Would I be wrong to leave part of my inheritance to my stepchildren instead of everything to my biological son?

[brunettehead]

I'm looking for outside perspectives because this has been weighing on me for a while.

My husband and I have been married for 8 years and together for 12. We're both in our mid-40s. We were both widowed before we met. I had one son, and my husband had a son and a daughter. The kids were only around 3–4 years old when we became a family, so for the past 12 years we've raised all three together.

In real life, I don't think of them as "my son" and "his kids." They're all our children. His two call me Mom, and my son is incredibly close to his stepdad. We've always been one family.

The issue that's been on my mind is inheritance.

My late husband came from a wealthy family. After he passed away, I inherited everything from him. I also have assets that are entirely in my own name, both from my family's inheritance and from what I've earned myself over the years. None of these assets have ever been part of my current marriage.

For a long time, I assumed everything would eventually go to my biological son. But life has changed.

My current husband and I have both been high earners. A few years ago, he left his executive job to start his own business. Unfortunately, it failed, and he lost a significant amount of money. We can manage the debt, but realistically there probably won't be much left for his two children to inherit from him.

That's where I'm struggling.

My son will always have the advantage of inheriting from his biological father's side of the family, while my husband's two children likely won't inherit much from their own father.

I've helped raise them since they were toddlers. I've been there for school, birthdays, illnesses, milestones, and everything in between. I financially support them just like I support my son. I genuinely love all three of them as my children.

Because of that, I've been thinking about changing my will so that my entire assets I inherited from my late husband and the assets in my own name is divided 50% to my biological son, 25% to my stepson, and 25% to my stepdaughter.

Part of me feels this reflects the family we've built together over the last 12 years. I also honestly believe that if our roles had been reversed, my husband would have wanted my son to be treated equally too.

At the same time, I know the wealth from my late husband's family originally came through my son's father. Part of me wonders if I'm doing something wrong by sharing that inheritance with children who aren't biologically connected to that side of the family.

My biggest fear isn't really about the money. It's that my son might someday feel betrayed or believe I loved him less if he learns I divided everything this way. I would never want him to question how much I love him.

Should I speak to him before making any changes to my will Or is this something that should simply be my decision as the owner of the asset

Can I ask OP are you trying to fake poor English or what is going on here with your writing? Your first post is grammatically written perfectly fine but then some of your later posts almost look like you are trying to fake poor English, so are you two different people writing this or is something else going on?

I'm so glad you asked this, was about the query the same thing myself.

There is certain a glitch in the matrix somewhere.....

It's like an episode of Black Mirror or Westworld when one of the super-lifelike humanoid robots suddenly overheats, starts malfunctioning and talking gobbledygook.

IMO the fairest thing would be for all your late husbands money to go to your son (as that's what he specifically said) and for your money to be split between the 3 children. With the numbers you are talking about it doesn't seem like anyone will be short on money anyway.

I would just split it 3 ways equally. 9M or 13M doesn't really matter. It's not as if your son will have to live in a hovel and go down the mines for the lack of an extra 4m!

Your proposed split would effectively tell your bio son you love him more. Is that what you want to do? Is that the feeling you want your non-bio children to be left with? As you say "they are all our children". If that's the case, treat them equally.

The money is no longer your 1st husband's and you don't need to respect it's provenance. That's all in the past.

Why?

I’d split 3 ways, given you think of all 3 of them as your children. No one surely can resent ‘only’ being left £8M. All 3 of them can do a huge amount of good with that amount of money each.

I think the sensible thing here would be for your husbands share to go to your son and your share split between the 3 of them. I don't think it's right giving away your 1st husbands money when he intended it to go to his son.

I honestly think that you should leave your late husband's money to his biological son but obviously you can do whatever you want with your own assets.

It's possible that your son might decide to share some of his inheritance with his siblings, perhaps you could discuss this with him when he's older. But it needs to be his decision, not yours.

My Dad and late step-Mum were both widowed when they got together and they keep their finances separate so that when she died, her family fully benefitted from the first husband's assets, nothing went to our side - that was the right thing to do IMO.

I'm a widow and I like to think of my sons inheriting what their dad worked hard for and I think that would be what he would have wanted. I wouldn't want that wealth to be shared with a future husband or his children , no matter how much a part of their lives I became.
Obviously I would share my wealth with them when alive but I would want my sons to inherit everything they my husband left to me which was meant for them too.

I think you would be morally wrong to do this. The money from your late H should go to his son. Any other money, do with as you see fit.

@brunettehead I have re-read your posts.

As I understand it you inherited 24m from your first husband and have a passive income from the assets/investments, you cannot touch the 24m core sum. You have autonomy to decide how the 24m should be split when you die.

Are you in England or Wales? If not what are the IHT rules where you live?

Is the 24m core sum in a trust? If so what does the trust permit you to do?

What happens to the 24m when your DC dies if your DC doesn’t have children?

How much of your 3m is made up of the passive income from the 24m?

For me the 24m is generational wealth to be passed down the blood line. Invested and managed properly it should grow, The passive income from the 24m is to provide for your DS and his future family.

Could the passive income from the £24m pay for all 3 DC to attend university, buy a home and car? If so, I would use it to set all 3 up - however encourage them to work and forge their own path in life.

If you are in England I would advise you to talk to a STEP solicitor to ensure you maximise legal tax avoidance measures as 40% inheritance tax is going to take a huge chunk of the £24m.

https://www.step.org/directory/members/search

I think that the money that came from your son's family should go to your son. But your personal wealth should be divided between equally between all three children.

I don't understand why the late husband's money has not been/can't be touched. Surely if it was left to the OP she should have been free to spend it on whatever she wanted over the last 12+ years (not sure how long ago he died, but she has been with her second husband for 12 years, so presume more).
If it was truly the OP's, she could have spent it on houses, holidays or whatever. Also, it would be reasonable to use it to cover the cost of raising her son, for example, school fees, as well as providing a nice home etc.
If her late husband had wanted her to not spend it, he would have had a will that put it in trust for their son to inherit when he was old enough and not left it to her; people with that sort of money don't just mention on their deathbed what they expect to happen to it.

Just imagining a conversation here with the son. Would you think him selfish if he insisted he wanted to keep all the money his Dad left? It wouldn’t be but even discussing it effectively is a guilt trip. Once he has the money, which frankly he should receive prior to your death, only then should he independently decide what to do with it.

I mean not that I am terribly convinced by the story but he left it "with a death bed" demand it went to the son, not for the o.p to make an executive decision so "trust her to do right" would be a false reading of the dead husband's wishes

I absolutely agree. You were widowed very young and hopefully you are only halfway through your life. One day hopefully there will also be grabdchuldren. Nevertheless what you propose 50:25:25 seems an excellent solution for your situation now. Having said that I think all the children are young(?) and your DSCs are not yet adults. So I think you need advice about how best to achieve your wishes. A trust? Testamentary guardians? What about IHT? In your shoes I would consult a solicitor.

In OP's earlier post, she mentioned that her previous husband wanted and stated that his money was to go to their son.

I’d be deeply disappointed if any child of mine couldn’t lead an exceptional and enjoyable life with nine million pounds. I’d be even more disappointed if a child of mine preferred to hoard £27 million rather than give £9 million each to the two people who were raised alongside him as siblings.

The deceased father would have presumably wanted his son to inherit wealth and luxury - nine million achieves exactly that. It makes literally no difference whether he gets nine or 27 million - but it would make a huge difference to his step-siblings.

And without getting all existential about it, deliberately leaving two people with nothing while loading another with astronomical wealth is just ridiculous in the grand scheme of things. Surely what matters is that with nine million pounds, he can lead a privileged life and want for nothing - while also continuing to enjoy a close relationship with two siblings who are able to enjoy the same standard of living. What actually matters in this life is how you treat people.

There’s nothing “moral” about giving one person 27 million and the other two nothing. Especially when OP has said the son is likely to also inherit from the biological father’s family too.

For a change, this sounds like a genuinely blended family. It’s lovely.

This. It should be obvious tbh. The stepdkids are still going to get a wodge off you so what is the problem?

This doesn't answer your original question, but another opinion.

The money set aside for your son is generating income/interest now. I would be using some of that interest to fund your son's life now. For example, school fees, sports, a new laptop or something that is required for school, even future university costs. This isn't going to eat into the capital that is being preserved for him. These are things your DH I assume would have happily paid for had he still been alive.

This means, you'll have more money left in your own budget each month for savings, pensions etc.. In other words, possibly building up other assets that can be left to your two SC.

I wouldn't be talking to your son about this yet, but it will be something you do need to discuss. What age will he be when he inherits from his father? Will it be 18/21/25? Or are you talking about this money remaining in your estate until you pass away? If he's set to inherit at 21, then I guess it's something you discuss with him then. He'd be old enough to understand that as he has inherited so much from this father, that when you pass, you're choosing to include your two SC in what they will inherit from your estate.

I'd give your DS all the inheritance from his dad, in accordance with his wishes, and then share your 3M equally between the three of them. They are all incredibly priviliged to be getting this kind of money.

It is now your money to do with whatever you please. If you wanted to leave it all to the cats' home, that would be your perogative. As it is, you might have to spend most of it on your own care in later life.
Your proposal sounds very fair to me, as already your DH has brought up your son for longer than his own father was able to do and you have been Mum to your stepchildren for that length of time too.
Those people who are saying all the family money should go to your son, I wonder what they would say if you had adopted your stepchildren, which dies happen in some families.

It doesn’t really matter how long her current DH has been raising her son.

Her previous husband and his family worked/earned that money - and wanted it passed to the son.

She was told this.

Doing otherwise is akin to theft. By all means OP can share her assets as she pleases.

Also her step-children may still inherit from elsewhere eg. Grandparents.

If this was posted from a man's perspective, the answers would be totally different of course.
The problem with Mumsnet is its spite towards stepmothers and their biological children and whether this post is real or not, it perfectly highlights that.
When a stepmother posts on here about anything, other women post as if its their children that could potentially miss out. It's driven by the fear of their own situations turning and their own children acquiring a stepmother.

Stepmothers, according to a large chunk of the women who post on Mumsnet, are there to ensure financial equality, make sure all the boring shit (ie, hard work) is done but never allowed* *to have an opinion, put their own children first or expect anything back from the stepchildren at all.

The money belongs to the son. It is that simple. His father did not save for the OP to hand it over to another man's children. It was his dying wish.

Though, from what the OP has posted, most of it is in a trust she cannot touch. She is just hoping she can manipulate her son into handing it over.
Hopefully, he would seek advice from his Father's family and a legal team before doing anything.

It's your money, your choice.

That amount of money is more than enough for anyone, no matter where you split in 3 or the way you are proposing.

Your step children have been in yiur life since they were very young - they are your children in very way but biological.

Your late husband's opinion was point in time and based on the circumstances as they were then. It's very possible he may have had a different opinion if he knew how things were going to work out.

Then all of your late husband's money should go to his son. You made a promise to him on his death bed and it would be wrong to break it.