second marriage, children and finances

[istherelifeafter40]

I am considering getting married for a second time and am very confused by our discussions about finances and my own feelings.

DP has 4 kids, most grown up. I have 1. We are considering trying for another child though I don't feel I can trust him - to get married and have a child, see below.

If we were to buy a house together, he'd put in more money, as he earns more/has more savings. He also has a share in a joint house with his ex-P, which is maintained (he pays for it).

In discussions about ownership and inheritance, he said a few times how he would like his share to go to his kids (my daughter would inherit what I have put in), or the house to be divided between our 5 kids equally (my daughter would inherit less than what I have put in). His share in the other house will go entirely to his kids (high value and almost paid out). In previous versions of that discussion, it would happen upon the death of one of us. Now at least the other can stay in the house until death.

There is great inequality in our positions: he has more money, and more children, I have less of everything. He proposes to leave the other house out of discussion and share this future possible house that we will get in terms of what everyone has put in. And then leave whatever he will earn/put into our joint house to his kids. I really do understand the need to protect them, though I can't fully grasp the idea that the parent is financially responsible for their kids forever, in their entire adult life.

But I also wonder what my role is in all of this. It feels like the stream of money from him to his kids needs to be protected at all costs (from me) - and I am a temporary companion. I like the fact that he is such a good dad, but I also feel that a more direct way to support his kids is not to have a relationship with me, then there would be no distraction of finances onto me! I know it is a bit of an emotional response, and may sound ludicrous. But I can't see how a marriage which requires in my opinion total sharing of life can fit inside this model. I can't see how I can trust him the way he wants me to while this is the background. WWYD?

I would have thought in such circumstances the house would be split equally between you and you leave your 50% equally to your DC (your current DD and any future dc you have together) and he leaves is 50% to be divided equally amongst is DC.

Otherwise I'd not see any reason to marry him to be honest, there's more than monetary value you'll be putting in the house surely? Or will you both contribute equally to all domestic chores setting up the home etc?

yes, but 50/50 means that my DD gets more of the money he has put in (because I'd be able to contribute around a third overall) - money that otherwise would have gone to his kids!

It seems that two thirds would be split between his children and one third would go to your DD?

MaybeDoctor Yes. Is this normal that everybody's biological children retain what their parents managed to earn and the relationship has to be seen from than angle?

Yes but if you bring up a child together you are sharing assets - his earnings if he works and you stay at home - should be a shared 50/50 thing and 50% should go to you to leave to who you like.

I have this with my DP - he was 'burnt' as it were and gave way over the top to his Ex and is now being quite mean with me and out child together. I'd be happy with 50/50 - as if we were married - he has more children than me - but he wants all kids an equal share which will mean my kids lose out. Especially as his children already will have inheritance from their mothers house - which me and DP are paying for!!

bananas Yes, this is very similar to my situation. How do you convince yourself that this is ok?

How long have you been together?

I don't think there is any right or wrong, but I'm with your OH on this. I think it is fair that everything he has build before he met you should benefit his kids and also fair that the current house should be divided between all the kids or indeed, they get his share, you get yours.

Frankly, I think it is a very individual decision who should get your wealth when you pass away. My husband made the decision not to leave all his wealth to me and my kids, but also to leave some of it to his mum and brother (he doesn't have children of his own), even though his mum is 90 and his brother 60 and earning a good income himself (no kids either). This would still leave enough for me to be well cared for in addition to my own wealth.

I respected his choice. He had a life before he met me and that was his mum and brother. Similarly, I made the decision to leave the house I own (previously resided in) to my kids only. He knows it and actually fully agree with this.

Would you feel the same if it was you who had come into the relationship with significantly more wealth than him? Would you have been happy that you'd be expected to leave as much to his kids than your own?

I can understand him wanting to protect his assests he's already built up prior to you being a couple and save for his own DC. I think it's unfortunate and sad when parents move on to second relationships and cut their previous family out in favour for their new one. I have DS1 from previous relationship and anything we would leave would be divided three ways equally regardless if he would inherit from his DF.

I think he's right to protect what he already has for his children, I'd advise anyone to do the same male or female.

It's financially not worth it for him to get married.

I think it's fair and right that he protects "his" assets for his DC.

However, if you're going to have a child together, then I think, regardless of what you each contribute to your shared house (eg you one third and him two thirds) then I think your house should be split 50/50, half to your two DC, and his half to his 5 DC.

Hi OP - firstly I'd say to you if his kids also have inheritance from another property don't let yourself get into a situation where your daughter would inherit less that what you put in. I think that would be very unfair.
Secondly - do you own your own property yourself at the moment? Would you be selling to purchase with Dp?

If you have a child together then I think that changes the situation.

At present: the 2/3 and 1/3 split, with each share split between the children, seems fair to me, as at least there is a guiding principle of passing on what you have put in.

Sent previous post too early by accident.
Meant to add that I can see both sides.
My Dp is self employed in a business that does very well but it's ongoing success depends on him continuing to work.
I own my own home as ex & I had an investment property - he got one I got the other. My mum died a few years ago & my inheritance has allowed me to work part time & go back to college. Before I met Dp my intention was to sell my home in a year or two, buy a smaller property & set myself up in business. My property now looks like becoming the 'family' home which leaves me asset rich but cash poor & potentially borrowing from the bank to start my business. I don't want Dp buying into the house as that's all I have for my kids but that leaves him potentially homeless if anything happened to me.
Dp wants to get married eventually (as do I) but the inheritance stuff really bothers me.
I'm happy for him to leave to his kids & vice versa but how to we make provision for each other if something happens to either one of us?
It's soooo confusing.
When my dad passed he left everything to my mum who in turn divided it between my siblings & I when she passed on. So simple in comparison.

Thanks for that Foxsticks - very interested to read that & it makes perfect sense. I'll definitely look into that type of set up.

Presumably your existing DD stands to inherit from her birth Father?
Could this be part of his decision process?

Thanks very much for all the opinions. I do understand and many people have expressed it here, the need to protect children. What I don't understand is why wanting to marry me then so much.

As KarmaNoMore says, it is an issue of trust. If he wants to ring fence whatever he brings into the marriage, why marry altogether? To put it another way, being with him means I can't build a relationship with someone else, have more children, and a proper family, for instance. I see it as using me, and my relative youth whatever is left of it for companionship while making sure I (if I am alive long enough) come out exactly the same as I come in. Why marry then? Why pretend we share "everything"?

I could consider a relationship which is more of a companionship, living separately, for instance, going on holidays together, spending weekends, etc, me not making a claim on his finances. He gets very offended when I suggest this. But I see that this is in fact what he wants, it is more a matter of pretending that it is something else.

People say a mutual child changes everything. I can't imagine having a child when the relationship is like this. A child can't be an instrument to sort love out.

Some details: I work full time and earn well. I am not going to be SAHM even if we do have another kid. What I can't marry in my head is the claim that he loves me so much with this desire to wall me from his wallet (hypothetically and preventively, I don't need money).

Is he walling you from your money now or setting up provisions for after he dies (If he dies first)? With my Dad and his wife they lived a very full and lovely life. Finances were shared and open. It was only his stake in the house that he put aside for his children, and that won't come into play until after she dies. His Pensions etc and other financial benefits like shares have passed to her so she is secure in the house and financially comfortable. If incomes etc are not shared and open now I can understand you being worried.

Sorry walling you from his money. Must proof read better.

I hear you OP. I feel somewhat the same in that while I'm happy to leave what I might bring to a marriage to mine & vice versa I do feel that moving forward there needs to be a provision for each other & a mutual sharing of assets from this point forward.
My siblings & I were always told by our parents that we'd be given university education but that we'd then on our own so to speak & if there was any assets there when they passed well & good, but that they weren't going to make life decisions for themselves & their retirement based on feeling the need to leave their children an inheritance.

I personally feel similar as it's the way I was brought up but Dp feels he needs to 'give' to his kids as adults which I personally don't really get.
All I'd say to you at this point is seriously question having a child with this man particularly if he is older. I would have loved a child with Dp but my head told me no - waaay to complicated & as a result he has had a vasectomy. My Dp is a great man but we have fundamental differences regarding money which would have melted my head if another child had been throw into the mix as I know that my expectations from him would naturally have changed.
I also know that my Dps eldest (17) has outright asked Dp if we are going to have kids as he wants to know where he stands re inheriting family land!!! Honestly! I'd never even have thought of that stuff at 17. Is if possible your Dp is jumpy if he has kids & possibly ex also querying him?

At the moment our salaries are very similar, and as he has one kid of school age still, and university students kids, and contributes to the other house, he doesn't have much money left. So there is no walling at the moment, but also nothing to wall from, so to speak. All his wealth is in the assets and future assets.

I can understand splitting the house 50/50 for instance. This will mean my DD gets very slightly more than my contribution (or less + another child) but his kids also get a massive inheritance of the other house as well. My DD will not have anything from her dad.

Maybe I confuse what happens after with his feelings for me now. For me this will is an expression of our relationship. If my DD (10) who has great relationship with him and in whose life he actively participates, has to be clearly differentiated as not his biological child, what does it say?

I am not asking for 100% for my DD, to be clear. I just see this calculation of the half of the third as really weird counting of pennies, in the condition when his kids are in a better position already than any of the people I know, and he is trying to build a new and full life together with me. Why not think, OK, I've built one life, with good results: children and wealth. Now I am building another life. Parts of this new life will still of course go to my kids when I die, but its not like absolutely all results of the new life must return to my kids to the last penny.

Foxsticks put it much better than I did & in a shorter post! Honestly can't sort coherent thought this evening lol.
But I second what she says - the inheritance at death is understandable but not the separation of finances from here on in.