Step Parents and Spending

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You got $250,000 and you're complaining because your step mother is giving HER son money from HER share of the will. She may not have worked outside of the home since you were 14, but she certainly worked inside of the home taking on your dad and his two kids, loving you, raising you, and cleaning up after you.

You are incredibly ungrateful.

OP was 14 when her baby brother was born. I bet stepmom got a LOT of free babysitting from OP. Her stepmom lucked out in having a live-in babysitter to make her life easier. Now she’s doubling down on taking advantage of OP and her brother to direct all the inheritance to her biokid. What a user.

You sound unhinged.

Really? You’re invested in the story of a selfless stepmom “taking care of a teenager.” I’m presenting the more likely possibility that the teens helped their stepmom a LOT in taking care of her new baby. It wouldn’t surprise me if the teens were treated like unpaid au pairs.

I’m sorry you get so upset if someone challenges the version you’ve convinced yourself is the right one.

Keep in mind that the half brother also got 250K when his dad died. It sounds like the dad wanted to treat his children equally. Stepmom clearly wanted to give more to her bio-kid and she’s making that clear in her actions.

You sound unhinged because you are literally making up a story about OP’s stepmom using her for free labor with zero indication this occurred.

[Anonymous]

OP's father could have written a will that left the family home to all 3 kids after the stepmother passed, but did not. It's a bit too much to expect a step parent to leave large assets to non-bio kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You got $250,000 and you're complaining because your step mother is giving HER son money from HER share of the will. She may not have worked outside of the home since you were 14, but she certainly worked inside of the home taking on your dad and his two kids, loving you, raising you, and cleaning up after you.

You are incredibly ungrateful.

OP was 14 when her baby brother was born. I bet stepmom got a LOT of free babysitting from OP. Her stepmom lucked out in having a live-in babysitter to make her life easier. Now she’s doubling down on taking advantage of OP and her brother to direct all the inheritance to her biokid. What a user.

You sound unhinged.

Really? You’re invested in the story of a selfless stepmom “taking care of a teenager.” I’m presenting the more likely possibility that the teens helped their stepmom a LOT in taking care of her new baby. It wouldn’t surprise me if the teens were treated like unpaid au pairs.

I’m sorry you get so upset if someone challenges the version you’ve convinced yourself is the right one.

Keep in mind that the half brother also got 250K when his dad died. It sounds like the dad wanted to treat his children equally. Stepmom clearly wanted to give more to her bio-kid and she’s making that clear in her actions.

You sound unhinged because you are literally making up a story about OP’s stepmom using her for free labor with zero indication this occurred.

It's a lot than logical than the story of the selfless "taking care of a teenager." If the SM came into OP's life when she was 4, I can see a lot of care being involved. But a teenager? It's a lot more likely that 14 year old OP was helping the SM babysit her infant half-brother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more than anything, he emotional aspect it’s what stings. If I lost my mom, and thought I had unconditional love from my stepmom - and then found out it wasn’t fair? It would hurt. A lot.

It doesn’t mean the SM is wrong, but it is absolutely something that’s insensitive and divisive. And it doesn’t have to be about giving $1000/mo to one child our of your three. It’s giving anything to one child that you don’t give to the other. Parenting 101.

If SM had a vacation but only invited her bio kid, etc - she’s wrong. She would be wrong if she were SM, biomom, grandmom, adoptive mom.

It’s the principle of family inclusion, ESPECIALLY since OP has lost BOTH bio parents before 40. And your Mom is going to start excluding affection, gifts, etc? Again, people have a right to do what they want in this case. But that doesn’t make it morally right.

It's a great lie that a woman will give equal affection to her own flesh and blood baby and a girl who was 12 already. No they aren't equal in the stepmother's eyes, what made you think they ever were?

If I were in this situation it would make a lot of difference to me that the 12 year old's mother had died, leaving her vulnerable and in need. This would make me offer a lot more to her emotionally than if she had a living mother.

You won't offer a 12-year old more than to your own flesh and blood newborn baby, please stop lying. Women are designed to care for their own babies as number 1, 2 and 3, and everyone else comes way down the list, as it should be.

If she had a living mother, you wouldn't be there so stop the crazy talk.

[Anonymous]

This may have more to do with stage in life than being a biological child.

In almost all families I know, one child may struggle compared to other siblings. In my family, youngest brother suffers from depression and anxiety. My parents don’t give me a dime but help support my brother.

My dad is oldest in his family. He was only one who went away to college and his parents spent more on my father than all his siblings combined.

In my mother’s family, her parents used to send her money in America. My aunt married rich and didn’t need the money.

Are you comfortable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My stepmom, who is v. Wealthy (eg ,+-20 m in assets at least) insisted my dad leave her half of everything he has (half is around 750k ) plus their joint properties go to her. She has no children, though we have made every effort for her to be as much of a grandparent as she would like. Evidently she has left him 1 m and right to stay in house until he dies, then it is split. And the balance goes to her nieces ( who are also wealthy, it's all family wealth)and charity. It's about control not money in our case. I could care less about her money but I'm pissed that my dad's retirement, savings, pension goes to her when she doesn't need it. He isn't looking out for his grandkids. He just cannot stand up to her. He's a lot older so likely to pass first. Meanwhile I'm a stepparent myself and have been sharing burden of private schools for stepchild while my bio kids do public. Another story.

If her wealth is inherited, it may be in a trust with a provision that she is only allowed to leave it to her kids or nieces and nephews. I have a trust my dad set up and I literally cannot leave the assets to a husband or step kid. It’s impossible for me to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My dad and mom had me and my little brother. They were an extremely happy couple from what I remember. My mother died of cancer when I was 8 and my brother was 6 . My dad was extremely depressed for several years but met "Susan" when I was 10. They fell in love and married when I was 12. They had a son when I was 14. Susan never worked outside the home again. That was 25 years ago. My father passed away four years ago.

I just learned this weekend that Susan has been gifting my half brother $11,000 annually since my dad's death as well as paying his cell phone bill and purchasing his car (a 30k 2017 Subaru). My brother and I haven't seen a dime.

I honestly have no complaints against my step mother or half brother and see them regularly, but this just.... pisses me off incredibly. It's my dad's money and she's not sharing it with me and my brother. My half brother is a full grown adult not needing any assistance at all and has a cushy job with the USDA.

That's wrong, right?

I feel like I'm being stolen from.

Ummmm...I think you need to get over this. This was the way your dad set this up. I *might* be more sympathetic if this wasn't your dad's child. All of his kids got $250k, which is nothing to sneeze at. I am assuming he left her the house. He did that because people in your position put the step-mom out of the house upon the death of the other parent.

You are dickering over HER money. I would feel differently if he left her everything and she was doing this, but you got your equal share. HIS mother is giving him the part of HER money SHE wants him to have. Be upset at how your dad did this. Be upset at how he agreed to her being a SAHM. And then get over it. Do you think he should have left you more money than his other son? It sucks, but you aren't being stolen from.

I agree. She didn’t dictate how you spent your share. Grow the F up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's another perspective ...

I am surmising that the stepmom was a SAHM because she essentially took over raising the OP and her brother (who were still children) and then gave birth to a half-sibling two years later. Raising someone else's children is never an easy job and is rarely appreciated. It is especially difficult when it is the mother who has died and another woman comes into the family.

Immediately, most people's thoughts are "evil stepmother" which couldn't be further from the truth in many cases. The fact the OP says she gets along with her stepmom is an indicator that this woman probably did the best she could in caring for two children who had lost their mother. Evidenced because it sounds like the OP and her brother are both living successful lives.

I am probably sure that the OP's father had many heart-to-heart conversations with stepmom about the challenges of being part of a "blended" family. I am also probably sure that as a show of his love and gratitude towards her for 25 years of life together, he wanted SM to live a future life without worry once he was gone. C'mon... she was not some gold-digger who swooped in during the final stages of his life with her claws out for a bag full of cash.

OP doesn't say whether her father was ill for a long time. Did SM care for him during illnesses? So for 25 years she raised two children who were not hers, gave new life to a grieving widower and gave him another son, and watched the love of her life pass away.

Try to put a price tag on that. How much is YOUR life worth - would you do the same?

BRAVO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My stepmom, who is v. Wealthy (eg ,+-20 m in assets at least) insisted my dad leave her half of everything he has (half is around 750k ) plus their joint properties go to her. She has no children, though we have made every effort for her to be as much of a grandparent as she would like. Evidently she has left him 1 m and right to stay in house until he dies, then it is split. And the balance goes to her nieces ( who are also wealthy, it's all family wealth)and charity. It's about control not money in our case. I could care less about her money but I'm pissed that my dad's retirement, savings, pension goes to her when she doesn't need it. He isn't looking out for his grandkids. He just cannot stand up to her. He's a lot older so likely to pass first. Meanwhile I'm a stepparent myself and have been sharing burden of private schools for stepchild while my bio kids do public. Another story.

Pensions and retirements go to the other spouse upon death. Those are the married couples assets, nothing that you would be entitled to. Pension laws were enacted to protect a couples retirement. Also, it's your job to protect your kids, not your dad or step mom. If they gift you something be happy, but it's your job to plan for your own pension and estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op you got a LOT of money. He was married to your stepmom for a long time and left her the bulk of his estate. How she spends HER portion isn’t your business. [/quote

This isn't the 1800s. THEY had an estate that was jointly own after all those years. It wasn't his money, but both. He died and the kids were well provided for. The widow is now the sole owner of her assets now able to do whatever she wants with her money. Not the kids business at this point.

[Anonymous]

lol all the people calling 250k a lot of money. A lot of money is 5 million or more. 250k is a dinky cabin in the woods or half the cost of a shitty beach house or one kids college tuition. It is not a lot of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SM here. Difference is I work, but DH had two kids that I raised and we had a kid. 1/3 of half goes to each kid and half goes to my bio kid. I’ve been upfront with DH that is what I’ll do if he dies before me. I’m not penalizing my kid for having me as a mom.

This is what I am doing.

Gross

I don't actually understand what this arrangement is. So father's assets go directly to all children when he dies, and none to the stepmother? And the children get unequal portions? That wouldn't make sense.

What DOES seem more fair is that 50% would go directly to the 2 bio-children (split between them), and 50% to the stepmother. Stepmother can then decide what their joint kid gets, and presumably, joint kid will be her sole heir. Alternatively it could go in thirds, with 2/3 going to bio-kids and 1/3 going to stepmother. However, I do think it's fair for the surviving spouse to get 50%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol all the people calling 250k a lot of money. A lot of money is 5 million or more. 250k is a dinky cabin in the woods or half the cost of a shitty beach house or one kids college tuition. It is not a lot of money.

It is when YOU didn't earn it!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol all the people calling 250k a lot of money. A lot of money is 5 million or more. 250k is a dinky cabin in the woods or half the cost of a shitty beach house or one kids college tuition. It is not a lot of money.

Its 5 years of my salary, so it seems like a lot to me. I don't own a cabin or a beach house of any kind and would not buy one even if I had the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SM here. Difference is I work, but DH had two kids that I raised and we had a kid. 1/3 of half goes to each kid and half goes to my bio kid. I’ve been upfront with DH that is what I’ll do if he dies before me. I’m not penalizing my kid for having me as a mom.

This is what I am doing.

Gross

I don't actually understand what this arrangement is. So father's assets go directly to all children when he dies, and none to the stepmother? And the children get unequal portions? That wouldn't make sense.

What DOES seem more fair is that 50% would go directly to the 2 bio-children (split between them), and 50% to the stepmother. Stepmother can then decide what their joint kid gets, and presumably, joint kid will be her sole heir. Alternatively it could go in thirds, with 2/3 going to bio-kids and 1/3 going to stepmother. However, I do think it's fair for the surviving spouse to get 50%.

Surviving spouse should get all in this situation and then it be divided equally upon death. Why should his wife not inherit it just because he had a previous child? This was a long term marriage with kids. She stayed home to raise their kids. Equally shared assets.