17 years ago, I gave them money for driving lessons. I knew my brother wouldn’t be able to afford them and checked with him at the time that he was ok with me paying for them.

The amount I gave my nieces was significantly more than I have given to SD. I thought my brother was quiet after I gave SD her gifts and he has now spoken to our parents to say he is disappointed that I haven’t given the same amount to SD as I did to my nieces so that she can have driving lessons. It never crossed my mind to give SD the same as our nieces.

Would you say anything? Obviously he hasn’t spoken to me about it and I only know through parents. He knows our parents don’t keep anything to themselves so I feel like he wanted me to know.

AIBU to not have given the same? Would you say anything?

I’m not saying emotions behave like maths - I’m saying the comparison is obvious. Of course people vary in how they feel. Some teenagers would shrug it off, some would feel a pang, some wouldn’t care at all. That’s normal.
But none of that changes the fact of the situation:

• two girls got £1000 at 17
• one girl got £50 and perfume

That’s a huge disparity. Whether it bothers her a lot, a little, or not at all, the difference itself is still there. That’s the point. Saying “emotions vary” doesn’t erase the reality of the contrast. It just means different people respond differently to the same situation -which is exactly why her father’s protectiveness is understandable. He saw a very obvious gap and didn’t love how it looked for his daughter. And again, nobody is insisting she must be upset. Nobody is claiming she’s devastated. Nobody is demanding equal gifts. It’s simply recognising that the message exists regardless of how she personally feels about it. Some people wouldn’t care. Some would care a bit. Some would care a lot. But the disparity itself doesn’t magically stop being stark just because one possible reaction is “she might be fine.” That’s all I’m saying.

Why do you keep repeating yourself?

You realise we have all stopped reading?

I think that’s a good idea.

But you’re shifting the question away from what actually happened. Nobody is arguing that every relative must give every child identical gifts. Of course different relationships exist. Of course different relatives give different things. That’s normal.
The issue here isn’t “should every family member treat every child identically?” The issue is one very specific comparison:

• two girls got £1000 at 17
• one girl got £50 and perfume at 17

Same milestone. Same family unit. Same aunt. Same age. Wildly different treatment. That’s the contrast I’m talking about - not the entire extended family tree. And yes, the step‑niece has grandparents, aunts, cousins on both sides. So do the biological nieces. That didn’t stop the aunt giving them £1000. The idea that the step‑niece should rely solely on her “other side” while the bio nieces get generosity from both sides is exactly the dynamic that makes blended families feel unequal. This isn’t about forcing equality across every relative. It’s about acknowledging that within this specific relationship, the disparity is stark. And no, the nieces don’t have to treat their step‑sister identically either. But again - that’s not the comparison being made. The comparison is between:

• what the aunt gave her biological nieces
• what she gave the step‑niece at the same milestone

That’s where the message sits. You can absolutely argue the aunt has no obligation to match the gifts -that’s fair. But pretending the difference won’t be noticed because “other relatives exist” doesn’t really address the point. Inequality is acceptable everywhere except where it becomes meaningful. And milestone birthdays, inside a close family unit, from the same aunt, are exactly where it becomes meaningful. Two girls got £1000. One girl got £50. The emotional contrast is obvious - even if the girl herself handles it graciously. That’s all I’m saying.

With seven years passing even for bio relatives, the situation might be different (there’s that banned word again).

I think OP gave a lovely generous present and I would like to be on her birthday list!

I’m not projecting my “emotional reality” onto her - I’m describing the emotional context of the situation. There’s a difference.
I haven’t claimed she’s devastated, crying, demanding £1000, or suffering long‑term harm. I’ve said the disparity itself carries meaning - because it does. That’s not me deciding her feelings. That’s me acknowledging how comparisons work inside families.
And the comparison here is extremely simple:

• two girls got £1000 at 17
• one girl got £50 and perfume at 17

That contrast exists regardless of how she personally feels about it. She might shrug it off. She might feel a pang. She might not care at all. She might care a bit.

All of those are possible.

But the message created by the disparity doesn’t disappear just because one potential reaction is “she might be fine.”
And again, the only person making assumptions about behaviour is the one insisting the dad “gives CF vibes” based on nothing but a hunch. The one concrete behavioural clue we have is that he expected her to be included equally - which is far more consistent with treating her equally at home than with sidelining her.

None of this is about forcing equal gifts. None of this is about insisting she must be upset. None of this is about rewriting her feelings.
It’s simply recognising that:

• the disparity is stark
• teenagers notice stark disparities
• parents often react protectively when they see them

That’s not projection. That’s just how family dynamics work.

Whats grammarly????

Yes it is. Of course it’s up to all extended family members to treat children equally

I have never used Chatgpt in my life!

Yep, getting repetitive strain injury here 🤣

It isn’t really, they can give what they like to who they like.

in this instance, giving a present was the equal treatment. OP didn’t need to give the same present to someone she has a different relationship with.

im sure the bio family on the other side haven’t done every present equally for the past 8 years, and nor should they

The extended family didn’t commit to a step-child.

They should be kind and inclusive but being kind doesn’t mean treating them exactly the same.

Nah.

Should the children (some now adult of course) also have to treat each other equally? Or are they allowed to account for bio vs step relationships?

Yes, I’d rather a few lines with typos than a generated bulleted essay.

But that’s exactly the point - calling her “an in‑law” doesn’t magically make the emotional context disappear.

Yes, legally she isn’t the aunt’s niece. Nobody is disputing that. But emotional relationships aren’t built on paperwork, they’re built on shared life. And this child has shared eight years of day‑to‑day family life with the aunt’s nieces.

That’s not remotely comparable to an adult who marries into a family.

She’s been there for:
birthdays
Christmases
family meals
holidays
ordinary daily life

She hasn’t “arrived” as an in‑law. She’s grown up inside the family unit. That creates a very different emotional landscape.

And again - nobody is saying the aunt must give £1000.
Nobody is saying the step‑niece is entitled to it.
Nobody is saying the aunt has done something morally wrong.

The point is simply that the disparity is stark, and stark disparities carry meaning in close family settings.

Two girls got £1000 at 17.
One girl got £50 and perfume at 17.
Same milestone. Same aunt. Same age. Very different treatment.

Whether the girl personally shrugs it off, feels a pang, or genuinely doesn’t care - the message created by the contrast still exists. That’s not projecting feelings onto her. That’s acknowledging how comparisons work inside families.

And yes, she may not consider the nieces her sisters. She may be perfectly fine with being in a blended family. She may not care at all. All of that is possible.

But none of that changes the fact that the difference is obvious, and it’s understandable that her father - as her parent - reacted protectively when he saw it.

You don’t have to agree with him.
You don’t have to think the OP should have matched the gift.
But pretending the disparity carries no emotional weight because she’s “not really a niece” doesn’t reflect how blended families actually function after nearly a decade of shared life.

That’s all I've been saying all along

It’s the repetition that gets me most

like, PLEASE ADD something new and fresh

don’t make me read £1000 to 2 girls yet again

surprised Mumsnet allow it given how it stifles discussion

I can’t believe people are SO stupid that they can’t see all the obvious AI tells and realise that others are well aware 😂 bet they use it to send emails as well thinking they are super clever

I don't know how many times I can say this, there is a limit to the different ways I can put it.

I’m not claiming she’s the aunt’s biological niece - I’m saying the emotional context of eight years of shared family life matters. Legal terminology doesn’t dictate emotional reality. A child who has grown up inside a family unit for nearly a decade isn’t experienced by the other children — or by the adults - as “an in‑law.” She’s part of the household dynamic, part of the celebrations, part of the day‑to‑day life. That’s simply how blended families work when they’ve been together long‑term.

And again, nobody is saying the aunt must give £1000. Nobody is saying the step‑niece is entitled to it. Nobody is saying the aunt has behaved maliciously.
The point is that the disparity is stark, and stark disparities carry meaning in close family settings:

• two girls got £1000 at 17
• one girl got £50 and perfume at 17

Same milestone. Same aunt. Same age. Very different treatment. Whether the girl personally shrugs it off, feels nothing, or feels a pang - the message created by the contrast still exists. That’s not projecting feelings onto her. That’s acknowledging how comparisons work inside families. And yes, she may not consider the nieces her sisters. She may be perfectly fine with being in a blended family. She may not care at all. All of that is possible. But none of that changes the fact that the difference is obvious, and it’s understandable that her father - as her parent - reacted protectively when he saw it.

You don’t have to agree with him. You don’t have to think the aunt should have matched the gift. But pretending the disparity carries no emotional weight because she’s “not really a niece” doesn’t reflect how blended families actually function after nearly a decade of shared life.

That’s all I’m saying - repeatedly

You are clearly not listening to what I have repeatedly said.

I’m not claiming she must feel hurt. I’m saying the contrast itself carries meaning - and that meaning exists regardless of how she personally reacts.

Of course emotional responses vary. Of course some teenagers shrug things off. Of course some genuinely don’t care.
But none of that changes the fact of the situation:

• two girls got £1000 at 17
• one girl got £50 and perfume at 17

That’s a huge disparity. Whether she personally feels delighted, indifferent, or slightly stung, the difference itself is still there. That’s the point. You’re treating “she might not care” as if it erases the message. It doesn’t. It just means she handled it graciously -which is entirely possible. Teenagers often do that to avoid awkwardness.

And yes, she may have felt nothing but warmth from the aunt’s gesture. That’s absolutely within the range of normal reactions. But her potential reaction doesn’t change the reality of the contrast. The emotional impact isn’t created by me - it’s created by the scale of the difference.

This isn’t about insisting she’s upset. It’s about acknowledging that the disparity is stark, and stark disparities carry meaning in close family settings.
Her father reacting protectively doesn’t mean she’s traumatised. It means he saw a very obvious gap and didn’t love how it looked for his daughter - which is a perfectly normal parental response.

Different people think differently. Different people feel differently. But the situation itself doesn’t change.

Two girls got £1000. One girl got £50. The contrast is obvious - even if the girl herself is perfectly happy with her gift.

You have no idea what the ‘emotional impact’ or ‘emotional relationship’ is or isn’t. If she does feel hurt it’s unfortunate, but it’s not OP’s fault or problem to solve.

You don’t need to keep repeating your bullet points. No one has failed to understand you, we just don’t agree.

Jesus Christ @PrettyPickle would you ever stop? Talk about dogmatic! Many don't agree with you, get over it.

I know I've been saying people don't all think the same but I'm fairly sure the 'emotional impact' of your repeated chatgpt posts is mental torture on all of us 😂