AIBU to include stepchildren in our family foundation benefits?

[Tonotcauseissues]

I have done a nc for this. We are setting up a family foundation- it will pay for school fees, uni fees, driving lessons, first car, 3 years insurance and a gap year. The children of the family will join the board age 18 and be mentored until 25 where they gain a seat on the company board. We have said it is for biological and adopted children. But after all these blended family threads I don’t want to create issue if our children have step children. So thinking we offer the same the foundation gives(car, driving lessons, uni fees etc) to step children if married or living with our descendants but not the seat on the board- does this seem reasonable so children living in the same house get the same? Just reading the post about the car for nephews etc and got me thinking. And I know this is a privileged position but I want to get it right as once the deeds are written it can’t be changed so don’t want to cause issues in years to come that I haven’t thought through.

Yes it seems whatever we choose it is difficult. Marriage just seemed really old fashioned and hypocritical as we had our children before we got married.

How lovely you’re being so considerate and sense checking. I have a SS and my own DC - I would offer the same to him if I could afford to.

Far too messy to include step children imo. If they are truly part of the family they could be adopted in.

Thanks -no the foundation and the company are different for different things. What we decide is what the foundation has to follow.

She does speak to us when we see her now, which was never frequent anyway, but there have been a lot of awkward moments and pointed comments over the years. We have still never met this girl who we were apparently supposed to be funding!

And this was my initial feelings but as many pp have said I could just be creating a bigger mess.

This is not a 100% one right answer
It will come down to a 'do what you feel is right' answer

My recommendation would be keep to blood line only but include a discretionary power that enables children of a spouse to benefit as long as there is a marriage with child whose spouse/step children it is, prohibited from voting on the inclusion/exclusion as the case may be. Maintains blood line but allows for opportunity where appropriate. You also need to consider should adopted children being included

Not if they have another parent still alive!

That is madness and it is so difficult to find school fees- many a times it was a struggle and those quarterly fee statements just seemed to keep coming. Part of why we are setting this up.

I would give biological children and adopted children a place on the board. But I would allow the financial benefits to be issued to any child who is resident with a family parent for at least 50% of their time.

I would not want to use the word “step” because many people these days don’t marry, so a child never legally becomes a “step” child.

But I would definitely want those children included in the financial benefit of the foundation. If I had a family unit including step and biological children, with the step children considering my home their home for at least half of their time, I would not accept this level of financial support for my biological children but not the step child. They are living as siblings and I would want them to be treated fairly. If they only came for a weekend every so often I would accept the different treatment.

Thank you and we have stated we want to include adopted children but it is not UK and discretionary clauses seemed more problematic

The advice is harsh for a reason.

Off the top of my head

1. At this level of wealth you'll attract bad actors and predators... including this introduces a lever to enable partners to force your children into marriage (and expensive settlements upon divorce) when they may very reasonably prefer to cohabit....

Eg "it makes sense to marry....why would you insist on staying as partners... it means my child is disadvantaged and the children are treated differently. I just want the children to get on wah wah wah"

1. What happens if....there are a million what if scenarios thar need to be accounted for...

What if...
Your ds marries some woman who has a SC aged 9. She is awful for some reason. The child is in some fancy boarding school and he leaves her when the child is 15 in the middle of gcses. What happens?
Is the child cut off and turfed out of the school? Does he need to wait until post gcse?
Could she sue for compensation since she didnt initiate the divorce? She had an "expectation" due to the trust

Conversely your biological relation is "the villian"... the ex and the SC are gorgeous humans and everyone loves them but now they are destitute upon divorce.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Absolutely - and it is a commitment for the whole of the education. Even if our family circumstances changed we’d do everything (sell the house etc) to keep our kids in their school and avoid disruption, but would we really sell our house so that we could fund a total stranger? Madness!

As the parent on an adopted child, that seems incredibly unfair that children need to be biological. An adopted child is mine legally, financially and in every other way that counts. If you are talking about DNA, this could mean that a child could turn up, aged18, that no-one ever knew about (these things happen) and have money and rights, but a child raised by your kids wouldn’t.
I do think a step child is a completely different category to an adopted child, especially as they could enter the family very late eg age 16.

Thank you this was my intitial feelings but as pp have said this could create more issues.

This isn't always possible and I think would cause problems in some families. What about situations where the other parent has no role in the child life or has died but adoption isn't possible because the other parent won't allow it or from respect for the dead parent?
I think OP needs to think carefully about the Trust and try and set something up that is more flexible that can deal with different types of families.
The legal advice about a DNA test is very harsh!

They can - but the other bio parent loses parental responsibility. They either have to agree or the court severs it.

Which is why I disagree with a PP who said this would create an incentive to adopt step children. It’s not a quick and easy process with no other consequences.

You should be thinking about scenarios that don’t yet exist when creating a family foundation. You should be examining the principles that are important to you as a person and family now (and making sure all children living together are treated equally is a perfectly fine principle, as is encouraging marriage or not differentiating when people are married/unmarried), and coming up with a structure that continues these core values when you’re not here. The point of the foundation is that your wishes continue along with your money when you’re not around to fund the stepkids yourself like you mention as a solution.

Despite what your adviser (very oddly) says, or what MN says, both choices around step children are valid and up to you. It sounds like you’re being influenced by others views a lot when this is about what you see as family and preserving that.

If it’s enough money to create a family foundation then complexity is likely necessary, otherwise you could function perfectly fine without the foundation and family board.

Thanks everyone it has sparked discussion as we have been sat here. We will go with biological and adopted children within a recognised legal marriage and we are speaking to the advisors on Tuesday and see what discretionary powers we could potentially include for step children. It is a mine field and thank you for all opinions we have discussed them all.

I’d leave it up to the board at the time to make that call on a person by person basis with no president set by previous step children. Very different if part of the family since 5 or since 17 etc. how close to the family they are can also influence it.

It’s almost as if someone made up the advice to sound official and didn’t think through the ramifications and how unlikely this advice would actually be.

Thank you the part about marriage particularly seemed hypocritical to me. We also own immovable assets in a jurisdiction that includes all assets in a marriage dissolution and this protects sale from divorce- so a really difficult thing to get right.

What ever you do - it will piss someone off 😂

go with the professional advice ( but inc adopted kids )

It was biological children with proven DNA within a legally recognised marriage. But I wanted some opinions on step children being included family dynamics not legal.