Child of Family Definition needed

[StarbucksSally]

I want to give full account so this is long. Essentially I was with a partner for about 18 months when I became pregnant. He assumed I would have a termination and was shocked when I refused. He said it was up to me but 5 months later he said it wasn’t what he wanted and went back to his home country. He would enquire re: our health and would put generous amounts of money into my account. This is regular but does not follow a pattern and amount varies. I am guessing but have no proof, that the money is related to bonuses. He is not on her birth certificate. His mother emails me occasionally and he sees my child maybe twice in 18 months. They now communicate via social media as well.

9 years ago I married my husband and have two further children. My husband has not adopted my eldest.

My husband and I are having a crisis sparked by a wedding invitation which I have another thread about. He and his cousin’s partner who is a corporate lawyer and not, by his own admission a family law expert have the same hobby and met by chance at the weekend. They were discussing the wedding and husband explained the situation we find ourself in re: wedding.

Husband’s cousin’s partner is going to wedding but didn’t know the details of our situation. He disclosed to my husband that there is an ongoing conversation in my husband’s family re: my eldest child and they are terrified about her being considered a “child of the family”. My in-laws apparently sought advice when we married re; inheritance. FiL has since died. I know that they have savings accounts for my younger two.

What does ‘child of the family mean’?

Also if I died I now think eldest’s father would come and take her. Can he do this as he’s not on birth certificate?

Child of the family is a term used in inheritance issues.

if your child were to be considered a child of your DH, they would have inheritance rights.

I don’t believe your ex could take your child

Child of the family in divorce would mean your eldest would be taken into account in any proceedings. Now is there a reason your DH hasn't adopted her?

What is the definition though? What criteria is used to determine when a child becomes a ‘child of the family’?

Child of the family
A child who is:
A child of both of the parties of a marriage or civil partnership.
Any other child (but not a child placed with the parties as foster parents by a local authority or voluntary organisation) who has been treated by the parties of a marriage or civil partnership as a child of their family.
(Section 105(1), Children Act 1989, Section 88, Domestic Proceedings and Magistrates Courts Act 1978; section 52, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and section 75(3), Civil Partnership Act 2004.)

if your DH has treated him as a child of the family then legally he is equal to your joint children,

0.5 second google.

uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/5-534-8125?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true

So if your partner treats the child as their own, they are a child of the family.

This is a better link which covers children who have not been adopted.

www.sleeblackwell.co.uk/legal-articles/child-of-the-family

As others have indicated, if your husband has acted as your eldest's father, she is a child of the family. That does not give her any rights to inherit from your in-laws. However, when your husband dies, she may be able to claim against his estate if he has not made reasonable financial provision for her.

If you die and her father wants to take her, your husband can simply refuse. Her father would then have to go to court if he wanted her to live with him. The courts would decide based on your daughter's best interests. Given the limited contact, such an application from her father is unlikely to succeed.

I must be a bit stupid.

So our wills… my half of the estate is divided between my three children his half is divided between our youngest with the surviving spouse allowed to live in the house for their natural life.

There is a clear distinction then between his children and his step-child. So does that mean hd isn’t treating her as a’ hold of the family’?

He treats her well and no distinction is made in household expenses so the family pot is spent on all three children. What does this mean?

Adoption had never been talked about.

It emerged a few years ago when we moved house that the initial deposit given to DH as a gift to him for his first house was asked to be returned as they felt my eldest would benefit and that would be unfair to (even now unborn) children of BiL and SiL.

I believe that the in-laws seemed to think that my eldest could challenge their wills .

DH thinks that he will be bypassed in MiL’d will.

OP, U cannot contribute but I'm watching your thread as it may be helpful to me too. I wish you luck x

Did you read the second link I shared? It leads on to this:

www.sleeblackwell.co.uk/legal-articles/inheritance-rights-unadopted-children

Overthehill I have definitely read the link. I have absolutely zero intention of challenging wills etc, I also doubt that my eldest would be the type of person who would either but do you think my husband treats her as a ‘child of the family’? Every day he does bug his will suggests he doesn’t!

The real reason I am posting is to try and establish why my in-laws behave the way they do and if their fears of my child inheriting have an actual legal foundation.

As for my child’s actual father coming to claim them I worry that while their relationship is a long distance one it is actually a reasonably happy one now she is older and I wonder if a judge would take this into account rather than his initial wish that she be aborted.

Your eldest cannot challenge your in-laws' wills unless she is being maintained by them at the time of their deaths.

If your husband treats her as a child of the family every day, she is indeed a child of the family regardless of what it says in his will. She is therefore entitled to reasonable financial provision and can, if necessary, challenge his will to get it. What "reasonable financial provision" looks like depends on the circumstances at the time of your husband's death. If she is no longer financially dependent on him at the time, she may not be entitled to anything.

If you die and your ex wants your daughter to live with him, a judge will look at what is best for your child. The fact that her father initially wanted her to be aborted is not relevant. The fact that he only sees her twice in 18 months is relevant and means it is unlikely he would get an order saying that she is to live with him.