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?

So true Jumping. What happened?

Happily thanks for sharing your experience of all this. I think you & your dh are very lucky in that you are both obviously on the same page regarding both money & attitudes to children.
Both my Dp & I were badly burned by our divorces & initially I thought I would never merge finances with anyone ever again. However increasingly I see that that attitude presents a barrier within a relationship; a barrier that is ok if both people are genuinely happy with it.
The more I read here the more I see that that unless both parties are prepared to treat everyone equally (all kids) then there's no point in combing finances. I'm not saying that's what should be done - each couple is different - but if you're all in then everyone is all in.
I've actually been talking to my own Dp about this the last few days & in his head my kids have me & their dad to provide/leave inheritance & his kids only have him (his ex refuses to work) & therefore he does not want to combine.
At this stage I honestly don't know how I feel about that as he wants to live in my house (& will contribute) & also still wants me to provide office space & work for him (with payment) the latter of which I'm still saying no to.
Outcome - he sees us as a team, but only on his terms

It is an interesting thread. I think it raises a lot of issues about 'second families' and 'second spouses' and there isn't necessarily one clear right way.

I do personally have an issue with just leaving your own children everything automatically, particularly if you have another child with a partner. I have had solicitors advising me to do that - yet how then would be DP cope with becoming a stay at home parent and having to give up his job to care for our child for instance? He couldn't afford the mortgage then.

One of the main issues is a shared home. Who wants to be turfed out of a house that they financially shared with their husband/partner if one dies for it to go to adult children?

I know that his is a big contention for me, I have no interest in money accumulated by my DP before we got together. However I do feel that any money accumulated since is shared as we have a child together.

Belmotian why is it a red flag that OP OH doesn't consider her child has is when almost every posts we read is about SMs complaining that they are expected to care for their SCs like their own and everyone respond that this is outrageous.

Generally speaking I wouldn't expect a new partner to treat his dsc as his/her own when it comes to inheritance but the OP said he has been instrumental in her dd's upbringing from the age of 5, which I think makes a difference when they are getting married and assumedly living as a family. It doesn't bear much consequence now, however if 30 years down the line the DP died and his children are inheriting then it would be horrible for the OP's dd (who probably considered him Dad) to be excluded from this. Not from a monetary POV, but more symbolic.

In saying that though it very much depends on the dynamic within the family in the first place. Some blended/step families have clear boundaries about who is who and as a lot of children have another parent living else where the step parent assuming a parental role may not be as important.

I find it very heartening that women like the OP are asking these big questions beforethey get married! Money, sex, household chores, children, aren't they the subjects of most couples' arguements?

It might be good to have flushed out an incompatibility - maybe they can resolve it, maybe they can't, but at least everyone knows where they stand beforehand.

(I'm on my second marriage, and we've pooled all assets and treated DD as 'ours' in our wills. My DH doesn't have children of his own. We had a lot of conversations before we thrashed out this solution - it's a bit more complicated than that, but essentially DD will get the lot when we are both dead - if we've not spent it all by then ).

Belmontian - I agree, a lot depends on whether a SP is in fact in a parenting role, or not. Particularly where they take an active role in bringing up a child from a very young age effectively replacing an absent or mostly absent parent. That's so different to being an EOW stepparent with a child you may have met in their teens who doesn't want or need you to be in any kind of parental role. Plus loads of variations and shades of grey in-between those two extremes.

There are a million permutations of step/blended families...and therefore a million ways in which issues like this can get complicated and hard to resolve.

Yes , you can't combine finances and wills if the other party doesn't agree.

It was a hard lesson learned in my first marriage, that marriage takes two. If one person decides leave, and to not work at a marriage but just leave with a new (temporary) partner followed by more partners, then the marriage ends.

Wills and finances can been seen as similar- the mirrored agreement takes two.

Otherwise, in a scenario where we had to portion off our assets and be 'separate' for giving to the children, then I would insist on a reasonable portion.

I would be detailed too - making sure there an orderliness to the 'his costs' and mine, his wealth and mine. It wouldn't be easy to feel enthusiastic about it.

Yes Swing, if SM is in a position to support her step children then obviously the same goes
Yet that certainly isn't what most SM posts here, maybe you, but not the majority.

I do think each situation is individual. A SD who meets his step-child when they are toddlers, with a non existant (or not much involved) father is much more likely to treat them as their own child then if they meet them when they enter teenage years, spend half of their time at their dad who they consider like God.

My point is that no step-parent, SM or SD should have any financial obligation towards a child just because they marry their mother. The child remains the child of both its parents, they don't trade to take on their SD as a father.

If marriage is about sharing everything, does it mean that upon death, you are committed to also take on and care for their parents until their own death just because they would themselves, even if you don't like them much?

I really think there is a massive double standard here between what is expected of SD and SM.

I agree, a lot depends on whether a SP is in fact in a parenting role, or not. Particularly where they take an active role in bringing up a child from a very young age effectively replacing an absent or mostly absent parent
In this instance, you would expect it to be the SP decision to make no difference. If they do, it means that despite being present in most of their lives, they still don't consider them as their own children, and that's their right.

I think what bothers me with this thread is the expectation that SFs should want to treat their SC the same as their children just because that's what their partner wants and I don't think when it comes to inheritance that what a partner/spouse wants comes into it at all.

My OH and I did our wills together, but if he had wanted me to confirm that I would leave equal amount to his mum than to my children before deciding whether he wanted to marry me, I would have been the one to tell him to take a hike as I would have perceived this as blackmail.

I find it very heartening that women like the OP are asking these big questions beforethey get married!

Yes, we discussed these really important issues but then everything changed when we got married. We didn't stay married for long.

Swing, I totally get what you're saying & TBH that would aways have been my stance.
However this thread is really giving me food for thought.
For instance I said to DP this morning that if we keep things separate as things stand he is cash rich & I am asset rich. I provide the family home, it's in my name & is my three kids inheritance. He has his business which is his three kids inheritance. All fine so far. However, if down the road his business collapsed & he became dependent on me & he had nothing much to pass on to his kids, how would he feel if I said so what I'm still leaving everything to my kids? He didn't have an answer.
I certainly don't think that a SP should automatically have to treat dscs like their dcs as yes every family is different. But I'm beginning to think that the real issue is expectation of having to leave assets to children & expectation of inheriting assets from parents.
I'm being tongue in cheek here but seems like leaving everything to a cats home might be a preferred option!
I'm just not entirely sure leaving assets to adult children over a spouse is right conduct for any marriage.

Sad to hear that Jumping. Some people hide their true colours, or change over time in a way which doesn't let you grow together. And it wrecks the stability of people's lives when a partner behaves in a way which is unthinkable in advance.

Swing,
The (new) spouse also takes on being a son/daughter in law. Marriage bring rewards and responsibilities that just dating doesn't involve. I think yes, a duty to the parents in law persists after the spouses death.

It would be an unusual will, however, as in your imagined condition, for you to be asked to leave money in your will to his mum. If he hasn't got children perhaps he thinks his half could go outside of your union, and descend though his family line?

I like it that I have chosen that, if all goes well, we will stay true to our vows and will treat the children/stepchildren equally. They are mine and his family line now.

Perhaps that principal is easier because we both have children.

It is also a strong case that sweetbitter made that there are so many types of families.

(Nb if we divorce - and that would be a tragedy!!!!! but it is not impossible I guess, then where would we be?? The reality is, the will would become null and void after divorce and we'd start wills again independently, and we would choose independently as to whether to gift the stepchildren equally).

I'm just not entirely sure leaving assets to adult children over a spouse is right conduct for any marriage.
I agree but I think time also comes into it. I've now been married 4 years, with OH 9 years, and his attitude (and mine) has already changed quite a lot in relation to finances and the future. He was very protective at first and I know that he got very anxious about asking me to marry him. He then decided that it was just a case of 'taking the plunge' and if it failed again, then that him staying single for the rest of his life!

4 years later though and his mindset has changed a lot and his thoughts are always about 'us'. We made our wills just after we married, in our case, mainly to protect our assets so that nothing would end up under the control of my ex acting on behalf of our children (he has a history of being very bad with money!).

In our case, he would be the one losing out more if we divorced, or upon our death. However, my parents are well off and I will be inheriting quite a bit when they pass away. I don't count on that money at all, we won't need it, but in the context of this discussion, the point is that things can change with time.

Nothing is stopping anyone changing their will as time go by but I still feel that this is something very personal and no one should feel pressured into it.

The (new) spouse also takes on being a son/daughter in law. Marriage bring rewards and responsibilities that just dating doesn't involve. I think yes, a duty to the parents in law persists after the spouses death.
I think this is true in principle, but rarely happening when the time comes. As said, how many spouse would look after the parents of their deceased spouse out of duty rather than love/care? It would happen if they've established a good relationship and wanted to do it, few would do it purely as a sense of duty.

If he hasn't got children perhaps he thinks his half could go outside of your union, and descend though his family line?
He's got no family line at all. He would just want to be sure that his mum enjoys the rest of her life to the max, even if it was a case of her being able to afford the nicest nursing home in town! It's actually this mindset that makes me love him so much. I would love my son to do the same when I'm old!

I agree that it is very individual to the situation. I'm a SM but we live a long way away and I do not have a close relationship with my DSC. I had acquired a reasonable amount of assets prior to meeting and marrying DH and it is that money which has been used for the deposit for our home; the house is also in my name only. DH will be protected via a trust if I die first so he can stay in the house / move as he chooses, but the capital will go to my DNs eventually. DSC will be in a no worse off position than if DH hadn't met me (I'd be happy for anything he has to go to DSC if he died before me) which I think is perfectly fair. Although we pool money day to day we keep savings etc separate in our own accounts.

As someone said above, it does very much depend on the step parent / step child relationship and how each views the other; in my case I do not really play a parental role and feel no responsibility to provide for my DSC in event of my death when they have 2 parents to do so.

Just my thoughts, I realise other people do things very differently!

Bit off track here but just wondered if anyone knows- when including assets in a will which are not property but still valuable, e.g. art, how does one even know which spouse "owns" the assets in order to will them?

jumping - sorry if I touched a nerve. You are quite right, some people change after marriage and no amount of planning and talking can prevent the unexpected changes.

This is an old thread, but I wondered how things have progressed 5 years on with finances and wills, and even marriage?, for the OP. @istherelifeafter40 @Jumpingjumpers @Bananasinpyjamas11 @Magda72 @swingofthings

An update on this would be very interesting! Five years on, DH and I have kept the wills the same as mentioned - we leave all we have to each other in the event of one death. The children will get nothing and only be able to divide everything between them equally when both of us are dead.

We have seen someone’s adult children demand their inheritance NOW from a stepparent when the dead parent’s will has identified that the children’s inheritance is in trust, and they are specifically left some wealth.

Thanks for resurrecting an old thread! What happened since I started it. We got married, had a will written and had a new DD together. I have to say I look back at these actions from my DH in bewilderment because he is really an amazing partner and a wonderful person and we are very happy together. Perhaps these were the aftereffects of previous divorce, perhaps having a child together changed the entire dynamic in a way just talking couldn't do.

So before having new DD, we decided, with the help of a lawyer that:
1.his previous property that he co-owns with his ex partner and he keeps paying the mortgage, bills and everything for, will go to his 4 kids.
2.our current joint property that we own together, will go to me if he dies first, and then will go to my two children: one his step child, another his biological child. If I die first, he has a right to live there until death. After all the rigmarole I posted about, I couldn't bring myself to trust him and just leave things to him.

I think it balances things out more or less. His first property is substantially more expensive and although there are 4 kids, individually their share will be not far off what mine two will get from the new house. There is also a factor that his 4 kids are likely to access the money much earlier in life because DP's ex-P can downsize and release DP's half to be distributed among DC to help as house deposits. It is only fair that I have no claim on that house.
For our new house, this is our life together. Although he brought more money to it as a deposit, we're paying for it equally and realistically, it increased so much in price from the moment we bought it, which was only possible because we both put our savings there and both have high salaries (and a very high mortgage), that it doesn't really matter. He brought in a part of a deposit almost equal the amount the house appreciated in value in 4 years (there are of course renovation costs and stuff). We plan on living here till we die, and we are very happy together.

With this arrangement, I feel this is really my home and we have a life together where we both have protection. I am grateful to him for daring to start another family and agree to another child (4 was really enough for him). We were lucky to conceive at 40. I have a chance to re-live a life (of a young family) and there is this new world of having a wonderful partner and father to my child. So I don't mind a resource distribution where a lot goes to support the first house. Young people even as adults need support - things are very tough and expensive in the SE.

Sorry for the very long post!

This is the most fantastic update! You have both been courageous and you are reaping the rewards. You are married and stable, and all six children have security and you good and high earning parents do too. This is such a good thing for all the family members. Your husband is a very lucky man and it sounds like you are lucky too. You have built something very happy and have had a second bite at the cherry so to speak, and have a young family! So nice.

I am very happy to hear this.

I am pleased for you that you have your forever house. That adds to the settled status. You must have had very constructive conversations to get to where you are today.

The asset split between the children seems fair and is as good as our will which says everything should be evenly distributed, though for ours that is only eventually - after we are both dead.

It is good your house will be yours if DH passes away, and that there is a trust for the 2 children.

Is it unusual that your DH funds a house for the ex? How much longer will he fund that? The ex and your DH can get their 50% if either party force the sale I suppose? It seems the ex is on a good deal and would not want to move.

Will tax have to be paid on a living gift? I suppose the adult children know of the arrangement?

@Happify 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.

This is what my dad and step mum have done and in their case I absolutely think it's 100% the right thing to do but that's because we were very little when they got together.

However, I have a mortgage free house and significant investments due to the passing of my first husband. That is my children's future. I have a DP and on no planet on this earth would I be prepared to sacrifice a penny of that as it's my children's inheritance from their father. If we ever marry, I will take advice, I have a very good solicitor, and have something as watertight as possible to ensure that anything i brought into the marriage goes to my children. I would give DP the right to live in our home until his death and his money would be anything he brought into the marriage plus a 50/50 split of any wealth we had generated together excluding the house unless we moved somewhere he put money into. If we didn't do that I wouldn't marry him. End of.

@Happify Thanks so much for your kind words. In answer to your questions:

1.DH I suppose has a high sense of duty. He hopes to rebalance the payments for the other house as the youngest is now 18, but I think it will be very gradual to put it politely. Wouldn't everyone want to have mortgage paid, council tax paid, energy bills, water, TV license whatnot paid and food delivered for free? Part of the reason of the breakdown of their marriage was a great misbalance in their relationship and a certain infantilisation/feeling of being "used". It's probably very difficult to get out of this mode of existence when you are provided for. In any case, as adult kids are now returning home after uni and are in jobs, I would imagine the bills will gradually be redistributed especially when the youngest is through education. I don't think about this often. Yes, it's a lot of money, but I am also putting a lot of money in supporting my oldest child through A-levels and uni. So we are just broke with all our money going to the kids 😂It will pass though. We have enough to have a good life and lucky to have friends in various sunny places we can holiday with
[also, DH and his ex weren't married so there were no courts or legal arrangements, this is all personal choice]

2.The adult children know about the arrangement. I think they might need to pay tax but I envisage selling that house will be the most likely outcome. It is a large house, and when children start reaching their 30s (and some of them are not so far off) it would be hard to justify a huge house where their mother lives alone and they all need to rent (?)

Thanks to you and to the thread. I think your arrangement is very good; our situation is very peculiar. I remember the solicitor drafting the will was most amused and entertained.

Fabulous. He is a good man. You sound very level headed and you see things sensibly, and you navigate your family with great kindness and an even temperament. This pragmatism bodes very well for a happy life for you, as well as for all those around you. You are a good woman.

If you are felling unsure in any way about this relationship, don’t get married. Marriage should be a mutual major commitment. Trust, from both sides, is crucial.

Your DP sounds perhaps more concerned about his four children’s financial security than yours. Deep down does he care more about his children’s happiness and interests than yours? How will that feel for you? For your child?