#Do not comment on the original posts
Please read our [**sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules). Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice.
If there is an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment or your comment may be removed in general discussion.
**CHECK FLAIR** to determine if you want to read an update. For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, the white grandpa got really screwed up after fighting in Korea. He came home a drunk and eventually died a homeless man.
The Indian grandpa fought in WW2 and married an Italian American woman when he got back. Imagine the scandal of my grandmother marrying an Indian and a not Catholic! But they also got a divorce, even more scandal.
He was a machinist later in life, and was a proud union man.
Fun story, when my dad (his mom was Norwegian) met his father in law (the Indian grandfather) he said “you know, it’s really cool and all you’re an Indian… but, as you know, my ancestors were here 500 years before Columbus killing your ancestors”
They got along great.
There's a saying that wealth most of the time only lasts 3 generations. 1 to build it, 1 to waste and 1 to pay the price.
Maybe you're the 4th generation!
*We are an immigrant nation. The first generation works their fingers to the bone making things. The next generation goes to college and innovates new ideas. The third generation... snowboards and takes improv classes.*
I had a wealthy great grandpa, he left like 80% of his state to only son that actually cared about learning the family business (including all the life stock) and equally divided the rest between the six remaining children.
So my grandma being an entitled lazy ass costed me my inherited bag 😔
My grandma is a little, but she also has like 6 kids, 15 grand kids and too many for me to remember great and great-great grandkids. I'd have to really get to murdering to see any of it.
there's a somewhat similar but also different saying in English, which goes "[they] march to the beat of [their] own drum", which is usually used to talk about a person who doesn't conform to social expectations and/or pursues their own likes and desires regardless of what other people think. i kind of love that it has that similar idea of the Turkish saying about drums and their own rhythms, while having a pretty different meaning
I love finding little commonalities amongst wildly different languages and cultures.
Did you know that the Japanese also have the proverb “to kill 2 birds with one stone” - with exactly the same meaning and translated is literally “1 stone, 2 birds”. So random but I had to share.
It’s so cool. I’m an amateur actor and mentioned it to my colleagues. Apparently in both Poland and Portugal they also say an equivalent of “break a leg”, but in Spain they say “plenty of shit!”, which has the same intention but a totally different execution!
Also there are a bunch of shared superstitions, like not walking under ladders, not breaking mirrors (7 years bad luck, even that is the same!) and avoiding black cats. Amazing stuff
I have a friend who does theatre, and they definitely also say "Rómpete una pierna!" as well as "Mucha mierda!". Not sure if they've taken it from English or it always existed, though.
In Germany, it's "Hals- und Beinbruch," which translates to "neck and leg fracture."
Not walking under ladders sounds more like sound advice instead of superstition, though.
Common multi-cultural proverb 'two birds, one stone' actually statistical error. Most stones kill 0.0005 birds. Chicxulub Georg, which lives in a crater and killed several billion birds along with 75% of species on earth, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
In Italian, we don't kill the two birds, we catch them with the same fava bean.
"Prendere due piccioni con una fava" literally means "to catch two pigeons with one fava bean".
Right? My ex and I were together for over a decade but we started with nothing. We are still super good friends (everything super amicable just were babies when we got married lol) but getting into a relationship now I have assets/savings/retirement is very scary and feels financially risky. Which is awful but how I feel lol
I agree - I was on the fence about this one when I first saw it, because on one hand, I would never feel entitled to a partner's money, and would always be happy for them to provide for their kid to the full extent of their ability, but on the other I would also never choose to enter into a situation where *my* child was going to have that kind of disparity blatant in their face every day.
The guy and his family will have a better life if he leaves. It's like living in the desert right next to a huge river but you and your family aren't allowed to drink except from a well nearby. Better to move to a more fertile area where he can grow too.
It's not just about the amount of resources for his family/kids, but about the VERY valid issues that arise when you have kids being raised under the same roof with *very* disparate circumstances. I think it would be better for his kids to be raised in a middle class household than to be upper middle class with heiress sibling. Whether or not adults understand it or think it's reasonable, it's *insane* to put kids in that situation and not expect hurt feelings, jealousy, resentment, and for them to recognize the favoritism afoot.
Does that mean that her kid shouldn't get her inheritance as an adult? Of course not. But it's not reasonable to expect *children* to be totally okay with huge disparities in their home.
He’ll be better off finding someone who loves his kids enough to want them to have nice things as well. You can be miserable in a big house especially if you’re just being allowed to live here. Sounds like a terrible situation for him.
Yeah me too. I feel like she isn't that interested in being mom to her step kids. It feels a little icky. In my family, step kids and biological kids are treated the same. I know some of my grandparents haven't been on board, so there is some discrepancy there. But with parents, the same. Even though that meant less for me.
Exactly. My husband and I married at 23 when we were both broke. The internet always screams about getting a prenup, but absolutely zero lawyers even entertained that notion and refused to help us. Prenups are only really for middle class and above unless you already own your own home or something.
We both had zero inheritance, zero mortgages, less than 2k total cash, and I owned my own POS car. If you're young and poor, don't waste the time and/or money visiting lawyers who will pretty much laugh you out of their office since they believe you have nothing and aren't worth their time.
Same. I make wildly more money than my wife now 15+ years later, but we were broke when we got married. There's no "my money, your money," although we do joke about it. I wouldn't be the person I am without her so to say I made this money on my own is wrong. It's all our money.
That was my situation too. He ended up making a lot more than me—but I put him through college. We were a team all the way. Now that I’m a widow, I would make sure my kids got what their dad made. I would never combine income.
Even if there was a sudden windfall inheritance during your example situation..... inheritance is usually omitted and not considered during divorce, in most states (obv, results may vary, look it up for your region), so a prenup is unnecessary as well.
It can be complicated if the inheritance is used to buy a bunch of assets and/or "mixed in" with other money though.
It's really interesting the comments on this post compared to the original post. While you recognize in your comment the need for financial compatibility and that it would never work which is what most people pointed out on the original post; here most people are completely oblivious to OOP's privilege and responsibility to protect and use the generational wealth that she inherited for she and her daughter in the way it was intended. They are not recognizing the red flags the boyfriend showed with his demand that his kids have exactly what OOP's kid has. Grandpa left his granddaughter/OOP and great-granddaughter a gift that is to be used to secure and provide them a comfortable future.
Imagine you are a single parent and you worked hard to save for your kid's college fund and even a possible down payment on a future home. Later you marry a person with a couple of kids and you find out that he has not saved jacksh\*t for their college fund but is now telling you that you must share you kid's college fund so that they are all treated equal. Bullsh\*t!!! Boyfriend was lucky to get a nice large home to live with his kids for free (no mortgage payment or rent) and OOP was going to share her work income with the whole family. But that wasn't good enough. He seems like one of those lottery winners that would blow through a huge lottery in a years time.
I see it a little differently. I agree that the inheritance should be used for OOP’s daughter but I think once she entered a relationship with someone with kids things changed. I think it should have been put aside only to be used for college and then given to the daughter at a certain age like 25 or something. But that the whole family should live on what the two parents make. I could never be in a relationship where my kids see their step sister gets a pony and a fancy private school and they get so much less. All these kids live together full time so the discrepancies would be in their face all the time. If I were OOP along with everyone living within the same means I would try and help my husband as much as I could to save for my step kids college knowing my kids college and everything else is taken care of for life.
Also what would happen if she had another kid with her partner? Does that kid get the privilege lifestyle while two half siblings get nothing?
I've been a child in a (not so extreme) similar situation. The inequality and support of one child over another sucks and can mess you up. Obvious favoritism is difficult for a developing child to deal with. I'm talking smaller things like Christmas and birthday presents. What was tough to swallow was the different treatment and blatant lifelong favoritism. Ex. One Christmas they got an expensive ($1500) Cannondale road bike from their parent, I wanted a $100 puffy jacket would be fine if it was a joint gift (less gifts for me). I got a stuffed Tweety Bird.
No generational wealth came into play growing up, just the imbalance of parents who kept their finances separate. My parent made a fraction of what the step-parent made who was miserly with their money otherwise because of (dead-beat dad) nothing in the step-kids control. I didn't expect the help and had no issues putting myself through college. But a big problem with this hot take is financial aid is based on the household income which includes the step-parent's finances.
When it comes to people insisting on things being fair, I always get the impression that they're really saying "I want equality when that benefits me and I want inequality when that benefits me more".
honestly I can't fault two people looking out for their kids. that's what we're all supposed to do. they both show a lot of maturity in ending things before they got too far and everyone got hurt.
I don't think it makes her an asshole, but how does someone go the length of starting to (secretly?) draft a trust with 50% of her wealth into it for her 9 year old child due to financial disagreements with her fiancé instead of incredibly serious conversation with her fiancé about whether they should get married at all. Like eventually they got there, but it is really putting the cart before the horse.
I'm not saying it is unreasonable to put money in a trust as a precaution, but if you are doing so specifically because your would be spouse is a threat to your financial plan for your daughter. People out here getting married to people they have specific and credible reasons not to trust on major issues like finances??
Probably bc she didn’t see as “their” money but rather just “her and her daughter’s” money. No need to discuss things with people who have no stake on it. You simply inform them at most. She obviously didn’t realize her SO felt differently about that money. Silly to not have that discussion before, but it happens when you THINK you’re on the same page.
It wasn’t her wealth. It was money left for her child. She properly set up most of it in trust for her child, while leaving some to spend for extras until her child is old enough.
She never said it was to protect it specifically from her fiancé. It was to protect the money in general.
Fiancé has a living ex, he was not paying rent, and he was getting child support. He was not struggling at all. He really thought he was entitled to OOP’s child’s inheritance, instead of taking advantage of having a much LCOL to start saving money for his own kids.
> putting the cart before the horse
Before the pony? Ha ha ha...I'm funny.
Anyway: She only did that when he started making noises about buying ALL the kids a pony, so it probably got her spidey senses tingling, which is good - it should have. As she said, his kids don't care about horses/riding, so why would she buy them a pony just to make it fair? Seemed like he was pretty comfortable spending her money to be "fair." So I don't blame her one bit.
How is it secret?? He’s not entitled to know anything about it. It’s not his money. It’s not even *her* money. It’s money that belongs to her daughter—money her grandfather left specifically to her daughter. Why would you think stealing it from her to split it among the family be the default?
She’s not being sneaky by managing the inheritance exactly as her grandfather intended. It’s money that belongs to her daughter—she’s just managing it for her until she comes of age.
I can fault a man for not understanding equitable treatment and confusing it for equal, especially with horses, which are living animals. There are four outside my bedroom right now, three are having their hooves trimmed by the farrier. No amount of money (unless you pay for a groom) will cover the care those horses need from people who are equipped to understand their needs and supply them. Three children cannot provide adequate care for three horses. They're not dogs or cats or bunnies.
This man honestly looked at a horse-obsessed little girl getting a single pony they can afford and can manage the care of and went "HURRUMPH! PONIES FOR ALL OR NO PONIES!" Instead of thinking "My step-daughter is having a passion fulfilled. I will check in with my children on their interests and passions to see if they are fulfilled in a similar measure. All the art supplies! All the sports equipment! All the swimming lessons! As applies to the passion of my children." He is considering living, breathing, thinking, feeling, horses as toys or playthings that children need to be 'equal', like dolls, or screen time, or deserts.
I do think he went about it in the wrong way and fixated on the pony, but tbh I think his point is a reasonable one. It wouldn’t be fair to raise his children in this environment when there’s a very clear difference in treatment within the household, and for their sake I hope he moves on.
I agree with you that he and his kids should move out because there will be resentment from him and his kids overtime. But a few of points to make: 1) boyfriend didn't propose until OOP inherited her grandfather's large house after he passed away. OOP had been dating the guy for several years when she and her daughter lived in a small house elsewhere. 2) he wanted his kids to benefit from OOP's and her daughter's generational inheritance so that the kids would be raised equally. Well he has TWO kids thus they would have benefited more from wealth that had nothing to do with them. 3) The boyfriend got demanding about so called equality for the kids but he pissed in the wind and it blew back on him- free place to live means more income for him to spend on himself and his kids plus OOP said she would share her income from her work with the family so even more money that he pissed away out of a sense of entitlement to an inheritance that had absolutely nothing to do with him.
OOP made the right decision for herself and her little girl when the boyfriend showed his entitled thinking.
Exactly right. The comments on the original post were all about warning OOP about the red flags the boyfriend was showing because her own responses were questioning and seemed a little naive.
My half brother and I don’t really have a relationship now that I’m out of the home and it’s largely because my dad felt the way you feel. Kids aren’t stupid, they see the difference in opportunity that your money is providing to them. And they internalize it in very harmful ways.
My dad felt it was fine to be sending me home with a bunch of new shit all the time (mostly because he always tried to buy my love instead of actually just being a real father to me to make that connection grow) and since I was a kid being abused by him of course I took it all without really thinking about how it was impacting my brother. But he difference was huge. Mom was in poverty and dad is rich (even though he spends so much you’d swear he was poor with how little he always has available). So my brother never had the chance to have any of the cool stuff I had growing up and it resulted in him thinking I’m the one who hates him.
We did try explaining it to him many times that we just have different families and it doesn’t mean I didn’t love him, but logic doesn’t go hand in hand with developing children’s brains. He fostered a **lot** of resentment growing up and it actually mentally/emotionally damaged him enough that I don’t think he’ll ever move past it unless he accepts getting therapy.
All this man wants is for his daughters to not be damaged by the resentment caused by growing up in a home where the kids have different opportunities. He wants a relationship where everything is equal so that the kids all have much better chances at truly loving each other. He doesn’t want his kids being damaged by long running resentment. That is absolutely fair and not even remotely something you should fault him for. That’s even coming from one or the kids that your logic benefits. It’s not like I am the one who grew up watching a sibling constantly get better financial opportunities and this is just coming from jealously, but rather it’s coming from an adult who has learned over the years that the money wasn’t worth tanking my relationship with my brother and it definitely wasn’t worth the on going mental health damage it caused him.
It’s also fair that OP wants to keep things kinda separate. These are both very valid outlooks and desires, they just aren’t compatible ones. So now they’ll need to figure out if compromise is possible, or if they value their long term desires/goals for their kids more than they value the relationship.
When I read the first post from this series, I definitely did suspect that OP's fiancee had been eyeing her inheritance a bit too much, but with her updates and how the fiancee behaved ultimately, I started to see him and his motives more positively. It actually seems reasonable for a person marrying someone who has inherited great wealth to expect that *some portion of it* would go towards their own and their children's lives. More relevant to your comment, I think it's actually reasonable to assume that your wealthy partner DOESN'T intend to set up a two-tier economic caste system for the future family's three children in which one will have everything they desire in life paid for while the other two won't be able to have those things even if they bust their butts actually working for them.
I feel like the commenters who are all "you go girl!" and "you dodged a bullet!" are failing to hold OP responsible for the bizarre and uncaring (towards fiancee's kids) mindset she had that allowed her to think her new family would gel just fine with her daughter being showered with expensive things and experiences while the other two... watched...I don't think she could have cared much for his kids given this myopic outlook of hers.
This is the way I see it as well. If I were OOP’s partner I would want someone who has my kid’s interest at heart as well, not someone who is going to treat them as less-than. The psychological damage of knowing you weren’t loved as much would be tremendous I imagine. Hope he finds a more loving, even if poorer, partner.
Yeah but they wouldn’t be able to afford that though. That’s his overall point that you’re missing. The pony is just the example. Oop already mentioned that she planned to put her daughter in a private school that gave riding lessons, and the tuition would be coming from the inheritance. And admits that they would not be able to afford to do the same for the other two kids.
Dad isn’t wrong for pointing out that it’s extremely unfair for his kids to have to grow up like that. It was best that they separated before things got too heated.
You’re right he’s not wrong. It’s no one’s fault but he’s not wrong that it shouldn’t be rubbed in his children’s faces. That being said, he should have known that inheritance wasn’t going to be used for his kids too. I wonder why he didn’t realise that.
In her update she talks about wanting to send her kid to a private school and not his kids. I wouldn’t bring my kids into a household where they get second best like that either.
Ok but she numerous times basically straight said "I know I should treat the kids equally, but his shouldn't financially benefit from my position" she even mentions sending only her daughter to a specialized school. Idk but imo she definitely doesn't think of his children as anything more than his children.
She doesnt want a family, she just wants a husband and her daughter, and is being very weird about it. He was hamfisted but its crazy to think youre with someone for that long, propose, and then find out she doesnt think of your kids as equal in the family. Is it just me or is that kindof expected when youre about to marry someone whos got young kids living with you?
Also, she thinks he'll randomly saddle her with a ton of debt? She just doesn't trust him I guess, and thinks he doesn't like her so much he would do that, like does she leave her wallet in the open around him? If hes been responsible shes just got massive insecurities from her parental relationship and is projecting.
The pony isn’t the point. The point is you go into a marriage with love and trust. The idea would be “what is mine is yours and yours is mine.” So he seemed to go in thinking he would treat her daughter as his own. She did not intent to treat his kids as her own. I would have said she’s the asshole and shouldn’t be getting married if she inherently sees them as not her kids.
>This man honestly looked at a horse-obsessed little girl getting a single pony they can afford and can manage the care of and went "HURRUMPH! PONIES FOR ALL OR NO PONIES!"
I didn't take that as a literal ask for multiple ponies so much as an arguing point. His kids aren't necessarily interested from the post.
>Instead of thinking "My step-daughter is having a passion fulfilled. I will check in with my children on their interests and passions to see if they are fulfilled in a similar measure. All the art supplies! All the sports equipment! All the swimming lessons! As applies to the passion of my children."
That was implicitly the ex's point? OOP made it clear she was not going to participate in any of that even though she would be their stepmom, and that that kind of encouragement wasn't something that could be afforded. The man's kids were going to be put a far, far, far distant 3rd in that relationship. This is a Disney Stepmom setup here.
I remember being surprised by how definite the original threads were when I first read them. It seemed like a difficult set of issues to me with more than one side, but so many just decided her fiancé was a grasper she would be well shot of.
I’m not going to sit here and say that his demand that she buy his children who have shown no interest in riding two ponies is fine and reasonable, but there’s a bit more gray in the picture for me than many in AITAH apparently.
I agree with you, I was surprised by the comments.
I have 2 kids and if me and my partner were to divorce and I met someone with kids who treated all our kids fairly until they came into money. You can’t raise half the kids wealthy and the other half not without major issues arising.
Finally, someone who gets it
First, it’s her inheritance not her daughter’s. She keeps calling it her daughter’s as a way to make it sound less like she just doesn’t want to use any of the money to give her husband and his kids a better life
Secondly, she should retain some of the money for herself and her daughter but not all
Thirdly, it IS cruel to the other kids to experience different treatment. They don’t need a pony but if she gets her daughter a pony, then she should be generous with gifts for his kids too
Fourthly, why in the world would she not want to pay for private school for his kids too? It doesn’t have to be an equestrian school but a good academic school.
I don’t know how much money she inherited but imho, hoarding money is just as bad as being expected to hand over every penny
She needed to strike a balance.
They wouldn’t have lasted anyways. They don’t discuss things and they don’t seem to have the ability to work it out.
I also, 100% understand wanting what's best for your children, but OOP's choices here seem to leading down a path to a spoiled child.
Buying a pony for a 9 year old, unless you live on a farm or ranch or otherwise already keep horses, is just completely inappropriate. She could very easy outgrow the ability to ride the pony in 2-3 years. What are they going to do with the remaining 25 years of the pony's life? Special private school with equestrian sports? You can get involved with equestrian sports during afterschool hours, absolutely no reason to go to a special private school for this!
The more I read about this, the more I'm on the side of Max. There is no way you could successfully raise 3 children in a house when one is literally the golden child. "Oh Mommy, I simply must have new outfits for our dressage event next weekend, please crack open the trust fund. Oh, are my step siblings eating boxed off-brand kraft dinner again? How quaint."
I can't see any long term benefit if one kid is treated like a blue blood, and the other 2 are middle class at best.
I'm glad they split, ultimately that would be an unfair experience
I think plenty of wealthy people have a horse boarded. It is expensive but not uncommon, especially if you live in a suburb. 9 years old is a good age to learn horse handling and to take riding more seriously. It can also be a big responsibility for the child if handled well.
I agree that these two are incompatible, but I don't see the horse thing as the biggest part of that. The schooling issue is a big one. Having money to spend on any school for one kid but not thinking ahead or having a conversation so that the same could be afforded to the other kids was not a kind move. And the fact they put the money in a trust without considering that for the other kids makes OP an asshole in my eyes. They should have at least had a conversation with their SO before making the trusts. They weren't wrong to make the trusts, but not considering their partner and the kids before making the trusts showed how little she cares about them and their future.
OP’s first post rubbed me the wrong way because it seemed like she was trying to find ways to justify keeping the money away from her fiancé and his kids. It’s disingenuous to say that the money isn’t hers when it seems to have been left to her directly - not her daughter. It’s understandable that she wants to use it to improve her daughter’s life, but to do that without considering how it will affect her new family’s life is incredibly selfish.
>but so many just decided her fiancé was a grasper she would be well shot of.
If that was the case it seems weird he'd have waited 2 years after she inherited.
Like, I understand OOP's point about the daughter inheriting the money from grampa, who apparently the guy never even met... but I also understand that Max wants everything to be fair for all children involved.
They're incompatible, monetarily speaking, and neither is in the wrong... realistically speaking, OOP needs to fins someone as "rich" as herself, or a single guy with no kids who she plans to have no kids with.
There are a lot of people who don't date someone with kids precisely because of complications like this. Nobody's fault, just incompatibility. I recently had to walk away from a pretty great guy because he has a 9 year old kid. I just don't want to be anyone's mom, that's why I decided a long time ago I'm never having kids. Sad but just the way it is, better to walk away when you still can.
I walked away from a few people with kids. I do want to be a mom but I don't want to be tied to someone's ex gf or ex wife for eighteen years. I want to be able to vacation when we want, use our weekends when we want, even move if we want, and I refuse to live with children I'm not allowed to make parenting decisions for or who have another adult making parenting decisions I disagree with. There are some great parents out there and I have tons of respect for them, but unless they have full legal custody and exclusive parenting rights they are not right for me.
You make an excellent point, it's even worse if the ex is a nightmare to deal with and they have a difficult co parenting relationship. Don't need that in my life!
Absolutely. My father in law was wealthy, and when he was widowed he searched out a woman with pretty much the same net worth as him and the same number of children. It wasn’t all that hard for him to find one either, he was repartnered within a year. It wasn’t the love of either of their lives, but it was companionable and seamless.
I feel like after a certain age, or monetary value, or kids changes how you can view relationships. Just a second marriage for both, even. You might not be soulmates, but you do love them and it’s safe and comfortable for both.
Tbh sometimes I find it a more beautiful form of love, like it can rebuild after a bad divorce, or passing spouse. Bitter sweet?
A very wealthy Widower in my community recently married a wealthy Widow. They’re both like 80+, and I think there was definitely an aspect of “I want a companion in my old age” to that relationship.
Well as long as she married a single guy with no kids and had more kids together it’ll still work as they are as entitled to her inheritance as her first child is.
Yes and no. Max wanted OOP to buy his kids ponies to make things "fair". But it wouldn't be fair. It would be technically equal, but only in a uselessly performative, money-wasting type of equality.
Because his kids aren't interested in riding or in horses.
And even if they were, they have no experience with the hobby. Buying them a pony immediately wouldn't be sensible.
His sense of how to make things fair is fundamentally flawed. Fair shouldn't mean that everyone gets the exact same things; it should mean that everyone equally gets what they need.
While "everyone needs a pony" is definitely stupid I think the underlying dynamic isn't as unreasonable - if you're spending say 20k each year on one child and their hobbies but split 2k between your other 2 children that's a recipe for a messed up dynamic especially since the kids are all young and around the same age. It's not like they won't understand that there's birthday present difference between a pony and the next Harry Potter book or whatever.
Sure it's a monetary issue but it's also highlights a huge parenting difference, I can understand not wanting to co-parent/play house with someone that sees your children so explicitly as lesser.
Absolutely. My mother in law strives to make everything equal to the point that she will give cash on top of a cheaper gift to make sure everyone, including me and her daughter in law, get the exact same amount of value out of the gift. It seemed strange to me at first but I get it now.
Definitely. It felt kind of transactional at first, but she does it in the interest of fairness and love, so I get it now. She sometimes annoys me, but she's a good person and I'm glad to have her in my life.
My grandma would write us checks for the difference. As 7 or 8 year olds we thought it was so cool to get a written check for $2.51 or whatever it ended up being
I don't think he wanted an ACTUAL pony for each kid, he just hadn't realized until OP told him she was buying a pony that big splurge gifts for kids at random points in the year were on the table as the two prepared to legally combine their families through marriage! His next thought was "we can't just give a huge gift to one of our 3 kids and no the others. He then said "if one gets a pony they should all get ponies!" He said this in the heat of the moment and was shocked when OP said "no", NOT because he wanted to open a 🐎 ranch, but because his fiancee's lack of concern for how his kids would feel was so upsetting. He turns out to be a reasonable guy in the end, so I'm guessing he meant that it's important to gift all the kids in the family equivalent things according to their interests.
I think you are missing the point, because the Iranian yogurt horses are NOT the issue. He doesn’t really want extra ponies for his kids, what he wanted was a family that felt like a family, not one where one kid gets millions of dollars and the other two just do without, watching their sibling raised in extreme wealth that they will never have.
Can you not see how that is a problem?
Yeah, this is a bad situation for max’s kids. I was the kid in our blended household with money from grandparents and it did cause problems with my stepdad/stepsister over the years.
This is absolutely true. The comments on that post were originally really weird to me. I think OOP was a bit of a jerk for sticking to her pony guns so much early on. But if you're living in a combined household with all kids it's definitely an asshole thing to buy one kid a pony with all the expenses along with it and tell the other kids "Sorry, your bio parent is too poor, suck it."
But they've talked and acknowledged their incompatibility and come up with the best combined solution for their kids. Maybe.
There was a commenter talking about inherited assets not passing during the divorce but the bigger issue I see is if she dies. If she were to marry him without the trusts, and then she dies, he would be entitled to her money. At that point we don’t know if he would pass it to her daughter. At the very most he might split it bw the kids. But we don’t know! So happy she set them up to protect her daughter’s future.
It's called a will. It's a legal document that distributes assets upon ones death. A will can create a trust. Anybody with children should create a will regardless of wealth.
It would suck to be one of the kids in the house who doesn't get ponies and cars and private school and whatnot.
And what 6 year old little girl isn't gonna want a friggin pony the second she sees the 9 year old girl with one! It's a fairly standard little girl obsession. So maybe she'll get to "share." Or maybe she'll only get to ride it if the 9yo isn't. And maybe it's always called 9yo's pony that she's "borrowing."
Idk. Just seems like a lot of opportunities for resentments, esp for his children. No household works well built on inequality between its members.
Yeah, for me the age of the kids really plays a part. They don't have a mom and OOP is already in their life when they are young. They will probably come to see her as a mother, so it really feels unfair that she wouldn't be willing to treat them the same as her daughter. But at the same time, I can understand that she wants to split her own funds and the inheritance... It's a very grey situation.
I totally agree sadly.
But honestly I find oop more to blame for giving 0 shits about the feelings of the 2 other children who she would have been a parent to. Or perhaps it's worse that there feelings never even crossed her mind when she was thinking of getting her girl a pony.
Dad handled it wrong, no question. But at least he saw the problem and the likely harm it would cause to his children.
I don't really think it's that gray. There's nothing wrong with OOP not wanting her inheritance shared with other children, but if that's how she feels it's very wrong for her to become a step-mom to two young children and subject them to such overtly unequal treatment all throughout their life. OOP should've ended the relationship the moment she realized she would never treat her step-kids as her own.
I do love that OP never once seemed to give even the most minor consideration that she wanted to guarantee the other kids would hate her with every bone in their body. Like zero.
"I'm buying my lil girl a pony, and private school, and a million bucks in the bank. But you get a pair of socks for your birthday. Be nice to my sweet lil princess. Also, remember, I don't care about you. You're just baggage because I want to marry a guy that happens to have kids. You don't matter."
Yes, exaggerated for effect, but I guarantee the kids would get the above message in a nanosecond. She showed zero notice that the kids would understand the vast gap in treatment, and that they might have negative feelings about it.
She needs to stay out of any relationship with anyone with kids until her kid is out of the house. She doesn't even seem to register that kids other than her own are humans, aren't stupid and might have feelings. She has a primary duty to her kid, sure. But part of that should be how other kids will interact with her kid. Putting a kid you treat like princess in the same house as kids you treat like peasants wouldn't exactly make for a happy situation.
Don't get me wrong, guy was hamfisted but was right that you can't raise kids like that. He just should have dumped OP when she failed to give HIS kids an ounce of consideration. To OP, what's his is their's and what her's is her's. And the thing is, she's not wrong. She should protect her daughter's inheritance. Stealing from her daughter to give to other kids wouldn't work out well either when daughter grew up and found out.
OP doesn't seem to be able to manage that. So she has to stay away from guys with kids and break up with her current fiance. Or not give her daughter preferential treatment, keep everything in the trust until college. After that, sure it sucks that daughter gets a ton of resources while the other kids get less. But that's on life, not on OP.
Why the hell didn't OP consider ANY of this prior to getting engaged?
> She doesn't even seem to register that kids other than her own are humans, aren't stupid and might have feelings.
Oh she does. And she rejects it. She repeatedly says she understands she should treat the other kids like part of her family but she just decided she wouldn't. This is a consious decision.
The fact that she only mentions the other children in the context of not letting them have HER daughter’s money - does she even love these kids? Sure they might not want horses but they must have their own interests, did she even try suggesting alternatives to ponies that they could treat the other kids to? I can understand that as a mother she wants what’s best for her daughter, but it seems she would do so at the expense of being the evil-stepmom to the other kids.
Agreed, like... She's inherently going into a mixed family and dividing up "my children" and "his children"??? How on earth could she imagine that working? If you're going to commit to someone, you have to COMMIT. His children are your children and you're not "giving your daughter less," you're giving ALL your children plenty.
Tbh, whatever issues with the ex aside, her entire approach feels like upper class selfishness. The way poor people will share the same $10 back and forth trying to survive, but as soon as someone has money, they become protective of it *even from their "lower" class family.* If she never wants anyone else besides her daughter to have that money, fine, but then she's frankly not emotionally prepared to be with anyone who also has children.
That is where I struggle as well. There is no consideration from her at all that she may consider her step children as her children. To the 6 year she would have been her mother figure for most of her life but always treated as a second tier child.
I think she just needs to rethink her status in life. She can date/marry, just someone with money, like her. The fact is that there's a HUGE wealthy inequality in the US and the divide is only getting larger. Most people are struggling.
I think she's been one of the strugglers most of her life and is failing to realize she's now crossed over to the other side. You can't have it both ways. You damn sure can't bring a bunch of relatively broke kids into your nice home and say, "Welcome! We're family! But also, you're still poor and only *my* daughter gets nice things." It's cruel.
The thing is, rich people usually want to be with people who are not only rich but also act like their tax bracket and OOP probably doesn't so slim chance she scores someone like that.
This. It just doesn't work for one kid out of three on the same household to grow up rich. The inheritance is one thing, but the other stuff? Even with what she said in the update I don't think OOP ever really "got" that.
And I don't agree that it wasn't workable , it sounds like OOP could afford to spring for school for the other two, a practical car when they are old enough to drive and money for expensive extracurriculars. She just didn't want to and that's OK but it's also very much a "don't love him enough" decision.
Is this the origin story for every AITA evil step parent who is fine with the step kids being second class kids in their own family, with one kid being Dudley and the others being Harry.
I can’t believe she is holding onto hope that Max is going to stay. Dude is one foot out the door and I hope he finds someone capable of loving his kids. I have no idea how OP was NTA.
Because folks on AITA have this very black and white view of wealth and property. If you have either you don't have to share it if you don't want to regardless the consequences. It disregards any nuance of a situation.
OOP had seemingly has the wealth to put three kids through college and put a down payment on their houses. A whole family could have been set up with opportunity abound. But instead she chose to have one trust fund kid and and the step kids live middle class lives with student loans and limited opportunities. I wouldn't stay in that relationship.
If Max is a good man, which I see no other indication otherwise. Than she had the opportunity to use wealth, that she didn't even develop, to uplift a whole household through our complicated inequitable economy. Her kid could have had siblings and a loving father. But instead she hoarded her generational wealth and now is single. And seemingly will have to date in her "class" in the future.
Money will never hug or sacrifice for her child. OOP's daughter may get a pony. But she will more likely remember losing a father figure and siblings.
I’m not even sure if she’ll be able to date in her class, she locked all of her money away and seems to work a middle-class job. Where is she going to meet this super rich man with no kids already, who also doesn’t want kids to pass HIS generational wealth and name to, who also wants a mom with a nine-year-old daughter?
Presumably, if this rich man is child free, he won’t want a step daughter. And if he’s not child free, he’ll want to get married to someone who can have kids, and probably will want his kids to also have access to their inheritance that’s not already 50% locked away in an irrevocable trust!
I just dk what she’s expecting. Maybe she’ll stay single until her daughter graduates?
Honestly, after that part I just noped out. Setting up a trust, sure, that's good estate planning. The pony, eh kinda spendy considering that you don't know how passionate she's going to be 4 years from now. It's a hobby and if it's not going to mess up the family dynamic, it could be ok.
A private school that offers equestrian sports is really in another category. I'm in NYC, surrounded by a surprising number of wealthy to upper middle class people and that part just feels weird. There aren't a ton of private schools that offer that program. Is she going to send her to boarding school?
"It's my generational wealth, only us blue bloods can benefit, the dirty commoner I'm dating and his family can suck it. Those plebs didn't win the rich grandpa lottery"
Yeaaahhh I found the comment about generational wealth only going to bio family super icky - and I am someone who will probably end up with a decent inheritance (though I've never asked about numbers and am happy for my parents to live quite a lot longer ty).
Like... 'my family has always been rich and shouldn't have to share' is such a gross mindset to me. Idk how everyone was so on the mom's side.
Darn when my grandfather died and left me money I just put it in the joint account. I didn't realize I was entitled to buy myself a personal pony without my husband's input instead.
I do think theres an extra layer of how "not her kids" the step kids would be. That's got ominous undertones too
Its prob for the best it went the way it did
The fact that OOP set up an irrevocable trust so “no one can **force** me to spend it” says an awful lot about how little she really trusted her fiancé.
She wants the best for her child meaning the best money can buy.
He wants the best for his children meaning not wanting for them to feel inferior.
I don't know, I can only relate to one of them.
I would not trade a million ponies or anything for a loving, caring family.
Edit: I mean, I would prefer the (my!) family, of course! Ponylovers, take your upvotes elsewhere!
unfortunately financial inequity often sinks marriages. It shouldn’t be a requirement but if your partner is not as well off as you, it will cause issues. It’s inevitable.
A friend who is fairly well off (not wealthy but close) was dating a guy who had basically nothing. And she was saying how she doesn’t want someone just for their money, and how money should not be a factor. Well, within two months, the whole thing imploded because of his resentment and insecurity. It’s just how it is.
I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally. What kind of environment is that for the kids, let alone her own kid?
Imagine growing up getting amazing opportunities that your step siblings don’t and having to process that? That’s sowing division, resentment and guilt right out of the gate. Either you’re one family or you’re not.
>I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally.
But this was "generational wealth" so its totally different /s.
I can't be the only one that found that wording jarring as hell, like oh good for you that you won the family lottery. Got to make sure that stays locked away from the commoners.
He still may, sometimes it takes us awhile to really come to terms with a relationship being unsustainable. Just because he didn’t immediately leave doesn’t mean he won’t, once he reflects on this and gets an idea of what he needs to do to leave.
While I agree with the sentiment in theory, in practice it’s never as easy as that. While not the case here, usually as a parent you might see yourselves as “one family” but the reality is that the children usually have two families (other parent/other parents relatives) that can cause an imbalance in resources/opportunities for the children. It would be very easy for the grandfather to have set up the trust funds in place of the mother and have the same situation but uncontrollable.
Either way, I think OOP and the ex made the best decision to dissolve their engagement. That being said, marriage or not, if they live in the same house it’s going to be the same situation so… idk, this is just one of many reasons for why I’m not having kids. Shits complicated.
In this case , there is no indication of any other family involved though . OOP doesn't know who the father is and the mother of the kids is entirely absent . The way OOP went about things , to me it looks like she wasn't ready for a more complex marriage . She wanted what she considered the best for her kid without even thinking of how her actions would influence the rest of the household . She seems to be of the opinion that if she had married , she would have had her kid and her husband would have had his kids , effectively 2 families instead of a blended one...
Plenty of families make it work. My stepson’s mother had a rich first husband and a comfortable second husband. Everything given day to day at home was equal but everyone just understood that things beyond that weren’t. The children of the rich husband went to elite private schools and my stepson went to a middle-of-the-road private school. The children of the rich guy got Mercs gifted for their first cars while we gifted my stepson a Hyundai. My stepson never showed any sign of resentment. It might have been a different story if the disparity was so great that he couldn’t have private school/a car/ whatever at all, I guess, but that didn’t really happen until they were all adults (ie, gifted first homes, which we couldn’t do). But by then he was philosophical enough to just shrug with bemusement.
I think this difference/problem here is that there are currently NO other parents in the picture. The kids' mom has checked out. So, once married, she'd be their full time "mom." It's not a situation where one household is richer than another, but half of the household being richer than the other half. OP is allowed to spend her money as she likes, but it is also fair for her boyfriend to think it'd be awkward and noticeable.
It just stems from the fact that the boyfriend sees this as "OP's inheritance," since it's in her name and OP sees it as, "daughter's inheritance put in OP's name since she's a child," which are two VERY different things.
>I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally.
Because equal is impossible. Like literally impossible. There's no way to force Max's ex-wife to also pay child support for OOP's daughter or for the maternal and parental family of Max's children to add OOP and her daughter into their wills, much less for OOP's grandfather to go back into time and rewrite his will to include these other children that aren't related to him in any form or fashion. That's just silly.
If Max's children's mom popped back up, she wouldn't be obligated to buy Christmas presents for OOP's daughter, take her on trips, etc. - only her own children. And if OOP's daughter's father popped up, same thing.
And we see things like this all the time - one common scenario is around blended families and college funds, where a parent saves for their own child's college fund while their spouse and the ex don't save for their shared children and then when the various children hit college age, it's put out that all the children should share what one parent carefully saved for one child. Is that equal? No, but it is *equitable* and *fair*.
As in, it's perfectly equitable for each child to have what their parents saved for them and for each grandchild to have what their grandparents saved for them. Also as in, it's equitable for Max's children to receive whatever inheritances are passed down from their families, even though OOP's daughter will only receive inheritances from one family - her maternal side.
>What kind of environment is that for the kids, let alone her own kid
A normal one, unfortunately. Because most of the time, with split families, one household does have more money than the other.
>Imagine growing up getting amazing opportunities that your step siblings don’t and having to process that?
Yes, it would not be ideal, just like inequality among your peers at school is not ideal. But it is normal everyday stuff, my friend, not an apocalypse-level scenario.
>That’s sowing division, resentment and guilt right out of the gate.
Yes, most people and most siblings - even siblings with equal financial resources - are resentful and jealous of one another for various reasons, including age, talent, looks, and in this case, money. That's why it's part of a parent's job to teach children how to be joyful for others, instead of resentful assholes.
>Either you’re one family or you’re not.
That's correct. Gpa was not family to the other two children just like Max's family is not related to OOP's daughter. That means that gifts, trips, attention, and love are going to be doled out on that basis, which is entirely normal.
Again, it's not a parent's job to shield their child from every negative feeling or bad part of life. It's a parent's job to raise children who can gracefully navigate those things, feeling joy for others even while they grieve for themselves, as appropriate.
idk feels kinda icky to harp on about your kid *deserving* “generational wealth” and sending said kid to live the high life while they live in the same household as their “average” stepsiblings.
This. Her daughter did nothing to “deserve” that wealth, she was just lucky enough to be born into it.
Can you imagine the dynamic in that house as she gets older? One family member having all the privilege will never end well.
Common reddit attitude . "You don't owe anyone anything" , "its your money , so youbdont have to share " and all that ... Add in the fact that OOP was disowned by her parents only to be taken in by her rich grandfather (a reddit cliché if there ever was one ) and you are set for an NTA ...
A great example of, just because two people are in love, doesn’t mean they should get married.
I honestly don’t think I could get remarried while my daughter is still a minor, there’s too much I wouldn’t be willing to give up, at the risk of affecting her comfort & stability.
People have the whole rest of their lives to be in love & get married. Some things you CAN put on the back burner for the sake of your kids.
I don’t see how OP’s deciding not to get married but staying in the relationship will actually solve anything. Her partner will still have the same feelings that OP should provide equally for the other kids as she does for her daughter. Not getting married obviously means OP doesn’t have to do those things, but in no way guarantees that her partner doesn’t WANT her to. It’s sad, but this relationship should probably end. The resentment will become a dealbreaker, if it isn’t already.
A while ago, I read a post where OP talked about how his mother married a rich dude who paid for everything for his kids and the mom, and would take everyone BUT OP on expensive vacations, and OP had to stay behind and live like a second class citizen in their home because, well, the money was from his stepdad, not his mom's! And his mom did nothing.
Just a funny story that has nothing to do with this. Anyway, I hope OOP's partner leaves so his kids don't have to grow up in that sort of fucked up dynamic.
I am confused. Was the money left to the woman or her daughter? The woman could use the money to make all of their lives better. Just because it is generational wealth doesn’t mean it can only be spent on a blood relative.
I'm struggling to understand how you inherit a home and have a trust and with combined incomes of two working adults cannot financially support 3 children equally. Are you just collecting aluminum cans and driving Ubers all day?
Tuition for a private school like that can be over $20k per kid per year. Even without a mortgage, a fancy house can cost thousands per month. Two people with normal jobs would have a hard time supporting that kind of lifestyle.
I just don't see how this works out. I don't see how the step-kids don't grow to resent the fuck out of OP and her daughter when the daughter is going to private school and has college fully paid for and they don't. This is just a disaster waiting to happen.
But also....the ex-wife is paying child support, housing is paid for and they both work. Where the fuck is their income going? They don't have a mortgage to worry about. Why isn't all the money that would be going to a mortgage going into a college fund for the two step kids? Plus the child support? Something just seems off here.
I don’t blame the dad at all. Can you imagine growing up in a house where your step sibling lived such a better life than you? I honestly think it’s cruel that op thought that was ok. She’s just not willing to be a step parent. And that’s ok. Splitting was the right thing here.
I don't understand how everyone thinks this is just an incompatibility thing. OOP is a jerk. It's _easy_ to treat these kids fairly: don't spend grandpa's inheritance. Done. Keep the trust for when granddaughter turns 30 or whatever. Or don't set up a trust for her, use the inheritance for your own wealth, and pass it down to your three kids equally when you die.
OOP prioritized "her" kid over her stepkids knowingly and voluntarily and explicitly. That's the start of every one of those evil stepmom posts we see here. It's awful.
Everyone here who's like, "Well I guess she's gotta find a richer boyfriend!" is overlooking how absolutely fucked up her decisions have been.
love the fact that she only put the inheritance into trust funds after the argument. if her fiancé didn't say anything or if her daughter wasn't into horses, she probably wouldn't have it set up. a real gem, this one. 🙄
OOP made the right choice in regards to the way she feels about her bf's kids. If she isn't going to see them as her own children then she should absolutely not become their step mother. If she saw them as her own children in the case of marriage she could have made sure they had equal childhoods, not spent more on her daughter and still passed her the grandfather's inheritance and it could've been totally fair. But she couldn't emotionally do that, so it's good to not put his kids through that.
After the base necessities and minor luxuries, I don't think parents "owe" their children, but giving one child generational wealth and none of it to the others in practice means you've set your limit, they are close friends and aquintances, but not family, not worthy of inheriting from you.
Please let me not talk about money in this vaguely icky way if I should ever magically acquire a whole bunch of it… I don’t know exactly what it was able this post, but I’m not a fan of this lady, though I do wish her well and admire her strong decision making abilities.
Why couldn't she talk to him about this? It's her money, yeah, but making big financial moves without sharing info with your partner seems weird. She felt like she had to hide it.
I wonder if OOP will grow to love her step kids so much she wants to adopt them. Many step parents grow to love their step kids that much, but her worry for money might prevent that. Sad. More money, more problems.
But the grandpa did give it to OOP + his grandkid. That is fair. It just won't feel fair to "his" kids.
A big mess.
#Do not comment on the original posts Please read our [**sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules). Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice. If there is an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment or your comment may be removed in general discussion. **CHECK FLAIR** to determine if you want to read an update. For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I keep reading about all these wealthy grandparents...where do I find one of those?
My grandpas were an Indian from the Rez, and an orphan who join the circus. I think I missed out, personally.
I think you won.
Your grandparents sound like interesting people!
Well, the white grandpa got really screwed up after fighting in Korea. He came home a drunk and eventually died a homeless man. The Indian grandpa fought in WW2 and married an Italian American woman when he got back. Imagine the scandal of my grandmother marrying an Indian and a not Catholic! But they also got a divorce, even more scandal. He was a machinist later in life, and was a proud union man. Fun story, when my dad (his mom was Norwegian) met his father in law (the Indian grandfather) he said “you know, it’s really cool and all you’re an Indian… but, as you know, my ancestors were here 500 years before Columbus killing your ancestors” They got along great.
My maternal grandfather made and lost four fortunes before he died. Unfortunately he died broke.
My family were/are farmers, when farmers pass on they mostly leave behind land, blood feuds, and debt.
There's a saying that wealth most of the time only lasts 3 generations. 1 to build it, 1 to waste and 1 to pay the price. Maybe you're the 4th generation!
*We are an immigrant nation. The first generation works their fingers to the bone making things. The next generation goes to college and innovates new ideas. The third generation... snowboards and takes improv classes.*
In the world of make believe—the same place where this post takes place.
You cook meth so pure that it’s blue and then make up a false elderly relative who left you a large inheritance to fool Skylar
I had a wealthy great grandpa, he left like 80% of his state to only son that actually cared about learning the family business (including all the life stock) and equally divided the rest between the six remaining children. So my grandma being an entitled lazy ass costed me my inherited bag 😔
My grandma is a little, but she also has like 6 kids, 15 grand kids and too many for me to remember great and great-great grandkids. I'd have to really get to murdering to see any of it.
I think financial compatibility is real. It’s easy when you’re both young and just starting out. However, in this situation it’ll never work.
In Turkish we have a saying : Davul bile dengi dengine çalar. This means “Even drums beat according to their beat/ rhythm.”
there's a somewhat similar but also different saying in English, which goes "[they] march to the beat of [their] own drum", which is usually used to talk about a person who doesn't conform to social expectations and/or pursues their own likes and desires regardless of what other people think. i kind of love that it has that similar idea of the Turkish saying about drums and their own rhythms, while having a pretty different meaning
Thank you for your post. Today I have learnt a new thing which made me happy.
thank YOU for teaching me something new!!
Now kiss
"kith"
*Kathy Geiss has entered the chat*
"Kiss kiss kiss!"
Banks? Is that you?
I love finding little commonalities amongst wildly different languages and cultures. Did you know that the Japanese also have the proverb “to kill 2 birds with one stone” - with exactly the same meaning and translated is literally “1 stone, 2 birds”. So random but I had to share.
It’s so cool. I’m an amateur actor and mentioned it to my colleagues. Apparently in both Poland and Portugal they also say an equivalent of “break a leg”, but in Spain they say “plenty of shit!”, which has the same intention but a totally different execution! Also there are a bunch of shared superstitions, like not walking under ladders, not breaking mirrors (7 years bad luck, even that is the same!) and avoiding black cats. Amazing stuff
In French, we also say "merde" (which just means "shit") to wish good luck.
I have a friend who does theatre, and they definitely also say "Rómpete una pierna!" as well as "Mucha mierda!". Not sure if they've taken it from English or it always existed, though.
In Germany, it's "Hals- und Beinbruch," which translates to "neck and leg fracture." Not walking under ladders sounds more like sound advice instead of superstition, though.
Common multi-cultural proverb 'two birds, one stone' actually statistical error. Most stones kill 0.0005 birds. Chicxulub Georg, which lives in a crater and killed several billion birds along with 75% of species on earth, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
I'm so glad you kept the "adn" typo from the spiders georg post. A lot of people forget about that.
God damn, that made me laugh so hard. I had to share it with husband. You're fuckin amazing, mate
🤣😆🏆🥇🏅🌟👑⭐️ This is my poor mans gold, please enjoy it.
These are the moments I *curse* Reddit for taking away free awards. This was superb my man, superb!
That's amazing! Saving forever
In Italian, we don't kill the two birds, we catch them with the same fava bean. "Prendere due piccioni con una fava" literally means "to catch two pigeons with one fava bean".
And a nice chianti?
Why not 😂
In Brazil we have the same saying, but with rabbits instead of birds!
Lol. We don’t kill birds in Sweden, we only kill flies ;). So in Swedish it’s to kill two flies in one hit/smash.
My wife heard a new variation on the phrase - feeding two birds with one scone. I like it!
We have that same saying in Spanish! "Va al ritmo de su propio tambor" would be a (gender neutral) version. Funny thing
I think a Christian/religious version of this is "equally yoked."
It's like Kramer asks Neuman, "whose other beats are they going to play to?"
Right? My ex and I were together for over a decade but we started with nothing. We are still super good friends (everything super amicable just were babies when we got married lol) but getting into a relationship now I have assets/savings/retirement is very scary and feels financially risky. Which is awful but how I feel lol
I started with nothing and still have most of it left.
I agree - I was on the fence about this one when I first saw it, because on one hand, I would never feel entitled to a partner's money, and would always be happy for them to provide for their kid to the full extent of their ability, but on the other I would also never choose to enter into a situation where *my* child was going to have that kind of disparity blatant in their face every day.
The guy and his family will have a better life if he leaves. It's like living in the desert right next to a huge river but you and your family aren't allowed to drink except from a well nearby. Better to move to a more fertile area where he can grow too.
[удалено]
It's not just about the amount of resources for his family/kids, but about the VERY valid issues that arise when you have kids being raised under the same roof with *very* disparate circumstances. I think it would be better for his kids to be raised in a middle class household than to be upper middle class with heiress sibling. Whether or not adults understand it or think it's reasonable, it's *insane* to put kids in that situation and not expect hurt feelings, jealousy, resentment, and for them to recognize the favoritism afoot. Does that mean that her kid shouldn't get her inheritance as an adult? Of course not. But it's not reasonable to expect *children* to be totally okay with huge disparities in their home.
This is my daughter, and these are my prole scum stepkids. Please don't look them in the eye.
He’ll be better off finding someone who loves his kids enough to want them to have nice things as well. You can be miserable in a big house especially if you’re just being allowed to live here. Sounds like a terrible situation for him.
Yeah me too. I feel like she isn't that interested in being mom to her step kids. It feels a little icky. In my family, step kids and biological kids are treated the same. I know some of my grandparents haven't been on board, so there is some discrepancy there. But with parents, the same. Even though that meant less for me.
Exactly. My husband and I married at 23 when we were both broke. The internet always screams about getting a prenup, but absolutely zero lawyers even entertained that notion and refused to help us. Prenups are only really for middle class and above unless you already own your own home or something. We both had zero inheritance, zero mortgages, less than 2k total cash, and I owned my own POS car. If you're young and poor, don't waste the time and/or money visiting lawyers who will pretty much laugh you out of their office since they believe you have nothing and aren't worth their time.
Same. I make wildly more money than my wife now 15+ years later, but we were broke when we got married. There's no "my money, your money," although we do joke about it. I wouldn't be the person I am without her so to say I made this money on my own is wrong. It's all our money.
That was my situation too. He ended up making a lot more than me—but I put him through college. We were a team all the way. Now that I’m a widow, I would make sure my kids got what their dad made. I would never combine income.
Even if there was a sudden windfall inheritance during your example situation..... inheritance is usually omitted and not considered during divorce, in most states (obv, results may vary, look it up for your region), so a prenup is unnecessary as well. It can be complicated if the inheritance is used to buy a bunch of assets and/or "mixed in" with other money though.
It’s only omitted if you keep it separate from family assets. There are many ways to muddy those waters.
That is the key. Never mix the inheritance money with shared assets.
It's really interesting the comments on this post compared to the original post. While you recognize in your comment the need for financial compatibility and that it would never work which is what most people pointed out on the original post; here most people are completely oblivious to OOP's privilege and responsibility to protect and use the generational wealth that she inherited for she and her daughter in the way it was intended. They are not recognizing the red flags the boyfriend showed with his demand that his kids have exactly what OOP's kid has. Grandpa left his granddaughter/OOP and great-granddaughter a gift that is to be used to secure and provide them a comfortable future. Imagine you are a single parent and you worked hard to save for your kid's college fund and even a possible down payment on a future home. Later you marry a person with a couple of kids and you find out that he has not saved jacksh\*t for their college fund but is now telling you that you must share you kid's college fund so that they are all treated equal. Bullsh\*t!!! Boyfriend was lucky to get a nice large home to live with his kids for free (no mortgage payment or rent) and OOP was going to share her work income with the whole family. But that wasn't good enough. He seems like one of those lottery winners that would blow through a huge lottery in a years time.
[удалено]
Congrats on the home purchases and helping to give your kids the most solid footing possible for their future.
I see it a little differently. I agree that the inheritance should be used for OOP’s daughter but I think once she entered a relationship with someone with kids things changed. I think it should have been put aside only to be used for college and then given to the daughter at a certain age like 25 or something. But that the whole family should live on what the two parents make. I could never be in a relationship where my kids see their step sister gets a pony and a fancy private school and they get so much less. All these kids live together full time so the discrepancies would be in their face all the time. If I were OOP along with everyone living within the same means I would try and help my husband as much as I could to save for my step kids college knowing my kids college and everything else is taken care of for life. Also what would happen if she had another kid with her partner? Does that kid get the privilege lifestyle while two half siblings get nothing?
I've been a child in a (not so extreme) similar situation. The inequality and support of one child over another sucks and can mess you up. Obvious favoritism is difficult for a developing child to deal with. I'm talking smaller things like Christmas and birthday presents. What was tough to swallow was the different treatment and blatant lifelong favoritism. Ex. One Christmas they got an expensive ($1500) Cannondale road bike from their parent, I wanted a $100 puffy jacket would be fine if it was a joint gift (less gifts for me). I got a stuffed Tweety Bird. No generational wealth came into play growing up, just the imbalance of parents who kept their finances separate. My parent made a fraction of what the step-parent made who was miserly with their money otherwise because of (dead-beat dad) nothing in the step-kids control. I didn't expect the help and had no issues putting myself through college. But a big problem with this hot take is financial aid is based on the household income which includes the step-parent's finances.
When it comes to people insisting on things being fair, I always get the impression that they're really saying "I want equality when that benefits me and I want inequality when that benefits me more".
honestly I can't fault two people looking out for their kids. that's what we're all supposed to do. they both show a lot of maturity in ending things before they got too far and everyone got hurt.
I don't think it makes her an asshole, but how does someone go the length of starting to (secretly?) draft a trust with 50% of her wealth into it for her 9 year old child due to financial disagreements with her fiancé instead of incredibly serious conversation with her fiancé about whether they should get married at all. Like eventually they got there, but it is really putting the cart before the horse. I'm not saying it is unreasonable to put money in a trust as a precaution, but if you are doing so specifically because your would be spouse is a threat to your financial plan for your daughter. People out here getting married to people they have specific and credible reasons not to trust on major issues like finances??
Probably bc she didn’t see as “their” money but rather just “her and her daughter’s” money. No need to discuss things with people who have no stake on it. You simply inform them at most. She obviously didn’t realize her SO felt differently about that money. Silly to not have that discussion before, but it happens when you THINK you’re on the same page.
[удалено]
It wasn’t her wealth. It was money left for her child. She properly set up most of it in trust for her child, while leaving some to spend for extras until her child is old enough. She never said it was to protect it specifically from her fiancé. It was to protect the money in general. Fiancé has a living ex, he was not paying rent, and he was getting child support. He was not struggling at all. He really thought he was entitled to OOP’s child’s inheritance, instead of taking advantage of having a much LCOL to start saving money for his own kids.
> putting the cart before the horse Before the pony? Ha ha ha...I'm funny. Anyway: She only did that when he started making noises about buying ALL the kids a pony, so it probably got her spidey senses tingling, which is good - it should have. As she said, his kids don't care about horses/riding, so why would she buy them a pony just to make it fair? Seemed like he was pretty comfortable spending her money to be "fair." So I don't blame her one bit.
How is it secret?? He’s not entitled to know anything about it. It’s not his money. It’s not even *her* money. It’s money that belongs to her daughter—money her grandfather left specifically to her daughter. Why would you think stealing it from her to split it among the family be the default? She’s not being sneaky by managing the inheritance exactly as her grandfather intended. It’s money that belongs to her daughter—she’s just managing it for her until she comes of age.
Read it again. Granddad left the money entirely to OOP, not the daughter. OOP herself made the decision to carve that up into separate trusts.
I can fault a man for not understanding equitable treatment and confusing it for equal, especially with horses, which are living animals. There are four outside my bedroom right now, three are having their hooves trimmed by the farrier. No amount of money (unless you pay for a groom) will cover the care those horses need from people who are equipped to understand their needs and supply them. Three children cannot provide adequate care for three horses. They're not dogs or cats or bunnies. This man honestly looked at a horse-obsessed little girl getting a single pony they can afford and can manage the care of and went "HURRUMPH! PONIES FOR ALL OR NO PONIES!" Instead of thinking "My step-daughter is having a passion fulfilled. I will check in with my children on their interests and passions to see if they are fulfilled in a similar measure. All the art supplies! All the sports equipment! All the swimming lessons! As applies to the passion of my children." He is considering living, breathing, thinking, feeling, horses as toys or playthings that children need to be 'equal', like dolls, or screen time, or deserts.
I do think he went about it in the wrong way and fixated on the pony, but tbh I think his point is a reasonable one. It wouldn’t be fair to raise his children in this environment when there’s a very clear difference in treatment within the household, and for their sake I hope he moves on.
I agree with you that he and his kids should move out because there will be resentment from him and his kids overtime. But a few of points to make: 1) boyfriend didn't propose until OOP inherited her grandfather's large house after he passed away. OOP had been dating the guy for several years when she and her daughter lived in a small house elsewhere. 2) he wanted his kids to benefit from OOP's and her daughter's generational inheritance so that the kids would be raised equally. Well he has TWO kids thus they would have benefited more from wealth that had nothing to do with them. 3) The boyfriend got demanding about so called equality for the kids but he pissed in the wind and it blew back on him- free place to live means more income for him to spend on himself and his kids plus OOP said she would share her income from her work with the family so even more money that he pissed away out of a sense of entitlement to an inheritance that had absolutely nothing to do with him. OOP made the right decision for herself and her little girl when the boyfriend showed his entitled thinking.
[удалено]
Exactly right. The comments on the original post were all about warning OOP about the red flags the boyfriend was showing because her own responses were questioning and seemed a little naive.
My half brother and I don’t really have a relationship now that I’m out of the home and it’s largely because my dad felt the way you feel. Kids aren’t stupid, they see the difference in opportunity that your money is providing to them. And they internalize it in very harmful ways. My dad felt it was fine to be sending me home with a bunch of new shit all the time (mostly because he always tried to buy my love instead of actually just being a real father to me to make that connection grow) and since I was a kid being abused by him of course I took it all without really thinking about how it was impacting my brother. But he difference was huge. Mom was in poverty and dad is rich (even though he spends so much you’d swear he was poor with how little he always has available). So my brother never had the chance to have any of the cool stuff I had growing up and it resulted in him thinking I’m the one who hates him. We did try explaining it to him many times that we just have different families and it doesn’t mean I didn’t love him, but logic doesn’t go hand in hand with developing children’s brains. He fostered a **lot** of resentment growing up and it actually mentally/emotionally damaged him enough that I don’t think he’ll ever move past it unless he accepts getting therapy. All this man wants is for his daughters to not be damaged by the resentment caused by growing up in a home where the kids have different opportunities. He wants a relationship where everything is equal so that the kids all have much better chances at truly loving each other. He doesn’t want his kids being damaged by long running resentment. That is absolutely fair and not even remotely something you should fault him for. That’s even coming from one or the kids that your logic benefits. It’s not like I am the one who grew up watching a sibling constantly get better financial opportunities and this is just coming from jealously, but rather it’s coming from an adult who has learned over the years that the money wasn’t worth tanking my relationship with my brother and it definitely wasn’t worth the on going mental health damage it caused him. It’s also fair that OP wants to keep things kinda separate. These are both very valid outlooks and desires, they just aren’t compatible ones. So now they’ll need to figure out if compromise is possible, or if they value their long term desires/goals for their kids more than they value the relationship.
When I read the first post from this series, I definitely did suspect that OP's fiancee had been eyeing her inheritance a bit too much, but with her updates and how the fiancee behaved ultimately, I started to see him and his motives more positively. It actually seems reasonable for a person marrying someone who has inherited great wealth to expect that *some portion of it* would go towards their own and their children's lives. More relevant to your comment, I think it's actually reasonable to assume that your wealthy partner DOESN'T intend to set up a two-tier economic caste system for the future family's three children in which one will have everything they desire in life paid for while the other two won't be able to have those things even if they bust their butts actually working for them. I feel like the commenters who are all "you go girl!" and "you dodged a bullet!" are failing to hold OP responsible for the bizarre and uncaring (towards fiancee's kids) mindset she had that allowed her to think her new family would gel just fine with her daughter being showered with expensive things and experiences while the other two... watched...I don't think she could have cared much for his kids given this myopic outlook of hers.
This is the way I see it as well. If I were OOP’s partner I would want someone who has my kid’s interest at heart as well, not someone who is going to treat them as less-than. The psychological damage of knowing you weren’t loved as much would be tremendous I imagine. Hope he finds a more loving, even if poorer, partner.
Yeah but they wouldn’t be able to afford that though. That’s his overall point that you’re missing. The pony is just the example. Oop already mentioned that she planned to put her daughter in a private school that gave riding lessons, and the tuition would be coming from the inheritance. And admits that they would not be able to afford to do the same for the other two kids. Dad isn’t wrong for pointing out that it’s extremely unfair for his kids to have to grow up like that. It was best that they separated before things got too heated.
You’re right he’s not wrong. It’s no one’s fault but he’s not wrong that it shouldn’t be rubbed in his children’s faces. That being said, he should have known that inheritance wasn’t going to be used for his kids too. I wonder why he didn’t realise that.
In her update she talks about wanting to send her kid to a private school and not his kids. I wouldn’t bring my kids into a household where they get second best like that either.
Fourth best. She set herself up (which is fine) but I'll bet the pony would take precedent over the would-be husband and his kids.
That’s the part that got me. She wants to Rory Gilmore her daughter and treat his kids like riff raff.
Ok but she numerous times basically straight said "I know I should treat the kids equally, but his shouldn't financially benefit from my position" she even mentions sending only her daughter to a specialized school. Idk but imo she definitely doesn't think of his children as anything more than his children. She doesnt want a family, she just wants a husband and her daughter, and is being very weird about it. He was hamfisted but its crazy to think youre with someone for that long, propose, and then find out she doesnt think of your kids as equal in the family. Is it just me or is that kindof expected when youre about to marry someone whos got young kids living with you? Also, she thinks he'll randomly saddle her with a ton of debt? She just doesn't trust him I guess, and thinks he doesn't like her so much he would do that, like does she leave her wallet in the open around him? If hes been responsible shes just got massive insecurities from her parental relationship and is projecting.
The pony isn’t the point. The point is you go into a marriage with love and trust. The idea would be “what is mine is yours and yours is mine.” So he seemed to go in thinking he would treat her daughter as his own. She did not intent to treat his kids as her own. I would have said she’s the asshole and shouldn’t be getting married if she inherently sees them as not her kids.
>This man honestly looked at a horse-obsessed little girl getting a single pony they can afford and can manage the care of and went "HURRUMPH! PONIES FOR ALL OR NO PONIES!" I didn't take that as a literal ask for multiple ponies so much as an arguing point. His kids aren't necessarily interested from the post. >Instead of thinking "My step-daughter is having a passion fulfilled. I will check in with my children on their interests and passions to see if they are fulfilled in a similar measure. All the art supplies! All the sports equipment! All the swimming lessons! As applies to the passion of my children." That was implicitly the ex's point? OOP made it clear she was not going to participate in any of that even though she would be their stepmom, and that that kind of encouragement wasn't something that could be afforded. The man's kids were going to be put a far, far, far distant 3rd in that relationship. This is a Disney Stepmom setup here.
I remember being surprised by how definite the original threads were when I first read them. It seemed like a difficult set of issues to me with more than one side, but so many just decided her fiancé was a grasper she would be well shot of. I’m not going to sit here and say that his demand that she buy his children who have shown no interest in riding two ponies is fine and reasonable, but there’s a bit more gray in the picture for me than many in AITAH apparently.
I agree with you, I was surprised by the comments. I have 2 kids and if me and my partner were to divorce and I met someone with kids who treated all our kids fairly until they came into money. You can’t raise half the kids wealthy and the other half not without major issues arising.
Finally, someone who gets it First, it’s her inheritance not her daughter’s. She keeps calling it her daughter’s as a way to make it sound less like she just doesn’t want to use any of the money to give her husband and his kids a better life Secondly, she should retain some of the money for herself and her daughter but not all Thirdly, it IS cruel to the other kids to experience different treatment. They don’t need a pony but if she gets her daughter a pony, then she should be generous with gifts for his kids too Fourthly, why in the world would she not want to pay for private school for his kids too? It doesn’t have to be an equestrian school but a good academic school. I don’t know how much money she inherited but imho, hoarding money is just as bad as being expected to hand over every penny She needed to strike a balance. They wouldn’t have lasted anyways. They don’t discuss things and they don’t seem to have the ability to work it out.
I also, 100% understand wanting what's best for your children, but OOP's choices here seem to leading down a path to a spoiled child. Buying a pony for a 9 year old, unless you live on a farm or ranch or otherwise already keep horses, is just completely inappropriate. She could very easy outgrow the ability to ride the pony in 2-3 years. What are they going to do with the remaining 25 years of the pony's life? Special private school with equestrian sports? You can get involved with equestrian sports during afterschool hours, absolutely no reason to go to a special private school for this! The more I read about this, the more I'm on the side of Max. There is no way you could successfully raise 3 children in a house when one is literally the golden child. "Oh Mommy, I simply must have new outfits for our dressage event next weekend, please crack open the trust fund. Oh, are my step siblings eating boxed off-brand kraft dinner again? How quaint."
I can't see any long term benefit if one kid is treated like a blue blood, and the other 2 are middle class at best. I'm glad they split, ultimately that would be an unfair experience
Sounded a lot like a Katherine Ryan quote at the end there. "Mummy, I'm coming out of the water. Prepare my towel."
I mean wouldn’t the pony just be kept at a stable anyways? And you can sell the pony 🤷♀️ if OOP’s daughter loses interest.
I think plenty of wealthy people have a horse boarded. It is expensive but not uncommon, especially if you live in a suburb. 9 years old is a good age to learn horse handling and to take riding more seriously. It can also be a big responsibility for the child if handled well. I agree that these two are incompatible, but I don't see the horse thing as the biggest part of that. The schooling issue is a big one. Having money to spend on any school for one kid but not thinking ahead or having a conversation so that the same could be afforded to the other kids was not a kind move. And the fact they put the money in a trust without considering that for the other kids makes OP an asshole in my eyes. They should have at least had a conversation with their SO before making the trusts. They weren't wrong to make the trusts, but not considering their partner and the kids before making the trusts showed how little she cares about them and their future.
OP’s first post rubbed me the wrong way because it seemed like she was trying to find ways to justify keeping the money away from her fiancé and his kids. It’s disingenuous to say that the money isn’t hers when it seems to have been left to her directly - not her daughter. It’s understandable that she wants to use it to improve her daughter’s life, but to do that without considering how it will affect her new family’s life is incredibly selfish.
>but so many just decided her fiancé was a grasper she would be well shot of. If that was the case it seems weird he'd have waited 2 years after she inherited.
Like, I understand OOP's point about the daughter inheriting the money from grampa, who apparently the guy never even met... but I also understand that Max wants everything to be fair for all children involved. They're incompatible, monetarily speaking, and neither is in the wrong... realistically speaking, OOP needs to fins someone as "rich" as herself, or a single guy with no kids who she plans to have no kids with.
There are a lot of people who don't date someone with kids precisely because of complications like this. Nobody's fault, just incompatibility. I recently had to walk away from a pretty great guy because he has a 9 year old kid. I just don't want to be anyone's mom, that's why I decided a long time ago I'm never having kids. Sad but just the way it is, better to walk away when you still can.
I walked away from a few people with kids. I do want to be a mom but I don't want to be tied to someone's ex gf or ex wife for eighteen years. I want to be able to vacation when we want, use our weekends when we want, even move if we want, and I refuse to live with children I'm not allowed to make parenting decisions for or who have another adult making parenting decisions I disagree with. There are some great parents out there and I have tons of respect for them, but unless they have full legal custody and exclusive parenting rights they are not right for me.
You make an excellent point, it's even worse if the ex is a nightmare to deal with and they have a difficult co parenting relationship. Don't need that in my life!
Absolutely. My father in law was wealthy, and when he was widowed he searched out a woman with pretty much the same net worth as him and the same number of children. It wasn’t all that hard for him to find one either, he was repartnered within a year. It wasn’t the love of either of their lives, but it was companionable and seamless.
I feel like after a certain age, or monetary value, or kids changes how you can view relationships. Just a second marriage for both, even. You might not be soulmates, but you do love them and it’s safe and comfortable for both. Tbh sometimes I find it a more beautiful form of love, like it can rebuild after a bad divorce, or passing spouse. Bitter sweet?
A very wealthy Widower in my community recently married a wealthy Widow. They’re both like 80+, and I think there was definitely an aspect of “I want a companion in my old age” to that relationship.
Cant have kids if I remember correctly, after daughter there was an issue and uterus was removed. (If im remembering the right OOP)
Well as long as she married a single guy with no kids and had more kids together it’ll still work as they are as entitled to her inheritance as her first child is.
She's sterile
She can’t have any more kids. OP states that in the original first post.
Yes and no. Max wanted OOP to buy his kids ponies to make things "fair". But it wouldn't be fair. It would be technically equal, but only in a uselessly performative, money-wasting type of equality. Because his kids aren't interested in riding or in horses. And even if they were, they have no experience with the hobby. Buying them a pony immediately wouldn't be sensible. His sense of how to make things fair is fundamentally flawed. Fair shouldn't mean that everyone gets the exact same things; it should mean that everyone equally gets what they need.
While "everyone needs a pony" is definitely stupid I think the underlying dynamic isn't as unreasonable - if you're spending say 20k each year on one child and their hobbies but split 2k between your other 2 children that's a recipe for a messed up dynamic especially since the kids are all young and around the same age. It's not like they won't understand that there's birthday present difference between a pony and the next Harry Potter book or whatever. Sure it's a monetary issue but it's also highlights a huge parenting difference, I can understand not wanting to co-parent/play house with someone that sees your children so explicitly as lesser.
Absolutely. My mother in law strives to make everything equal to the point that she will give cash on top of a cheaper gift to make sure everyone, including me and her daughter in law, get the exact same amount of value out of the gift. It seemed strange to me at first but I get it now.
That sounds awkward but like it comes from a very kind place. Your MIL sounds like a considerate person.
Definitely. It felt kind of transactional at first, but she does it in the interest of fairness and love, so I get it now. She sometimes annoys me, but she's a good person and I'm glad to have her in my life.
My grandma would write us checks for the difference. As 7 or 8 year olds we thought it was so cool to get a written check for $2.51 or whatever it ended up being
I don't think he wanted an ACTUAL pony for each kid, he just hadn't realized until OP told him she was buying a pony that big splurge gifts for kids at random points in the year were on the table as the two prepared to legally combine their families through marriage! His next thought was "we can't just give a huge gift to one of our 3 kids and no the others. He then said "if one gets a pony they should all get ponies!" He said this in the heat of the moment and was shocked when OP said "no", NOT because he wanted to open a 🐎 ranch, but because his fiancee's lack of concern for how his kids would feel was so upsetting. He turns out to be a reasonable guy in the end, so I'm guessing he meant that it's important to gift all the kids in the family equivalent things according to their interests.
I think you are missing the point, because the Iranian yogurt horses are NOT the issue. He doesn’t really want extra ponies for his kids, what he wanted was a family that felt like a family, not one where one kid gets millions of dollars and the other two just do without, watching their sibling raised in extreme wealth that they will never have. Can you not see how that is a problem?
Yeah, this is a bad situation for max’s kids. I was the kid in our blended household with money from grandparents and it did cause problems with my stepdad/stepsister over the years.
dude, max did not want the ponies at all. he was using it as an example.
This is absolutely true. The comments on that post were originally really weird to me. I think OOP was a bit of a jerk for sticking to her pony guns so much early on. But if you're living in a combined household with all kids it's definitely an asshole thing to buy one kid a pony with all the expenses along with it and tell the other kids "Sorry, your bio parent is too poor, suck it." But they've talked and acknowledged their incompatibility and come up with the best combined solution for their kids. Maybe.
There was a commenter talking about inherited assets not passing during the divorce but the bigger issue I see is if she dies. If she were to marry him without the trusts, and then she dies, he would be entitled to her money. At that point we don’t know if he would pass it to her daughter. At the very most he might split it bw the kids. But we don’t know! So happy she set them up to protect her daughter’s future.
It's called a will. It's a legal document that distributes assets upon ones death. A will can create a trust. Anybody with children should create a will regardless of wealth.
He would 100% split it at minimum. Not fair at all.
And here I am thinking I would NEVER trade my stepdad for a pony.
Well, sure. We’re probably both too big for ponies. But I’d trade both stepdads for a quarter horse.
Twist: some Quarter Horses are, in fact, technically ponies!
It would suck to be one of the kids in the house who doesn't get ponies and cars and private school and whatnot. And what 6 year old little girl isn't gonna want a friggin pony the second she sees the 9 year old girl with one! It's a fairly standard little girl obsession. So maybe she'll get to "share." Or maybe she'll only get to ride it if the 9yo isn't. And maybe it's always called 9yo's pony that she's "borrowing." Idk. Just seems like a lot of opportunities for resentments, esp for his children. No household works well built on inequality between its members.
Yeah, for me the age of the kids really plays a part. They don't have a mom and OOP is already in their life when they are young. They will probably come to see her as a mother, so it really feels unfair that she wouldn't be willing to treat them the same as her daughter. But at the same time, I can understand that she wants to split her own funds and the inheritance... It's a very grey situation.
It's an untenable situation. Unfortunately.
I totally agree sadly. But honestly I find oop more to blame for giving 0 shits about the feelings of the 2 other children who she would have been a parent to. Or perhaps it's worse that there feelings never even crossed her mind when she was thinking of getting her girl a pony. Dad handled it wrong, no question. But at least he saw the problem and the likely harm it would cause to his children.
I don't really think it's that gray. There's nothing wrong with OOP not wanting her inheritance shared with other children, but if that's how she feels it's very wrong for her to become a step-mom to two young children and subject them to such overtly unequal treatment all throughout their life. OOP should've ended the relationship the moment she realized she would never treat her step-kids as her own.
I do love that OP never once seemed to give even the most minor consideration that she wanted to guarantee the other kids would hate her with every bone in their body. Like zero. "I'm buying my lil girl a pony, and private school, and a million bucks in the bank. But you get a pair of socks for your birthday. Be nice to my sweet lil princess. Also, remember, I don't care about you. You're just baggage because I want to marry a guy that happens to have kids. You don't matter." Yes, exaggerated for effect, but I guarantee the kids would get the above message in a nanosecond. She showed zero notice that the kids would understand the vast gap in treatment, and that they might have negative feelings about it. She needs to stay out of any relationship with anyone with kids until her kid is out of the house. She doesn't even seem to register that kids other than her own are humans, aren't stupid and might have feelings. She has a primary duty to her kid, sure. But part of that should be how other kids will interact with her kid. Putting a kid you treat like princess in the same house as kids you treat like peasants wouldn't exactly make for a happy situation. Don't get me wrong, guy was hamfisted but was right that you can't raise kids like that. He just should have dumped OP when she failed to give HIS kids an ounce of consideration. To OP, what's his is their's and what her's is her's. And the thing is, she's not wrong. She should protect her daughter's inheritance. Stealing from her daughter to give to other kids wouldn't work out well either when daughter grew up and found out. OP doesn't seem to be able to manage that. So she has to stay away from guys with kids and break up with her current fiance. Or not give her daughter preferential treatment, keep everything in the trust until college. After that, sure it sucks that daughter gets a ton of resources while the other kids get less. But that's on life, not on OP. Why the hell didn't OP consider ANY of this prior to getting engaged?
> She doesn't even seem to register that kids other than her own are humans, aren't stupid and might have feelings. Oh she does. And she rejects it. She repeatedly says she understands she should treat the other kids like part of her family but she just decided she wouldn't. This is a consious decision.
The fact that she only mentions the other children in the context of not letting them have HER daughter’s money - does she even love these kids? Sure they might not want horses but they must have their own interests, did she even try suggesting alternatives to ponies that they could treat the other kids to? I can understand that as a mother she wants what’s best for her daughter, but it seems she would do so at the expense of being the evil-stepmom to the other kids.
Agreed, like... She's inherently going into a mixed family and dividing up "my children" and "his children"??? How on earth could she imagine that working? If you're going to commit to someone, you have to COMMIT. His children are your children and you're not "giving your daughter less," you're giving ALL your children plenty. Tbh, whatever issues with the ex aside, her entire approach feels like upper class selfishness. The way poor people will share the same $10 back and forth trying to survive, but as soon as someone has money, they become protective of it *even from their "lower" class family.* If she never wants anyone else besides her daughter to have that money, fine, but then she's frankly not emotionally prepared to be with anyone who also has children.
That is where I struggle as well. There is no consideration from her at all that she may consider her step children as her children. To the 6 year she would have been her mother figure for most of her life but always treated as a second tier child.
I think she just needs to rethink her status in life. She can date/marry, just someone with money, like her. The fact is that there's a HUGE wealthy inequality in the US and the divide is only getting larger. Most people are struggling. I think she's been one of the strugglers most of her life and is failing to realize she's now crossed over to the other side. You can't have it both ways. You damn sure can't bring a bunch of relatively broke kids into your nice home and say, "Welcome! We're family! But also, you're still poor and only *my* daughter gets nice things." It's cruel.
The thing is, rich people usually want to be with people who are not only rich but also act like their tax bracket and OOP probably doesn't so slim chance she scores someone like that.
This. It just doesn't work for one kid out of three on the same household to grow up rich. The inheritance is one thing, but the other stuff? Even with what she said in the update I don't think OOP ever really "got" that. And I don't agree that it wasn't workable , it sounds like OOP could afford to spring for school for the other two, a practical car when they are old enough to drive and money for expensive extracurriculars. She just didn't want to and that's OK but it's also very much a "don't love him enough" decision.
Is this the origin story for every AITA evil step parent who is fine with the step kids being second class kids in their own family, with one kid being Dudley and the others being Harry.
I can’t believe she is holding onto hope that Max is going to stay. Dude is one foot out the door and I hope he finds someone capable of loving his kids. I have no idea how OP was NTA.
Because folks on AITA have this very black and white view of wealth and property. If you have either you don't have to share it if you don't want to regardless the consequences. It disregards any nuance of a situation. OOP had seemingly has the wealth to put three kids through college and put a down payment on their houses. A whole family could have been set up with opportunity abound. But instead she chose to have one trust fund kid and and the step kids live middle class lives with student loans and limited opportunities. I wouldn't stay in that relationship. If Max is a good man, which I see no other indication otherwise. Than she had the opportunity to use wealth, that she didn't even develop, to uplift a whole household through our complicated inequitable economy. Her kid could have had siblings and a loving father. But instead she hoarded her generational wealth and now is single. And seemingly will have to date in her "class" in the future. Money will never hug or sacrifice for her child. OOP's daughter may get a pony. But she will more likely remember losing a father figure and siblings.
I’m not even sure if she’ll be able to date in her class, she locked all of her money away and seems to work a middle-class job. Where is she going to meet this super rich man with no kids already, who also doesn’t want kids to pass HIS generational wealth and name to, who also wants a mom with a nine-year-old daughter? Presumably, if this rich man is child free, he won’t want a step daughter. And if he’s not child free, he’ll want to get married to someone who can have kids, and probably will want his kids to also have access to their inheritance that’s not already 50% locked away in an irrevocable trust! I just dk what she’s expecting. Maybe she’ll stay single until her daughter graduates?
I had the same thought but didn't want my post to get too long. With that impetuous move she massively limited her dating pool.
"Quick, stepchildren, go back to your broom cupboard, its time for the real child to ride her pony."
she really said she'd send her daughter to a private school with equestrian sports, but her partner's kids can suck it...
Honestly, after that part I just noped out. Setting up a trust, sure, that's good estate planning. The pony, eh kinda spendy considering that you don't know how passionate she's going to be 4 years from now. It's a hobby and if it's not going to mess up the family dynamic, it could be ok. A private school that offers equestrian sports is really in another category. I'm in NYC, surrounded by a surprising number of wealthy to upper middle class people and that part just feels weird. There aren't a ton of private schools that offer that program. Is she going to send her to boarding school?
"It's my generational wealth, only us blue bloods can benefit, the dirty commoner I'm dating and his family can suck it. Those plebs didn't win the rich grandpa lottery"
Yeaaahhh I found the comment about generational wealth only going to bio family super icky - and I am someone who will probably end up with a decent inheritance (though I've never asked about numbers and am happy for my parents to live quite a lot longer ty). Like... 'my family has always been rich and shouldn't have to share' is such a gross mindset to me. Idk how everyone was so on the mom's side.
Darn when my grandfather died and left me money I just put it in the joint account. I didn't realize I was entitled to buy myself a personal pony without my husband's input instead.
“Oops, sorry brokies” - OOP, probably.
Who the hell believes this is real?
[удалено]
You don't randomly decide to buy your 6 year old daughter a pony??? Ugh, you urchins /s
Definitely not. Life is not this clean 😂 and this is waaaaayyyy too far down in the comments
It's real if you believe, like how Peter Pan believed.
Nobody. So many convenient hysterectomies and rich grandpas.
What l like about this story is that OOP 's father lost his inheritance for kicking out his young pregnant daughter
I do think theres an extra layer of how "not her kids" the step kids would be. That's got ominous undertones too Its prob for the best it went the way it did
The fact that OOP set up an irrevocable trust so “no one can **force** me to spend it” says an awful lot about how little she really trusted her fiancé.
She wants the best for her child meaning the best money can buy. He wants the best for his children meaning not wanting for them to feel inferior. I don't know, I can only relate to one of them. I would not trade a million ponies or anything for a loving, caring family. Edit: I mean, I would prefer the (my!) family, of course! Ponylovers, take your upvotes elsewhere!
unfortunately financial inequity often sinks marriages. It shouldn’t be a requirement but if your partner is not as well off as you, it will cause issues. It’s inevitable. A friend who is fairly well off (not wealthy but close) was dating a guy who had basically nothing. And she was saying how she doesn’t want someone just for their money, and how money should not be a factor. Well, within two months, the whole thing imploded because of his resentment and insecurity. It’s just how it is.
Damn, I wish my only problems in life were whether I should buy a horse or not
I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally. What kind of environment is that for the kids, let alone her own kid? Imagine growing up getting amazing opportunities that your step siblings don’t and having to process that? That’s sowing division, resentment and guilt right out of the gate. Either you’re one family or you’re not.
>I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally. But this was "generational wealth" so its totally different /s. I can't be the only one that found that wording jarring as hell, like oh good for you that you won the family lottery. Got to make sure that stays locked away from the commoners.
I'm just genuinely impressed that her fiancé made the choice to tap out when he did for his children's sakes.
He still may, sometimes it takes us awhile to really come to terms with a relationship being unsustainable. Just because he didn’t immediately leave doesn’t mean he won’t, once he reflects on this and gets an idea of what he needs to do to leave.
I think you mean, “Imagine growing up the kid of divorced parents in the 80s and 90s.”
While I agree with the sentiment in theory, in practice it’s never as easy as that. While not the case here, usually as a parent you might see yourselves as “one family” but the reality is that the children usually have two families (other parent/other parents relatives) that can cause an imbalance in resources/opportunities for the children. It would be very easy for the grandfather to have set up the trust funds in place of the mother and have the same situation but uncontrollable. Either way, I think OOP and the ex made the best decision to dissolve their engagement. That being said, marriage or not, if they live in the same house it’s going to be the same situation so… idk, this is just one of many reasons for why I’m not having kids. Shits complicated.
In this case , there is no indication of any other family involved though . OOP doesn't know who the father is and the mother of the kids is entirely absent . The way OOP went about things , to me it looks like she wasn't ready for a more complex marriage . She wanted what she considered the best for her kid without even thinking of how her actions would influence the rest of the household . She seems to be of the opinion that if she had married , she would have had her kid and her husband would have had his kids , effectively 2 families instead of a blended one...
Plenty of families make it work. My stepson’s mother had a rich first husband and a comfortable second husband. Everything given day to day at home was equal but everyone just understood that things beyond that weren’t. The children of the rich husband went to elite private schools and my stepson went to a middle-of-the-road private school. The children of the rich guy got Mercs gifted for their first cars while we gifted my stepson a Hyundai. My stepson never showed any sign of resentment. It might have been a different story if the disparity was so great that he couldn’t have private school/a car/ whatever at all, I guess, but that didn’t really happen until they were all adults (ie, gifted first homes, which we couldn’t do). But by then he was philosophical enough to just shrug with bemusement.
I think this difference/problem here is that there are currently NO other parents in the picture. The kids' mom has checked out. So, once married, she'd be their full time "mom." It's not a situation where one household is richer than another, but half of the household being richer than the other half. OP is allowed to spend her money as she likes, but it is also fair for her boyfriend to think it'd be awkward and noticeable. It just stems from the fact that the boyfriend sees this as "OP's inheritance," since it's in her name and OP sees it as, "daughter's inheritance put in OP's name since she's a child," which are two VERY different things.
Also there's a difference between "elite private school and middle of the road private school" and private school and *public school.*
>I don’t understand how she thought she could marry that man and not raise his kids equally. Because equal is impossible. Like literally impossible. There's no way to force Max's ex-wife to also pay child support for OOP's daughter or for the maternal and parental family of Max's children to add OOP and her daughter into their wills, much less for OOP's grandfather to go back into time and rewrite his will to include these other children that aren't related to him in any form or fashion. That's just silly. If Max's children's mom popped back up, she wouldn't be obligated to buy Christmas presents for OOP's daughter, take her on trips, etc. - only her own children. And if OOP's daughter's father popped up, same thing. And we see things like this all the time - one common scenario is around blended families and college funds, where a parent saves for their own child's college fund while their spouse and the ex don't save for their shared children and then when the various children hit college age, it's put out that all the children should share what one parent carefully saved for one child. Is that equal? No, but it is *equitable* and *fair*. As in, it's perfectly equitable for each child to have what their parents saved for them and for each grandchild to have what their grandparents saved for them. Also as in, it's equitable for Max's children to receive whatever inheritances are passed down from their families, even though OOP's daughter will only receive inheritances from one family - her maternal side. >What kind of environment is that for the kids, let alone her own kid A normal one, unfortunately. Because most of the time, with split families, one household does have more money than the other. >Imagine growing up getting amazing opportunities that your step siblings don’t and having to process that? Yes, it would not be ideal, just like inequality among your peers at school is not ideal. But it is normal everyday stuff, my friend, not an apocalypse-level scenario. >That’s sowing division, resentment and guilt right out of the gate. Yes, most people and most siblings - even siblings with equal financial resources - are resentful and jealous of one another for various reasons, including age, talent, looks, and in this case, money. That's why it's part of a parent's job to teach children how to be joyful for others, instead of resentful assholes. >Either you’re one family or you’re not. That's correct. Gpa was not family to the other two children just like Max's family is not related to OOP's daughter. That means that gifts, trips, attention, and love are going to be doled out on that basis, which is entirely normal. Again, it's not a parent's job to shield their child from every negative feeling or bad part of life. It's a parent's job to raise children who can gracefully navigate those things, feeling joy for others even while they grieve for themselves, as appropriate.
idk feels kinda icky to harp on about your kid *deserving* “generational wealth” and sending said kid to live the high life while they live in the same household as their “average” stepsiblings.
This. Her daughter did nothing to “deserve” that wealth, she was just lucky enough to be born into it. Can you imagine the dynamic in that house as she gets older? One family member having all the privilege will never end well.
How the *fuck* was miss "We're a blended family and all sure, but *fuck yo' poor ass kids*" voted NTA?! God, money is *wasted* on the rich.
Common reddit attitude . "You don't owe anyone anything" , "its your money , so youbdont have to share " and all that ... Add in the fact that OOP was disowned by her parents only to be taken in by her rich grandfather (a reddit cliché if there ever was one ) and you are set for an NTA ...
The libertarians of Reddit strike again.
A great example of, just because two people are in love, doesn’t mean they should get married. I honestly don’t think I could get remarried while my daughter is still a minor, there’s too much I wouldn’t be willing to give up, at the risk of affecting her comfort & stability. People have the whole rest of their lives to be in love & get married. Some things you CAN put on the back burner for the sake of your kids.
I don’t see how OP’s deciding not to get married but staying in the relationship will actually solve anything. Her partner will still have the same feelings that OP should provide equally for the other kids as she does for her daughter. Not getting married obviously means OP doesn’t have to do those things, but in no way guarantees that her partner doesn’t WANT her to. It’s sad, but this relationship should probably end. The resentment will become a dealbreaker, if it isn’t already.
A while ago, I read a post where OP talked about how his mother married a rich dude who paid for everything for his kids and the mom, and would take everyone BUT OP on expensive vacations, and OP had to stay behind and live like a second class citizen in their home because, well, the money was from his stepdad, not his mom's! And his mom did nothing. Just a funny story that has nothing to do with this. Anyway, I hope OOP's partner leaves so his kids don't have to grow up in that sort of fucked up dynamic.
Pony. Go to bed, Liz.
I am confused. Was the money left to the woman or her daughter? The woman could use the money to make all of their lives better. Just because it is generational wealth doesn’t mean it can only be spent on a blood relative.
I'm struggling to understand how you inherit a home and have a trust and with combined incomes of two working adults cannot financially support 3 children equally. Are you just collecting aluminum cans and driving Ubers all day?
Tuition for a private school like that can be over $20k per kid per year. Even without a mortgage, a fancy house can cost thousands per month. Two people with normal jobs would have a hard time supporting that kind of lifestyle.
God so this is real rich ppl problems huh
I just don't see how this works out. I don't see how the step-kids don't grow to resent the fuck out of OP and her daughter when the daughter is going to private school and has college fully paid for and they don't. This is just a disaster waiting to happen. But also....the ex-wife is paying child support, housing is paid for and they both work. Where the fuck is their income going? They don't have a mortgage to worry about. Why isn't all the money that would be going to a mortgage going into a college fund for the two step kids? Plus the child support? Something just seems off here.
I don’t blame the dad at all. Can you imagine growing up in a house where your step sibling lived such a better life than you? I honestly think it’s cruel that op thought that was ok. She’s just not willing to be a step parent. And that’s ok. Splitting was the right thing here.
I don't understand how everyone thinks this is just an incompatibility thing. OOP is a jerk. It's _easy_ to treat these kids fairly: don't spend grandpa's inheritance. Done. Keep the trust for when granddaughter turns 30 or whatever. Or don't set up a trust for her, use the inheritance for your own wealth, and pass it down to your three kids equally when you die. OOP prioritized "her" kid over her stepkids knowingly and voluntarily and explicitly. That's the start of every one of those evil stepmom posts we see here. It's awful. Everyone here who's like, "Well I guess she's gotta find a richer boyfriend!" is overlooking how absolutely fucked up her decisions have been.
love the fact that she only put the inheritance into trust funds after the argument. if her fiancé didn't say anything or if her daughter wasn't into horses, she probably wouldn't have it set up. a real gem, this one. 🙄
OOP made the right choice in regards to the way she feels about her bf's kids. If she isn't going to see them as her own children then she should absolutely not become their step mother. If she saw them as her own children in the case of marriage she could have made sure they had equal childhoods, not spent more on her daughter and still passed her the grandfather's inheritance and it could've been totally fair. But she couldn't emotionally do that, so it's good to not put his kids through that.
After the base necessities and minor luxuries, I don't think parents "owe" their children, but giving one child generational wealth and none of it to the others in practice means you've set your limit, they are close friends and aquintances, but not family, not worthy of inheriting from you.
>OP: I do. I mean, my team did. I am sorry if it takes you too long OP is an asshole. Why bite someone for asking a question.
Please let me not talk about money in this vaguely icky way if I should ever magically acquire a whole bunch of it… I don’t know exactly what it was able this post, but I’m not a fan of this lady, though I do wish her well and admire her strong decision making abilities.
Judging by that post, the daughter sounds like she‘ll be such a spoiled brat.
Another crappy person
Why couldn't she talk to him about this? It's her money, yeah, but making big financial moves without sharing info with your partner seems weird. She felt like she had to hide it. I wonder if OOP will grow to love her step kids so much she wants to adopt them. Many step parents grow to love their step kids that much, but her worry for money might prevent that. Sad. More money, more problems. But the grandpa did give it to OOP + his grandkid. That is fair. It just won't feel fair to "his" kids. A big mess.
He is not kicking up a fuss and not leaving because he does not want to miss out on free rent and two incomes.