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?

Magda72 Thanks, yes, same here. I expect my DD to work and build a life that doesn't depend on whatever I have managed to earn. Inheritance is a nice boost later in life, but it might never materialise: you might spend it all on care or something bad can happen. It is not something that defines how you live.

It feels like DP has such a sense of duty, that he actually "belongs" to his kids: even his future mortgage payments are already theirs. If he is so dedicated, why not leave me alone, he can go and live for his kids, they will get even more out of him!

It's interesting that many people here agree with DP. For me, this is not a marriage or a family. Maybe I need to age a bit more.

That is an important point you raise about expectation. If my Dad had lived a long life he may well have had to sell his home to pay for care. We certainly didn't expect to inherit. God knows I would rather have him over an inheritance. Both my parents died in their 60s, it's bloody unfair, would rather have them back any day. I know I am looking at it from an adult child point of view, the opposite from you. Our situation is different as well as my Dad met his wife later on in life, they werent building new finances together, the wealth my father had was built on his marriage to my mum. She sacrificed her career for him and the children.

Something else to consider is if you were to die first. If put into trust, your portion of the property is safe and in trust for your daughter and cannot be touched if the home would need to be sold to pay for your husbands care.

It's a very emotive subject. My Dad's financial advisor said that he felt it we had all been treated very fairly. Maybe it would help you to talk to all over with an FA or solicitor?

Thanks, FoxSticks yes, a good idea to talk to the solicitor. The problem is he comes up with all these ideas about passing everything to his DC, while it is me who needs to suggest alternatives. I feel awkward (it will benefit my DD) and I don't want to make these suggestions. I don't want to make suggestions how to accept me and my DD in his life. Maybe it's unreasonable. But I feel it must come from him. The solicitor will say: "how do you want to divide the money" - and what, we'll start having an argument there? or I will need to say: "Treat my DD a little bit as your child as well"?

Do you see what I mean? I understand you're looking at it from an adult child point of view. But say the assets that you father built with your mother all went to you. And then your dad earned a bit more, and half of this went to you, and a half to his wife and your step-sister, - would this really matter a great deal to you? (the other half's proportion that your dad would have contributed will be much much much smaller than the assets from the first family)

And thanks for the idea about the trust for my daughter. I will look into this.

My Dps family background is very work & money orientated & in his wider family EVERYTHING revolves around money - the making & the keeping of it. His exw is also totally money orientated as are his kids - they know the price of everything - drives me nuts as my background couldn't be more different. Dps family see 'leaving' stuff after death as evidence of successful parenting - my family's' ethos was 'leaving' behind decent well educated children indicated a good life's work.

Is is possible your Dp is similar to mine and in his head the piece about providing for his kids is no indication of his feelings for you and your dd - to be simplistic, maybe he just doesn't get where you're coming from & can't see the problem?

What does he say when you point out that your DD will be shortchanged from your contributions if everything gets split 5 ways?

Yes I hear you OP. I did have a child with my DP, we were to marry and share assets however that hasn't happened and now I'm quite wary. Your DP does seem to be ring fencing his assets for his children over thinking about how you as a couple will be. That should absolutely come first. Whether it is 50/50 but having a life long interest in the house so that you don't have to move if one of you dies, and ensuring that whoever is left is catered for. That is crucial if you are to have a child.

I do think this is a bit of a warning. My DP is lovely in many ways but I really resent how he still has not made proper provisions for me. If he died tomorrow the house would be shared amongst his adult children - my son with DP and another from before would be homeless.

I think that you are right OP, your DP is not looking at your relationship in the right way and seems stuck on protecting adult children and not setting up an equal relationship with you. Your DD and you could end up compromising way too much and losing out.

How are things shared now in everyday life ? If hes still keeping a home with exW are you both 50/50 on current bills etc

My concern is if he's onto a bit of a free ride now surely that will colour how things go forward

Personally this focus on money from both him and his children could well be who they are

I would also suggest that if you're mid-20s and he's late 50s you've got a lot of years left on this planet perhaps you could still see Dp and build something for yourself separate from him like you're own investment property

Your ! Not you're sodding spell check

Thanks everyone. Now I don't feel like I am not totally nuts and have unreasonable expectations.

We have been together for five years, and lived together for two years. And he hasn't contributed equally to bills/rent as he has to pay for so much. Which means I pay the rent, and he pays the mortgage on the house that will go to his ex-P and DC. When I point this out, he says that as he contributes a part towards the rent, this benefits me and my DD because otherwise I'd probably rent the same size house but I'll have to pay for it in full on my own.

And now on top of that, if we buy a house together, the mortgage he would have paid in the future, will also need to go to his DC in its entirety. I think this all indicates I am not imagined there as a person to take care of, but as a resource to help look after this DC, even if and when they don't need looking after.

I mean, I think if someone has something like this in their head, why don't they just f* off. If I suggest separation, he gets very distraught and apparently I am the meaning of his life.

don't feel like I AM totally nuts

I can see both sides here. I can understand why he would want to ring fence what he puts into the house for his children - what if he were to die within a short space of time? Your daughter gets a large proportion of what would otherwise be his children's. Is there not a lot more to marriage than being entitled to half of everything he owns?

Personally I would draw a line from where you start, so anything prior to buying the house stays protected. So say he puts in 200k and you put in 100k that stays protected for your own children - in this example your DD is better off, as if everything is divided equally between 5 kids your dd only gets £60k - though I obviously appreciate these figures/proportions could be way off!

And then everything from that point gets split, so assuming the house increases in value that is then split as you decide.

If you don't set these things out in wills then the situation relies on trust to provide for the others children. If there is no amount set aside when the first dies and all is inherited by the spouse, the step child/children risk losing out entirely surely?

Family in this situation have ringfenced everything from before the new marriage (3 kids on one side and one on the other).

If one of them dies the other carries on living in the new house, sells it, care fees whatever they need to do.

When they have both died it's split equally between the kids even though they have paid different amounts.

Seems fair to me.

lalaloopyhead Everything prior to buying the house stays protected, and everything subsequent to buying a house stays protected. This is his proposition. Just everything is protected. I don't terribly mind but am not inclined to get married if the future life is formulated in terms of protection against me. Now, he really wants to get married and doesn't want to live separately, which I suggest. If we leave separately and don't get married, things will be protected even better surely?

live separately

OP - my Dp recently asked me to do some IT admin for his business - pay check included. When I said no; that I was not happy working in a set up whereby over 60% of his take home pay goes to his exw who spends money like it grows on trees while he works 10 hours days to support this he got really upset. He just couldn't see where I was coming from & accused me of begrudging his payments for his kids!
Obviously I don't & I have my own money so it's not an issue, but like you, moving forward I would have financial principles that are so at odds with his that I too am very wary.
My Dp sees me as very independent & resourceful, which I am. He also sees my children as confident, bright young people with me to guide them. He equates good parenting with the provision of a comfortable lifestyle (which my kids do have) - he doesn't see the hours I have put in with my kids tending to their emotional needs & trying to guide them into adulthood as self sufficient people with a healthy attitude to money. What I mean here is that my Dp thinks my kids are great because they've been well provided for, whereas I know my kids are doing great because of the hours I (& my ex) have put in to rearing them. Dp thinks his own parents did a great job as they moved from very little to quite a lot through hard work and so could buy 'stuff' for their kids, but he tells me stories of his childhood that are full of emotional neglect which he just doesn't see. All the above has influenced Dps own attitudes to parenting, provision & duty.
Not sure if this makes any sense but I say all of this as money and our relationship to it is a massive part of who we are and it does sound like your Dp is very ingrained in a certain way of thinking which could stem from very far back & which he will maintain unless he can be shown another way of looking at things.
I don't think his behaviour necessarily means he thinks less of you or doesn't trust you; his behaviour could be bound up in all sorts of his own crap that he hasn't sorted yet.
For the record my Dp also has a property with exw (an investment property from way back that neither of them live in) & I have told him in no uncertain terms that I will never merge finances with him unless he severs all financial ties with her. Initially he said I was being 'emotional' but I took legal advice & was told I was % correct in my attitude.
And also for the record the only arguments Dp & I have are over this stuff - would melt your head!

What happens to your dd in the event you die, would she go to her dad?

This is not a man who I would want to have any financial control over your assets. I wouldn't be agreeing to any clause allowing him to stay in your joint home till he dies I'd want to ensure that he had to pay out your share of things to your dd or into trust asap. It sounds like he has resources and a well paid job so it's not like you'd be making him homeless.

I really don't think I'd be marrying and living with him to be honest.

Hello IsThere. I agree with you. I admire your stance on being a bit if a stickler, and for doing this before marriage.

My hubby and I are both on second marriages, and we each had baggage children already.

I agree with Magda that this is not a reflection on what your fiancé thinks of you!

So be gentle, but clear, respectful and kind and understanding and see if you both can come to an agreement. Talk to him about the bits you have read in here that supports your view.

My DH and I have agreed to omit the offspring from our wills. (Apart from some small items mentioned so that none of them then could fight over it (rings go to the girls for example). Not that we think they would fight).

It is worth mentioning to him that on marriage, previous wills are null and void. A spouse automatically is protected inherits if the other dies if there is no will.

For us, Like in a first marriage, we have chosen that the surviving spouse will inherit all, will have the wealth to enjoy or spend until they die. Then the whole lot is divvied up between the (joint) kids,with one from each set being executor.

I believe in marriage. Mine has been my second chance and we have worked hard at it and simply love being together. We are a support for one another.
There is a line in the marriage service, "all that I have I give to you" and you seem to believe that and hold the same principal as me - marriage of the two families resets the equations. And I agree with you Otherwise, perhaps continue dating and keep finances separate

If you have separate finances then you are always ready to leave, disconnect. If you treated your job or home this way, you wouldn't fully invest. I think the same is true of a marriage.

Look at this as a problem to negotiate successfully, and don't dig your heels in and be feisty and lose something which is precious to you here. Open up your true feelings about JOINING as one. There is probably stuff on moral/religious websites that could eloquently and kindly put this into words for you.

Bear in mind -Men often feel the need to provide. tell him, he is only 1/3 through his adult life with ten or twenty years more work before retirement. Allied to you his chances of good health and good wealth, and happiness are far greater - and all the children benefit from seeing your strong union.

Nothing stays the same. His exwife might outlive him. His children might marry rich or poor. But in his passing he might want to treat his family equally to each other, regardless of what they inherit elsewhere.

Post marriage, I believed anything else would be inequitable.

ps -and I have a friend who has 'won' the bigger share of inheritance for her children over his, but their marriage includes some separateness, where their loyalty and money is divided. They are in it for the now and are happy with that compromise, that they wouldn't do the downsides of sickness/health nor richer/poorer. I'm too much of a stickler to want that.

Magda72 thanks, I see your point very well. It is about teaching and learning from each other and being able to change. I agree with you, my parents taught me to be resilient, gave me great education, but also cut me off support at a time I got my first job, which also taught me self-responsibility, self-reliance and planning. I know they love me very much and would do anything for me, while I don't expect them to fund my adult life, through inheritance or not. With DP attitude, there is a danger of making your kids vulnerable, as they are so protected that they don't need to do much in life. I know such examples among my friends. The friends who have got the richest parents who always paid for their stuff haven't really separated from their parents well into their late 30s, which is traumatic for them and the parents who are now having a say in what husband their DD choose.

I know it is not your story, and I see your history and context from the way you describe it so well. Maybe we can build a different feeling and different set of aspirations together with our DP, maybe not. I guess we'll see.

Lunar I think my DD would go to her Dad, yes, who lives abroad. It's difficult, isn't it. How can I argue for me to stay in the house until I die (in the event of his death), but not the same for him?

happify this is a wonderful post, thank you very much. You do capture what I feel very well. Thank you for your support. Also your second marriage sounds like a bliss and I wish you lots of happiness!

Are you ready to talk to him calmly?
Perhaps at your place..

For a start you need to seperate what joint finances mean in term of marriage and death.

Marriage is clear. Everything is 50/50 - in principle of course especially depending on length of marriage. When you agree to marry you agree to potentially lose accumulated assets.

This is different to wishes upon death. After divorce you can still be there financially for your children.

My OH came into marriage with more assets than I did. He decided to marry me because his love for me was stronger than his assets. However it doesn't mean that he should also leave my kids anything if he were to pass away.

Hi Happily,
Do you mind me asking what ages your kids were when you and dh married?
Your attitude & solution also sounds great but I'm just wondering how you tackled providing for dependant kids (education & the such like) if anything were to happen to either one of you?