DP and I own a house together. DP has two DC from a previous relationship and we have one DC together. The house is mortgaged and owned as tenants in common in equal shares. If either of us did in the lifetime of the mortgage we have insurance to pay it off. We are not married, do not intend to marry and so our finances are very much separate but we earn roughly the same amount. He will out earn me when I return to work PT but I can still afford to equally contribute to the house. Food may be the issue where I wouldn't necessarily be able to equally contribute, but I pay almost every cost for our DC. He pays for his other DC who don't live with us.
Now in our Wills we give the right to the other to occupy the house until certain criteria is met (e.g. marriage/death etc). Otherwise everything I have (minus a few specific gifts) goes to our DC. DP, however, has left his share of the house equally between his three DC but only his first and second born will get anything else of his e.g. cash, vehicles, investments etc. I just can't understand why he thinks this is fair. His argument is that our DC will inherit from me. But his older children have a mother too who no doubtly they'd inherit from. Granted I have a better paid job than her but I don't think that is relevant? Also DPs parents are well off. If they died and left their money to DP, our DC would stand to lose out on a lot if DP didn't change his Will. DP thinks we should have done our Wills separately and he is right. I just can't understand his logic. I'm sure I'm going to get ripped to shreds here but perhaps someone can give me a good insight as to his thought process and logic. It's really affected the way I see DP as I think he is being unfair, but perhaps I am.