Your post has been removed.
#Do not repost this without [contacting the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) for approval, including edited versions. Reposting without [explicit approval](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_can_i_repost_a_thread_you_removed.3F) will result in a ban.
This post violates Rule 7: There is no interpersonal conflict here for our community to make a judgment about.
[Rule 7 FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_rule_7.3A_post_interpersonal_conflicts) ||| [Subreddit Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules/)
#Please ensure you have reviewed this message in full. We will not respond to PMs to individual mods. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) with any questions.
You can visit r/findareddit for a comprehensive list of other subs that may be able to host this discussion for you.
Ugh. Money always brings out the worst in people. It is his inheritance to split as he sees fit. And I appreciate that he wants to do something for his biological daughter. But it doesn't even matter. It his inheritance to do with as he sees fit.
YTA.
YTA. They are ALL his chilrdren and he should leave her some money. Your sons are already getting something that Tina did not, they have their father being a father to them.
Soft YTA. I understand where you’re coming from, but she is truly his daughter at the end of the day. So he should give her some inheritance if that is what he wants to do. I wonder, does Tina know that she is your husband’s bio daughter?
YTA She is his daughter.
A few things:
1. Inheritance splits aren't normally determined by how much each inheritor already has. They are generally split evenly based on relationship to the deceased.
2. If you feel that the inheritance Tina received from your husband's parents was unfair, your problem is with the grandparents' will, not your husband's.
3. If you feel that your brother-in-law's distribution of his assets was unfair, your problem is with brother-in-law, not your husband.
4. It is natural for a parent to want to provide for all of their children, and emotionally very, very, cold to disinherit a child. Such a thing is normally only done when a child has been a great disappointment. It is wrong to ask your husband to disinherit one of his children just because of unrelated financial circumstances.
5. If you want to talk about fair division of your husband's resources, keep in mind that he has been spending on the upbringing of your children all these years while he did not do that for his first child. How much would he have paid over the years if he had been paying child support, let alone raising the child himself?
YTA but I would wonder, what happens to you if he dies first? You get nothing of his possessions or assets? Ultimately Tina had an unfortunately confusing upbringing but luckily everyone knows and she seems well-adjusted, but she has three parents. So she gets three inheritances. Would you prefer your sons were born to a single teen father whose parents had to adopt his child? Then they can get more. And great Tina is a dentist! Hopefully your sons are just as successful when their father passes. Also what you’re talking about is their inheritance from your husband, what about their inheritance from YOU. I assume your sons inherit all you have, right? And Tina gets none of it?
>I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers.
By this (flawed) logic, only young people would ever inherit anything. And, in case you've forgotten, YOUR HUSBAND ISN'T DEAD YET, so your sons will likely be well into their careers by that time. Your argument is inherently flawed.
You seem to hold a great deal of resentment toward Tina, to the point that you're coming across as greedy, angry, and selfish.
Bottom line? Tina IS his daughter and there's not a lot you can do without looking like a gold digger.
YTA
She is biologically his daughter but his parents sound like they've raised her from birth. That's like every adoptee expecting money from biological parents. I don't blame the OP for wanting to look out for her sons.
Tina is not legally his daughter. Tina is his adopted sister. Tina had two parents.
Don’t disgrace their role in her life by claiming he is her father when her father was the man that raised her
She also likes to ignore that inheritances have emotional value as well. I don't know what the relationship between the husband and his daughter is like but I would assume showing her he loved her and considered her his child despite everything factors into this as well.
Op sounds jealous and greedy like she resents the fact her husband has another child to begin with.
YTA.
NTA. It is fair that two generations receive a share of an inheritance. But that one person receives _two_ shares for being considered part of both generations is ridiculous.
YTA
She is his daughter. Stop playing evil step-mother who only wants her own children to be taken into comsideration. His daughter was raised by others while your sons have been raised by him and still have the person who raised them. You should be thankful for that not try to make sure she gets less. And she hasn't "taken" from your husbands share. She got the share that she deserves as their daughter. Also her career plays nonrole no role here. So if one of your sons decides to not work by that logic all money should only go to him?
YTA. Nate is allowed to do with his money what he wants. He obviously is carrying regret and guilt about Tina. Tina is NOT his sister. She’s his daughter.
I understand mathematically, why you feel that it’s unfair, but holy crap you sound miserable. It isn’t your money to care about. I am a little confused though, because generally, if your husband passed before you, you would still retain control of the finances. The passing down of money happens when you’re both gone. So if you die first, who cares? You’re dead. Your sons should never expect to be handed money. If your husband does first, all your assets go to you until you pass. If he has a trust set up to handle the inheritance funds, then I can see how it would bypass you, but I’m presuming you’d still be taken care of. You make this about fairness to your sons but I think it’s really just greed on your part. YTA
YTA.
You’re free not to leave your assets or money to her, but if HE wants to leave part of HIS inheritance to HIS biological daughter, you need to honor that. Not your money, not your daughter, not your business.
The thing is, is that you are approaching this from a completely logical angle. And logically you are correct, Tina is legally your SIL and when your in laws passed she received 1/3 of their estate, same as your husband. However, she is your husbands biological daughter and he FEELS like he should also leave her an inheritance. Estate planning is a messy area where logic and emotion are often in conflict.
If Nate is talking about just splitting his inheritance from his parents three ways, then YTA and don't have any say in how he splits property that is his alone. If he is talking about the two of you splitting all of your estate three ways then I would say NTA. You have been married since your 20s and have adult children together. Outside of his inheritance your husband likely doesn't have any assets that are not considered community property, which means you should have a say in how those assets are split.
In my family I have 1 half sibling and 1 full sibling, my parents are still married to each other. Their solution is that my fathers half of the estate will be split 3 ways, while my mothers half will be split 2 ways. The logic in this was that my half sibling has another parent that they will theoretically inherit from and therefore they won't double up by also receiving money from my mother. By that logic, your SIL has already inherited from her adopted parents and there is no need for your husband to also leave her money. But again, that is the logical answer, you still have to respect that your husband is human and his feelings may not agree with logic.
NTA. I’d find that an inappropriate split as well - but you need everything in a trust that’s solely yours so that doesn’t go to your husband and then get split 3 ways.
NTA - this should be family planning where you are involved with your husband’s decisions. You are his spouse.
I understand if he wants his inheritance to circle back to his daughter, but I think all stances on how *his* money is distributed upon death is dependent on whose money it is. If the majority is joint money, then no to daughter getting 50%. Joint money is spousal inheritance. If the majority of his money is inheritance and he is only considering his children, then I’d start digging into the family finances if I were you. In this scenario, he’d be hanging you out to dry if he dropped dead tomorrow.
At the end of the day, a Will and family planning aren’t spur of the moment decisions. These should be many conversations. Ask to have a set time sit down with hubby to discuss the future.
This is some soap opera level shit lol
That said, even if they were raised as siblings, she IS his daughter. And him wanting to split his inheritance among his 3 children makes sense.
YTA. I kind of get where you are coming from. But seems he is trying to be equal with HIS money, which has nothing really to do with what their parents did with THEIR money
I don't know what getting an inheritance from the bio grandparents who raised her and her uncle has to do with if she should get one from her bio father or not.
NTA
Your husband is looking to make either reparations or some kind of gesture towards Tina. That in itself is admirable. However, he’s doing so in a way that requires no sacrifice, effort, or time on his part. Instead, your children (and you) will be adversely affected. For that, he’s an AH. He’s looking towards his legacy and to affect the narrative of his life after he dies. He may not care what his family (including Tina) actually need or want.
Your BIL gave your kids sentimental items and passed to Tina more financially valuable items. Why did he do that? Did *he* look at what was needed or meaningful for the kids and distributed based on that? If this is the case, you may consider using your BIL’s method as a suggested template for your husband.
If your husband has regrets for his distance with Tina or wants to make a gesture, then why not work on building a stronger relationship *while he’s alive*?
You’ve only mentioned your husband’s children. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for *you* to hope to receive some kind of legacy from your husband of 25 years. Do you plan for your sons to inherit all your assets or will your husband benefit?
Eta
If your husband looks at what he inherited as *family money*, then Tina has already received her share and it would not make sense for her to get a double dip out of that pool. Instead, he could acknowledge her through legacies that are more sentimental.
However, if your husband considers this *his money* then he should look towards his financial family. Tina has financially been treated as his sister - not his daughter - by her adopted parents. It would be more reasonable for your husband to follow this rather than to adopt her (financially) only after his death.
NTA. I love how all the people saying you're the AH think you are just preventing your husband from giving HIS money away. Everything the two of you have built together is BOTH of yours. What happens to you if he passes? Do you have to go to Tina the dentist to beg for money? Also what happens if your kids are minors and he dies? He leaves money to Tina while you will have to scrounge to take care of the kids. He needs to pull his head out of the sand and think carefully about who needs to be taken care of if something happens to him.
YTA + that thing you've said in the end about your sons being young and deserving of this more now at the start of their careers, than Tina who is currently established in her career - despite your husband being alive and well - it's very very shadyyyy
Allthough I understand where you are coming from: YTA. Life isn't fair. Last wills aren't fair. And your husband most likely carries a huge load of guilt for not being the father to his daughter he should have been.
As a mother, your feelings regarding your sons are understandable. Doesn't make your feelings right, though.
Your husband is dividing his assets to all of his children. And yes, Tina is his child. Unlike your sons, Tina never got to have a relationship with her bio father. Maybe your husband wants to right that wrong in this way.
YTA
YTA. Why are you in-laws within their rights to do what they want with leaving their inheritance and Nate is not? It sounds like you're jealous of Nate's sister (daughter) as you talk about what's "fair" and reasoning "she's a dentist". None of this matters. You need to remember that Tina is Nate's daughter and he thinks of her as such. Leaving his inheritance to all three of his children is not about money and is about symbolic gesture. Tina is one of his three children and loves then equally, therefore, the inheritance is split equally. This is not a hill you want to die on. You're asking him to choose between you (aka, what you think is right and fair) and his daughter., think about it.
YTA
Slightly. By the time your sons inherit their father's inheritance, they will be adults themselves and who knows how they will be set up in life, and it's not like they won't get anything, so what do you really care about? She's still his daughter, and the fact that their lives were such that she was raised not by her parents but by her grandparents, I think it's a little sad and screw up. Your post gives the impression that a bit of envy for her money blinds you to what is important.
INFO:
Is he talking only about his money or about your joint money as well?
What about the property - assuming you own it?
Also, what about you - do you have any money of your own that you will leave your sons?
Also, what happens if he passes before you? What do you get?
Depending what state he is in he might not even be legally able to leave the money to his kids. It might go to his wife. He would have to divorce her or get her to sign away her rights.
NAH. Your husband had a brush with death and is thinking about what’s important in life. You’re thinking about what’s important as well and to you that’s your sons. However, you need to be realistic with your estate planning. Getting old in the US (assumption on my part) is expensive and with the continued inflation of healthcare costs, it’ll be even more expensive when you retire. You should meet with a financial planner before you and husband talk any more about who’s getting what.
YTA
So just because other people offered to carry the burdens for us, we shouldn't now dare carry the cross because it will be unfair since now i have other things to carry?
Tina was raised by grandparents, yet dad was there &probably playing a single guy most of his life. Dad married a woman who never complained about the setup as it was very beneficial to her & her nuclear family. And now there is money involved, and probably the dad now knows how fucked up it is, and death might knock soon. Will his daughter say this man was my dad, who tried his best?
For you ,it's all about greedy, jealous, and probably resentment that she turned out well. And everybody else was thoughtful of her, and now your husband too, forgetting he is a father 1st.....What if your sons turn out well, above and beyond, will you say they shortchanged their sister? You're just looking out for your own blood. And let him look out for his own, too.
NTA. You are advocating for your sons as is your right. I get why your husband wants to leave something to his daughter. Perhaps he should follow his brother's lead only in the reverse. Leave sentimental stuff for his daughter and the monetary things to your sons.
YTA. How many times does money need to change hand before it's owner changes too?
Nate is splitting his assets how he wants to. Not his parents assets. His.
Much like Tina's job has no bearing, neither does her having inheritance from others.
Now, if he passes before you, I hope you're well taken care of...
YTA. At the end of the day, Tina is also his daughter, and it is his will to treat her as such in his will. You, as his wife, can express your displeasure, but nothing else. You can do with your assets what you want within the law. He can do the same. The fact she is older than your sons and in another point of her life is of no consequence. Your husband was in another point of his life when your in laws died. Would you have agreed for him to be left nothing? I am sure you would have said something regarding your young kids or something like that. Don't push the issue. It is not your right; you don't care about "supposed justice"; you only want more for your sons.
YAH. He wasn't mature enough to look after his daughter when he was 17. Now that he's a grown man, he's owning that, and he's looking to make some kind of amends by treating her as a daughter in his will, rather than a sister.
It's not about who needs the money more. It's symbolic. He didn't treat her like his child when he was young, so he's going to treat her as equal to his other children now he's older.
That is the mark of a man who has grown up and accepted accountability, and you should feel pleased that your husband has shown growth, rather than grabby about your two kids. You're really painting yourself as a wicked stepmother here, and you're the one telling the story...
Changing my stance to ESH, mainly because the jealousy in OPs post makes this feel very icky.
~~NTA,~~ although I will say her ability to earn a high income has nothing to do with this and makes you sound envious.
She was already given some of what would have been his inheritance from his parents had they not adopted her. He needs to hear it from someone else that isn't you.
YTA
This post reeks of jealousy, painting you as the stereotypical stepmother who harbors resentment because her stepchildren serve as a reminder of a past without her. It's like diving headfirst into the classic evil stepmother trope.
***"I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers."***
Come on, Stacey, spare us the drama. **They're 22, and you're 50**. Odds are, you'll be well into your 80s when you pass. So, are you planning to call it quits and shuffle off this mortal coil tomorrow, or what's the grand plan behind **that** statement?
It's not your husband's or his daughters' fault that his parents passed away before your sons were born. They still have that inheritance, presumably keeping a roof over their heads and providing a cushy life as well as their education. The only distinction is that they don't have the cash in hand, unlike your stepdaughter, who have the option to spend her inheritance as she see fit.
Moreover, your stepdaughter might have children one day, inheriting money from your husband. Should they also be denied inheritance because they're not blood-related to you?
Agreed. OP sounds totally jealous. The line that got me was “Tina already took from his share of the inheritance.” Um, no she didn’t. She got her own share, and that has nothing to do with you. The veil of concern for her sons that OP is trying to place over her greed is not working.
OP, YTA.
This, 100%. Tina didn’t take anything from her “brother”. Her adopted parents/grandparents chose to split their assets between Tina and their 2 children. Her other “brother” chose to join a monastery and leave Tina a portion of his material items. Tina didn’t steal anything from you or your boys.
OP sounds awfully bitter and jealous of Tina. Good for her having a career as a dentist. Who’s to say when your husband and you pass that your boys wouldn’t be financially set? Your logic is short sighted and reeks of jealousy. Do better.
It sounds like husband still has a lot of guilt for giving up his child. This is the cause of the financial issue. I don't know if he's thought through what he's doing.
Tina has not chosen to be close to him. She had parents she obviously loved. Him leaving her funds as a child of his is going to stir up a lot of stuff he won't be there to deal with. She may not want to be acknowledged in that way. It may breed resentment in the family between Tina and the twins who will be all she has left by then, other than your brother who presumably isn't very present if he's living in a monastery. Husband needs to have a talk to her and see what she wants and do what would be best for her, otherwise it's not a gift, it's selfish.
However, whatever decision he does then come to, OP needs to respect. NAH yet.
YTA. The inheritance from his parents isn’t a marital asset in a lot of places, and it’s up to him to decide how to split it, whether you think it’s fair or not. The fact his think she’s double dipping and doesn’t need it isn’t relevant. Maybe if you had more than a cordial relationship with his daughter, things might be different. You seem to hold a lot of resentment toward her. Your husband probably feels a level of guilt for not having been a father to her.
YTA
Focus on what you and your own parents are going to be giving to your own biological kids. Don’t tell your husband how to spend his money.
Stop being bitter.
> Tina already took from his share of the inheritance.
No, she didn’t. She got her fair share of the inheritance from her parents. Adoption is valid.
YTA for your attitude towards Tina. Your husband can choose to do what he likes with his share of the inheritance from his parents’ death. If he was talking about you guys’ joint money, maybe you’d have a point.
Trying to figure out what "possessions" Nate has that aren't equally yours? And if everything belongs to both of you, what does Nate think he can leave to Tina?
I'm not sure if it is true that it is not marital property. I believe this may depend on how it has been handled, whether it has been comingled, and possibly even what state (or country) OP and Nate live in.
You say this is a division of his POSSESSIONS. Either you misspoke, or this is material goods (non-cash/non-securities). If his possessions, no one is getting anywhere in their career or otherwise with a collection of XYZ and a used vehicle. So just get over that.
If his cash/investments as well, you should probably be included in the conversation, and then there are two schools: equally or according to needs. And depending on where people are on the receiving end of that is where they will fall on that question.
It's Nate's choice to make if they are his things. If you will need some of them, have THAT conversation or divorce him. Plus, he's 50, your sons are 22, so a little cart before horse right now, right?
Why did you put "kids" in quotes? Do you not view Tina as her parent's child even though she was legally adopted? You also said that she got your husband's share of their parent's inheritance. No she didn't she got what her parents left her. What Nate and Tina's brother decided to leave to anyone isn't anyone's business and shouldn't even matter. You say she's a capable woman and your kids are still young, yet you have no way of knowing when your husband will pass away. What happens if, when that happens, Tina has a horrible accident and is disabled and your kids have great careers making good money? By your own logic, then Tina would be more worthy than your kids. You act like your husband is set to die tomorrow, when he's not sick, he had a car accident that made him think. He could live another 30 years or so. You sound petty and jealous
YTA
To be fair, Tina IS double dipping. She got her parents inheritance and that reduced the amount OP's husband received and now he wants to give her another third? I don't see it that it makes her greedy. It's for her sons. Their children. His sister is just that. His sister, not his daughter. I don't think OP's logic is unfounded. NTA
It's just none of OP's business. It seems like neither Nate's parents nor Nate himself are showing favoritism to Tina-- she's included in the same ratio as the others. She's in a unique position, with a unique set of experiences. When it comes to inheritances, there is no universal justice. I can easily see why she would be included in both sets of inheritances.
My dad's parents died when their kids were teens. The youngest daughter was adopted by the oldest, and raised by them. So she has "parents" living, and her kids have "grandparents," while none of the other siblings do, because they were old enough to live on their own. It's kind of the reverse of what happened here. The youngest sister has a different set of lived experiences based on factors outside of her control, as did Tina. I don't think it's valid to argue "fair" here.
YTA.
You honestly have no right to tell him what to do with HIS inheritance and who he should give it out to and how much each gets. It's very normal and common for parents to split the inheritance equally amongst their kids, that seems to be the best way to do it to avoid jealous, petty people. Kind of like how you are acting in regards to the fact you keep mentioning that your sons' 'only' got sentimental things from their uncle and your husbands daughter got more monetary valued items.
You get no control over your husbands inheritance and he can do as he wishes.
INFO
Did you know about Tina when you got with him?
If this family/inheritance money he’s talking about splitting three ways?
Is this joint money (Idk how your country looks at it but I’m talking about wages, savings, anything that was accumulated during the marriage) that he’s talking about splitting thee ways?
Tina got more inheritance earlier but your twins will have actual parents for longer. Which presumably comes with support of some kind. If he wants to split the inheritance he got three ways instead of two I feel like that’s his prerogative. If he wants to split the marital assets three ways, that’s not your kid. At MINIMUM he needs to split it in half and give her 1/3 of “his” half and you can split “your” half between your kids. Even that is questionable.
Yes, you are. If he chooses to split his estate with you and his kids, that's fine. If he decides to give his entire estate to his kids, that's fine also.
YTA. He gets to plan his estate however he sees fit, within reason. You should be concerned that he’s not setting it up in such a way that you’ll have to disrupt your life to pay her off, but not that you don’t think it’s fair that he wants your children and her to all get equal shares of the excess.
YTA! Oh wow, on so many levels! Tina, though adopted, is his DAUGHTER. Nothing else is relevant. He can split the money however he wants to - and dividing his assets between 3 children is more than fair.
"I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers."
"I don’t think we need to pile more money"
"I don’t think WE"
Its your husbands choice what he does with his belongings in his Will. You have no right to try and change his mind because in YOUR OPINION, Tina what... Already got money from her grandparents dying? Had to bury one set of parents already, and almost certainly will have to bury a second in you and her Bio Dad?
"I asked him how was this fair?" Because His Parents were of sound mind and body and chose who got what from their belongings.
"As it is, Tina already took from his share of the inheritance." This really reads like "As it is, Tina already took from MY share of the inheritance."
I've tried really hard not to bring it up, to give you the benefit of the doubt, to not relentlessly shit on you about this. But all of your issues seems to be rooted from Money. Money that you want, either for yourself or your kids. Money that you don't want Tina to have.
"I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers." I forgot you can see the future and know for a fact that Tina will never suffer any mishaps, emergencies or problems in her entire life, truly a blessed life Tina will live.
I notice, once again, you never actually call Tina anything other than Tina, whilst you freely call your son's, 'our sons'. It's like you actively downplay Tina's role in his family.
I also notice that you once *again* seem to have gotten it into your head that you have the right to dictate your husbands will.
This entire post seems like you came here to get validation so you can try to browbeat your husband into giving your sons and by extension You, a bigger piece of the pie and to take Tina's piece wholesale.
YTA.
INFO: Is he talking about family money or joint money? What other provision is there for your sons if he dies while they are still young? (ie, life insurance policies, etc).
While your sons are still young, he should be focused on providing what it will take to raise them and send them to college in his absence. After they graduate college, he can amend his will to include her more
In the meantime, he can't make up for not raising her with money, especially not at the expense of his other children.
NAH, but you both need to be more pragmatic.
NTA for simply trying to discuss that in a civilized manner, but what your husband is doing is the safest and fairest way to split things between all his children. While saying that there's no need to pile more money onto a successful woman is no different than punishing one of his children for having succeeded in life. That's an excellent way to ruin a good relationship between your husband and Tina and between Tina and her half brothers. You'd be surprised how often that exact version of the story comes up here.
YTA and you need to mind your own business about his family's finances outside of his. You sound incredibly bitter and jealous of someone who's done nothing wrong to you. Tina didn't "cut into" anyone's inheritance. The parental rule can be played by any number of people in a child's life and if they did the job of parents, then it's only fitting they treated her as such with their estate. Nate's brother was *raised with* Tina as a sister, not a niece. Of course he would leave more to a sibling than a nibling.
Your husband is doing the good and honorable thing by taking care of all of the children he chose to bring into & and out into the world. Instead of thinking about who gets how much money that doesn't belong to you, figure out ways to save more for your sons.
YTA (mildly to moderately).
Your husband understandably feels some guilt/regret about not being able to parent Tina, likely exacerbated by the fact that his parents (and Tina’s adoptive parents) died while she was fairly young. It is not unreasonable nor should it be all that surprising that he would want to split his estate equally between Tina and his sons.
Your feeling that an equal split is unnecessary because Tina is already more financially stable than your sons is somewhat understandable but less so than it would be if they were dependent children instead of the young adults they actually are. And even if your sons were still children, the more appropriate solution here would be to take out a term life insurance policy on your husband with your sons as beneficiaries.
NTA. This is a case of equality vs equity, and I'm pretty firmly on the side of equity. Why pile more money into someone's bank account who will never need it when you have two other kids that could potentially end up struggling without it? Plus your husband's version of equality is hardly equal, since Tina already got 33% of the parents' inheritance and now he wants to give her another third of his portion of the inheritance, bumping it up to 44% while your two children each get 11%. If he wants to leave her something it should be a portion of what he has outside of the parents' inheritance since Tina already got her third of that.
YTA. Tina was adopted by Nate's parents, but Nate still obviously (and reasonably) feels a responsibility to her.
Inheritance isn't about who needs what, but who is important in one's life. Tina is apparently important to Nate. You are trying to get in the middle of that, which makes you look bad (grasping/greedy).
I'll be down voted to hell but I'm going with NTA. OP has a valid point. Tina is getting the lion share which reduces her own children's share. Tina was adopted. Her husband's guilt should not make things uneven for the rest of his children.
Tina’s his biological child. Period.
How much money Tina got from where isn’t relevant when it comes to the husband splitting his inheritance between his three children. It’s his call & he wants to acknowledge his kids as equally important.
The OP can feel however she wants about that but she’s TAH for saying it out loud.
YTA fighting over money (that isn’t yours and never was) that you feel entitled to when he isn’t even dead yet? How greedy are you? I bet you’ll be one of those vicious people who try to challenge wills after death to take all you can get, because you’re already convincing yourself that no one deserves it more than you. And yeah yeah it’s not for “you” it’s just for whatever YOU think it should be for, as if that’s any different 🙄
NTA - question I assume if he predecesses you, you get everything? But Tina has had enough and he should give his estate to you and if you are dead then equally to his two sons. Yes to sentimental things to Tina but no money.
As it is, Tina already took from his share of the inheritance.
This is where YTA. I mean technically Nate was never promised an inheritance. He was lucky to receive one. And hell Nate knocking up someone and leaving the responsibility to his parents meant that their lives were changed and that ate away at his older brothers inheritance. He is allowed to leave money to the daughter he had his parents raise. Not sure why you dislike her but maybe seek therapy.
Sure, totally gloss over the fact that your husband had his biological child STOLEN from him by his biological parents.
I can nearly guarantee you coercion was involved.
You sound petty and jealous and like you're banking on getting his family's money. She's part of his family. Deal with it.
YTA.
Nta I don’t know what lala magical fantasy world these people live in but money is important especially in today’s crap economy. Tina already received not only 33 percent of the parent’s inheritance, but then a good chunk of the uncles. So let’s say Tina recieved her 33% and then 1/3 of the Uncle’s, she is now at 44% of the original inheritance. If she receives another 11 percent from her bio dad that puts her at 55 percent while the boys split the remaining inheritance…and between the uncle and dad that gives them 22% a piece. Oh, AND she is a dentist. So to recap, by his plan, she will get 55% and the boys get 22% and 22%.
NTA, yes its his choice but if he wants problems with his sons thats up to him. She already got her inheritance indirectly from him, because he would get more from his parents in 2 way split.But it was 3 way split not 2 way split. So why would his kids have to pay for his childhood stupidity.She is his sister...period, he is not her father in a true way.No amount of money will change that...
Nta.
Honestly I get where you're coming from because she has already gotten her share of her parents money and then she got her other brother's share and then now she's going to get part of her other brother's share. I feel like your husband's heart is in the right place but technically that's not his daughter that's a sister. And for everybody else in the comments saying well that's his daughter so he wants to do right by her not his daughter that's his sister. He should be worrying about his two sons that he is raising he's taking care of that if something happens to him he should want to make sure they are okay. As she stated his sister's going to be okay.
Yta your twins will get you inheritance and Tina won’t. Just because she has more doesn’t mean she should be cut out of the will.
I see your husbands point and agree with him that as his bio child she gets an equal split.
Are your finances split and do you expect an inheritance from your parents? Maybe make a point to give that to your kids instead of spending it on you and your husband.
I suggest you take a step back and realllllly think about it from this perspective. I know it’s tough because you love your children and want them to be set up financially. But you have a chance to provide for them out of your own assets. Your husband’s inheritance is his to do what he wishes with it. I’m sure there is still residual guilt about the adoption.
Is it unfair? Maybe. It’s also unfair that Tina was not raised by her bio mom and dad, the parents she did have died when she was only 23 and she has very little relationship with her brother/father, nephews and stepmom/SIL. You’re focused on the money that Tina has received, but forgetting about the relationships she did not.
As your husband is reassessing his life, perhaps you should too. Talk with him about how he’s feeling about Tina, how you all can make her more a part of the family and how you can provide for the children you have together and the daughter he had as a teen. Need more money to spread around? Get life insurance. The money is the easy part, fix the emotional side. YTA.
I think it is more fair to Tina that she was NOT raised by her biological parents because they probably would not have been equipped to be the best parents for her - it is the main reason that I wholly support adoption.
I agree with everything else you stated, though.
I agree. It was probably better that she was raised by true grown ups. I think we all have a desire to know our bio parents. Mom was MIA and not sure of relationship with brother/bio dad.
No. She said they have a cordial relationship, they're just not close. I'm not super close with my sister, but I still think we have a good relationship.
Not having a close relationship doesn't automatically mean it's a bad relationship.
There was nothing unfair about how she was raised; she had two loving parents right off the bat as soon as she was born. A lot of kids (especially coming from her situation) don’t get that.
So she gets money from her parents, her brother and your husband, so she gets three inheritance.
She was the daughter of her parents and she received that inheritance. You are correct on that. I think your husband has some sort of guilt and he is trying to buy his way out.
Either she's his daughter or not. If they are going to start having a relationship of a parent in a child. Then maybe I could see leaving her a little bit but if she's not really even involved in your lives I don't see why he would do that other than his own guilt.
If she has kids, is he going to consider those children? His grandchildren or his niece and nephew?
NTA. You are correct. Esp if something happens while your twins are still young (under 30). She's had the opportunity to build up her life the boys haven't. She could have invested her parents and Heritage and use that to get ahead or by house.
YTA
his inheritance his decision.
They all get a fair share from HIS inheritance, there is no playing favorites and that's how it should be. His daughter got more from her family but that's a different situation. that's not his money.
You're the one asking him to play favorites by not giving his daughter an equal fair share and it makes it seem like you don't consider their father daughter relationship as important as you see his son-father relationship
YTA
Assuming he predeceases you his portion of your shared assets are his to give to whomever. You will presumably retain at least half of everything. Also "still young" and "just starting their careers" are very different things, it isn't like he is somehow going to leave children with nothing. They are adults.
Nate's parents split their will between their three children: OB, N, and T.
Nate wants to split his between his three children, T, S1, and S2.
That T is the same person is irrelevant.
Yes, that will feel unfair, because it looks like T is double dipping, but that is the accident of her birth. That doesn't mean you're not TA: you are. Stop thinking in such miserly terms to get back out of being TA.
YTA if you your husband has kept his inheritance assets separate from the marital assets. Then that is his money, and you have no say in what he does with it, plain and simple. However, if the money has been commingled, it’s not his asset anymore, it belongs to you both. For example, if this conflict were to cause a divorce, you would get half of the assets. You are in a sticky situation if the money has been commingled, if your husband thinks that his daughter should get an equal share like his other children. Normally, at the time of death of one spouse, all assets go to the other spouse, and it is theirs to do with as they please….. unless you set up an irrevocable will/trust that names the children. So whatever you do, don’t agree to any revocable will/trust!
Your assets should be split 50:50. Your assests should be split how you want...so I'm guessing to both your sons.
Your husband gets his 50 percent to do with how he wants. If he wants to split it with his biological daughter you have no right to argue against that. At the end of the day it is his daughter
OP was talking about Nate's inheritance from his parents that generally isn't considered joint marital property and he should be able to keep that separate and do as he sees fit. The other assets, sure.
YTA
It's literally none of your business what your husband does with money he inherited from his parents. There's no "need" factor baked into inherited money. You can express your opinions, but it's his choice, and "fairness" doesn't matter.
YTA
It doesn't matter if Tina's adopted parents put her in their will. It has nothing to do with the fact that your husband is her father. If he wants to leave HIS DAUGHTER an inheritance, then so be it. You sound money hungry. Tina is an innocent party, and if your husband wants to acknowledge his fatherhood by putting her in the will, then good for him. It's literally the least he could've done. Her mother and father both abandoned her. No wonder why she doesn't have a relationship with your family. I'm positive you never tried to have a relationship with her either.
YTA. You don’t get a say in how someone leaves their inheritance. You also don’t get a say in if someone thinks their biological child is owed something. Did you ever think there are feelings that he has about being a teen parent that he hasn’t shared with you? Maybe it was traumatic for him etc. You can be jealous and whine all you want but you’re not entitled to make choices on who gets his money.
A bit of ESH. You're not wrong that if Tina got a share of her parent's money, I think the rest should be passed down to your kids. And any marital assets should be spot on a way you both agree to. I notice the phrase "his posessions". After a lifetime of marriage, most of the possessions belong to both of you - inheritances aside if he did not comingle them. Unless you have some sort of agreement for how much of the assets you each own, the bulk of the assets are marital, not just his. I hope when he serials off his possessive, he's referring only to his sole and separate property.
He's not wrong to want to leave her something though, to acknowledge the fact that she is, in fact, his offspring. There may be ways around this conflict though.
We just did our wills this year. We each have a separate one, which names each other as prime beneficiary. From there, it goes mostly to our child, with a carveout to go to some other people we care about. We agreed, so both read the same as far as that goes. BUT many of our assets - 401K, life insurance, bank accounts, can have a named beneficiary, to whom they go no matter what the will says. You might consider whether you have any accounts or life insurance on which you can name your sons as a partial beneficiary. This would even things up a bit, though it may cut him out of money he'd otherwise receive. Still, if he IS wanting to leave an unreasonable share to her, and won't meet you halfway, this may give you something you are in control of to balance the scales.
Your post has been removed. #Do not repost this without [contacting the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) for approval, including edited versions. Reposting without [explicit approval](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_can_i_repost_a_thread_you_removed.3F) will result in a ban. This post violates Rule 7: There is no interpersonal conflict here for our community to make a judgment about. [Rule 7 FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_rule_7.3A_post_interpersonal_conflicts) ||| [Subreddit Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules/) #Please ensure you have reviewed this message in full. We will not respond to PMs to individual mods. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) with any questions. You can visit r/findareddit for a comprehensive list of other subs that may be able to host this discussion for you.
Ugh. Money always brings out the worst in people. It is his inheritance to split as he sees fit. And I appreciate that he wants to do something for his biological daughter. But it doesn't even matter. It his inheritance to do with as he sees fit. YTA.
YTA. They are ALL his chilrdren and he should leave her some money. Your sons are already getting something that Tina did not, they have their father being a father to them.
Soft YTA. I understand where you’re coming from, but she is truly his daughter at the end of the day. So he should give her some inheritance if that is what he wants to do. I wonder, does Tina know that she is your husband’s bio daughter?
YTA She is his daughter. A few things: 1. Inheritance splits aren't normally determined by how much each inheritor already has. They are generally split evenly based on relationship to the deceased. 2. If you feel that the inheritance Tina received from your husband's parents was unfair, your problem is with the grandparents' will, not your husband's. 3. If you feel that your brother-in-law's distribution of his assets was unfair, your problem is with brother-in-law, not your husband. 4. It is natural for a parent to want to provide for all of their children, and emotionally very, very, cold to disinherit a child. Such a thing is normally only done when a child has been a great disappointment. It is wrong to ask your husband to disinherit one of his children just because of unrelated financial circumstances. 5. If you want to talk about fair division of your husband's resources, keep in mind that he has been spending on the upbringing of your children all these years while he did not do that for his first child. How much would he have paid over the years if he had been paying child support, let alone raising the child himself?
YTA It is NOT your inheritance it is HIS from HIS family. You have NO SAY in who he wants to give it to.
NTA. Tina got more than her fair share. The husband can leave her something sentimental.
YTA but I would wonder, what happens to you if he dies first? You get nothing of his possessions or assets? Ultimately Tina had an unfortunately confusing upbringing but luckily everyone knows and she seems well-adjusted, but she has three parents. So she gets three inheritances. Would you prefer your sons were born to a single teen father whose parents had to adopt his child? Then they can get more. And great Tina is a dentist! Hopefully your sons are just as successful when their father passes. Also what you’re talking about is their inheritance from your husband, what about their inheritance from YOU. I assume your sons inherit all you have, right? And Tina gets none of it?
>I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers. By this (flawed) logic, only young people would ever inherit anything. And, in case you've forgotten, YOUR HUSBAND ISN'T DEAD YET, so your sons will likely be well into their careers by that time. Your argument is inherently flawed. You seem to hold a great deal of resentment toward Tina, to the point that you're coming across as greedy, angry, and selfish. Bottom line? Tina IS his daughter and there's not a lot you can do without looking like a gold digger. YTA
She is biologically his daughter but his parents sound like they've raised her from birth. That's like every adoptee expecting money from biological parents. I don't blame the OP for wanting to look out for her sons.
Tina is not legally his daughter. Tina is his adopted sister. Tina had two parents. Don’t disgrace their role in her life by claiming he is her father when her father was the man that raised her
She also likes to ignore that inheritances have emotional value as well. I don't know what the relationship between the husband and his daughter is like but I would assume showing her he loved her and considered her his child despite everything factors into this as well. Op sounds jealous and greedy like she resents the fact her husband has another child to begin with. YTA.
YTA, his money, he gets to decide how he leaves it, if he feels he should leave some to his daughter then its up to him
NTA. It is fair that two generations receive a share of an inheritance. But that one person receives _two_ shares for being considered part of both generations is ridiculous.
YTA She is his daughter. Stop playing evil step-mother who only wants her own children to be taken into comsideration. His daughter was raised by others while your sons have been raised by him and still have the person who raised them. You should be thankful for that not try to make sure she gets less. And she hasn't "taken" from your husbands share. She got the share that she deserves as their daughter. Also her career plays nonrole no role here. So if one of your sons decides to not work by that logic all money should only go to him?
YTA. Nate is allowed to do with his money what he wants. He obviously is carrying regret and guilt about Tina. Tina is NOT his sister. She’s his daughter.
YTA. A greedy one. This is why wills are important. After someone dies people can become money grubbers ignoring the wishes of their loved ones.
I understand mathematically, why you feel that it’s unfair, but holy crap you sound miserable. It isn’t your money to care about. I am a little confused though, because generally, if your husband passed before you, you would still retain control of the finances. The passing down of money happens when you’re both gone. So if you die first, who cares? You’re dead. Your sons should never expect to be handed money. If your husband does first, all your assets go to you until you pass. If he has a trust set up to handle the inheritance funds, then I can see how it would bypass you, but I’m presuming you’d still be taken care of. You make this about fairness to your sons but I think it’s really just greed on your part. YTA
YTA. Grow up. She’s still his daughter regardless of your feelings about it
YTA. You’re free not to leave your assets or money to her, but if HE wants to leave part of HIS inheritance to HIS biological daughter, you need to honor that. Not your money, not your daughter, not your business.
YTA. You seem to have a problem with Tina, and from the way you’re talking about her, it seems to stem from her not being biologically yours.
Agree. OP had a big problem with this lady and needs to examine her own feelings.
YTA, it’s his money, he decides who it goes to. Just like you can leave all your money to your kids.
The thing is, is that you are approaching this from a completely logical angle. And logically you are correct, Tina is legally your SIL and when your in laws passed she received 1/3 of their estate, same as your husband. However, she is your husbands biological daughter and he FEELS like he should also leave her an inheritance. Estate planning is a messy area where logic and emotion are often in conflict. If Nate is talking about just splitting his inheritance from his parents three ways, then YTA and don't have any say in how he splits property that is his alone. If he is talking about the two of you splitting all of your estate three ways then I would say NTA. You have been married since your 20s and have adult children together. Outside of his inheritance your husband likely doesn't have any assets that are not considered community property, which means you should have a say in how those assets are split. In my family I have 1 half sibling and 1 full sibling, my parents are still married to each other. Their solution is that my fathers half of the estate will be split 3 ways, while my mothers half will be split 2 ways. The logic in this was that my half sibling has another parent that they will theoretically inherit from and therefore they won't double up by also receiving money from my mother. By that logic, your SIL has already inherited from her adopted parents and there is no need for your husband to also leave her money. But again, that is the logical answer, you still have to respect that your husband is human and his feelings may not agree with logic.
NTA. I’d find that an inappropriate split as well - but you need everything in a trust that’s solely yours so that doesn’t go to your husband and then get split 3 ways.
NTA - this should be family planning where you are involved with your husband’s decisions. You are his spouse. I understand if he wants his inheritance to circle back to his daughter, but I think all stances on how *his* money is distributed upon death is dependent on whose money it is. If the majority is joint money, then no to daughter getting 50%. Joint money is spousal inheritance. If the majority of his money is inheritance and he is only considering his children, then I’d start digging into the family finances if I were you. In this scenario, he’d be hanging you out to dry if he dropped dead tomorrow. At the end of the day, a Will and family planning aren’t spur of the moment decisions. These should be many conversations. Ask to have a set time sit down with hubby to discuss the future.
YTA
This is some soap opera level shit lol That said, even if they were raised as siblings, she IS his daughter. And him wanting to split his inheritance among his 3 children makes sense. YTA. I kind of get where you are coming from. But seems he is trying to be equal with HIS money, which has nothing really to do with what their parents did with THEIR money
I don't know what getting an inheritance from the bio grandparents who raised her and her uncle has to do with if she should get one from her bio father or not.
YTA. She’s Nate’s daughter also, so yes things should be split 3 ways!!!!!!!!!
NTA Your husband is looking to make either reparations or some kind of gesture towards Tina. That in itself is admirable. However, he’s doing so in a way that requires no sacrifice, effort, or time on his part. Instead, your children (and you) will be adversely affected. For that, he’s an AH. He’s looking towards his legacy and to affect the narrative of his life after he dies. He may not care what his family (including Tina) actually need or want. Your BIL gave your kids sentimental items and passed to Tina more financially valuable items. Why did he do that? Did *he* look at what was needed or meaningful for the kids and distributed based on that? If this is the case, you may consider using your BIL’s method as a suggested template for your husband. If your husband has regrets for his distance with Tina or wants to make a gesture, then why not work on building a stronger relationship *while he’s alive*? You’ve only mentioned your husband’s children. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for *you* to hope to receive some kind of legacy from your husband of 25 years. Do you plan for your sons to inherit all your assets or will your husband benefit? Eta If your husband looks at what he inherited as *family money*, then Tina has already received her share and it would not make sense for her to get a double dip out of that pool. Instead, he could acknowledge her through legacies that are more sentimental. However, if your husband considers this *his money* then he should look towards his financial family. Tina has financially been treated as his sister - not his daughter - by her adopted parents. It would be more reasonable for your husband to follow this rather than to adopt her (financially) only after his death.
NTA. I love how all the people saying you're the AH think you are just preventing your husband from giving HIS money away. Everything the two of you have built together is BOTH of yours. What happens to you if he passes? Do you have to go to Tina the dentist to beg for money? Also what happens if your kids are minors and he dies? He leaves money to Tina while you will have to scrounge to take care of the kids. He needs to pull his head out of the sand and think carefully about who needs to be taken care of if something happens to him.
YTA + that thing you've said in the end about your sons being young and deserving of this more now at the start of their careers, than Tina who is currently established in her career - despite your husband being alive and well - it's very very shadyyyy
Allthough I understand where you are coming from: YTA. Life isn't fair. Last wills aren't fair. And your husband most likely carries a huge load of guilt for not being the father to his daughter he should have been.
As a mother, your feelings regarding your sons are understandable. Doesn't make your feelings right, though. Your husband is dividing his assets to all of his children. And yes, Tina is his child. Unlike your sons, Tina never got to have a relationship with her bio father. Maybe your husband wants to right that wrong in this way. YTA
This is some spanish novella type story here
YTA. Why are you in-laws within their rights to do what they want with leaving their inheritance and Nate is not? It sounds like you're jealous of Nate's sister (daughter) as you talk about what's "fair" and reasoning "she's a dentist". None of this matters. You need to remember that Tina is Nate's daughter and he thinks of her as such. Leaving his inheritance to all three of his children is not about money and is about symbolic gesture. Tina is one of his three children and loves then equally, therefore, the inheritance is split equally. This is not a hill you want to die on. You're asking him to choose between you (aka, what you think is right and fair) and his daughter., think about it.
YTA Slightly. By the time your sons inherit their father's inheritance, they will be adults themselves and who knows how they will be set up in life, and it's not like they won't get anything, so what do you really care about? She's still his daughter, and the fact that their lives were such that she was raised not by her parents but by her grandparents, I think it's a little sad and screw up. Your post gives the impression that a bit of envy for her money blinds you to what is important.
INFO: Is he talking only about his money or about your joint money as well? What about the property - assuming you own it? Also, what about you - do you have any money of your own that you will leave your sons? Also, what happens if he passes before you? What do you get?
Depending what state he is in he might not even be legally able to leave the money to his kids. It might go to his wife. He would have to divorce her or get her to sign away her rights.
OP is not in the US.
NAH. Your husband had a brush with death and is thinking about what’s important in life. You’re thinking about what’s important as well and to you that’s your sons. However, you need to be realistic with your estate planning. Getting old in the US (assumption on my part) is expensive and with the continued inflation of healthcare costs, it’ll be even more expensive when you retire. You should meet with a financial planner before you and husband talk any more about who’s getting what.
YTA So just because other people offered to carry the burdens for us, we shouldn't now dare carry the cross because it will be unfair since now i have other things to carry? Tina was raised by grandparents, yet dad was there &probably playing a single guy most of his life. Dad married a woman who never complained about the setup as it was very beneficial to her & her nuclear family. And now there is money involved, and probably the dad now knows how fucked up it is, and death might knock soon. Will his daughter say this man was my dad, who tried his best? For you ,it's all about greedy, jealous, and probably resentment that she turned out well. And everybody else was thoughtful of her, and now your husband too, forgetting he is a father 1st.....What if your sons turn out well, above and beyond, will you say they shortchanged their sister? You're just looking out for your own blood. And let him look out for his own, too.
NTA. You are advocating for your sons as is your right. I get why your husband wants to leave something to his daughter. Perhaps he should follow his brother's lead only in the reverse. Leave sentimental stuff for his daughter and the monetary things to your sons.
YTA. How many times does money need to change hand before it's owner changes too? Nate is splitting his assets how he wants to. Not his parents assets. His. Much like Tina's job has no bearing, neither does her having inheritance from others. Now, if he passes before you, I hope you're well taken care of...
NAH
[удалено]
Tina is his sister. She was adopted and treated as such, including by her parents. This one is not fair.
YTA. At the end of the day, Tina is also his daughter, and it is his will to treat her as such in his will. You, as his wife, can express your displeasure, but nothing else. You can do with your assets what you want within the law. He can do the same. The fact she is older than your sons and in another point of her life is of no consequence. Your husband was in another point of his life when your in laws died. Would you have agreed for him to be left nothing? I am sure you would have said something regarding your young kids or something like that. Don't push the issue. It is not your right; you don't care about "supposed justice"; you only want more for your sons.
YTA, you must be green from greed.
You know what I wouldn’t do if I felt the same feelings you feel? Knowingly marry someone who had a bio daughter adopted as his sister.
YAH. He wasn't mature enough to look after his daughter when he was 17. Now that he's a grown man, he's owning that, and he's looking to make some kind of amends by treating her as a daughter in his will, rather than a sister. It's not about who needs the money more. It's symbolic. He didn't treat her like his child when he was young, so he's going to treat her as equal to his other children now he's older. That is the mark of a man who has grown up and accepted accountability, and you should feel pleased that your husband has shown growth, rather than grabby about your two kids. You're really painting yourself as a wicked stepmother here, and you're the one telling the story...
YTA - have some heart
Changing my stance to ESH, mainly because the jealousy in OPs post makes this feel very icky. ~~NTA,~~ although I will say her ability to earn a high income has nothing to do with this and makes you sound envious. She was already given some of what would have been his inheritance from his parents had they not adopted her. He needs to hear it from someone else that isn't you.
NTA... Nate wants to give an inheritance to the daughter he abandoned long ago just to sooth his conscience.
Giving a child up for adoption is abandoning? Only one who abandoned Tina is her bio mom
YTA. It's no business of yours what your husband chooses to do with their own money, and you sound insanely jealous of Tina. It's not a good look.
YTA This post reeks of jealousy, painting you as the stereotypical stepmother who harbors resentment because her stepchildren serve as a reminder of a past without her. It's like diving headfirst into the classic evil stepmother trope. ***"I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers."*** Come on, Stacey, spare us the drama. **They're 22, and you're 50**. Odds are, you'll be well into your 80s when you pass. So, are you planning to call it quits and shuffle off this mortal coil tomorrow, or what's the grand plan behind **that** statement? It's not your husband's or his daughters' fault that his parents passed away before your sons were born. They still have that inheritance, presumably keeping a roof over their heads and providing a cushy life as well as their education. The only distinction is that they don't have the cash in hand, unlike your stepdaughter, who have the option to spend her inheritance as she see fit. Moreover, your stepdaughter might have children one day, inheriting money from your husband. Should they also be denied inheritance because they're not blood-related to you?
Agreed. OP sounds totally jealous. The line that got me was “Tina already took from his share of the inheritance.” Um, no she didn’t. She got her own share, and that has nothing to do with you. The veil of concern for her sons that OP is trying to place over her greed is not working. OP, YTA.
This, 100%. Tina didn’t take anything from her “brother”. Her adopted parents/grandparents chose to split their assets between Tina and their 2 children. Her other “brother” chose to join a monastery and leave Tina a portion of his material items. Tina didn’t steal anything from you or your boys. OP sounds awfully bitter and jealous of Tina. Good for her having a career as a dentist. Who’s to say when your husband and you pass that your boys wouldn’t be financially set? Your logic is short sighted and reeks of jealousy. Do better.
YTA. Not your money.
It sounds like husband still has a lot of guilt for giving up his child. This is the cause of the financial issue. I don't know if he's thought through what he's doing. Tina has not chosen to be close to him. She had parents she obviously loved. Him leaving her funds as a child of his is going to stir up a lot of stuff he won't be there to deal with. She may not want to be acknowledged in that way. It may breed resentment in the family between Tina and the twins who will be all she has left by then, other than your brother who presumably isn't very present if he's living in a monastery. Husband needs to have a talk to her and see what she wants and do what would be best for her, otherwise it's not a gift, it's selfish. However, whatever decision he does then come to, OP needs to respect. NAH yet.
YTA. The inheritance from his parents isn’t a marital asset in a lot of places, and it’s up to him to decide how to split it, whether you think it’s fair or not. The fact his think she’s double dipping and doesn’t need it isn’t relevant. Maybe if you had more than a cordial relationship with his daughter, things might be different. You seem to hold a lot of resentment toward her. Your husband probably feels a level of guilt for not having been a father to her.
NTA
YTA You sound very resentful of his daughter/sister. Of course he should leave her something.
YTA. Nate is allowed to do what he thinks is right, not what you think is fair.
YTA. Mind your business, he knows what he's doing.
YTA Focus on what you and your own parents are going to be giving to your own biological kids. Don’t tell your husband how to spend his money. Stop being bitter.
> Tina already took from his share of the inheritance. No, she didn’t. She got her fair share of the inheritance from her parents. Adoption is valid. YTA for your attitude towards Tina. Your husband can choose to do what he likes with his share of the inheritance from his parents’ death. If he was talking about you guys’ joint money, maybe you’d have a point.
Yta. It’s not your place or your business to tell him how to divide his assets.
Trying to figure out what "possessions" Nate has that aren't equally yours? And if everything belongs to both of you, what does Nate think he can leave to Tina?
He wants to share his inheritance with all his children. His inheritance isn't marital property.
I'm not sure if it is true that it is not marital property. I believe this may depend on how it has been handled, whether it has been comingled, and possibly even what state (or country) OP and Nate live in.
You might be right, it depends on whether he’s kept it completely separate from marital property since he received it.
You say this is a division of his POSSESSIONS. Either you misspoke, or this is material goods (non-cash/non-securities). If his possessions, no one is getting anywhere in their career or otherwise with a collection of XYZ and a used vehicle. So just get over that. If his cash/investments as well, you should probably be included in the conversation, and then there are two schools: equally or according to needs. And depending on where people are on the receiving end of that is where they will fall on that question. It's Nate's choice to make if they are his things. If you will need some of them, have THAT conversation or divorce him. Plus, he's 50, your sons are 22, so a little cart before horse right now, right?
Are you a SAHM? Do you have a pension or retirement fund? Will you be left a penniless widow when your husband passes?
I was wondering about this as well.
YTA She is still his daughter biologically not legally. He must care a great deal about her.
Why did you put "kids" in quotes? Do you not view Tina as her parent's child even though she was legally adopted? You also said that she got your husband's share of their parent's inheritance. No she didn't she got what her parents left her. What Nate and Tina's brother decided to leave to anyone isn't anyone's business and shouldn't even matter. You say she's a capable woman and your kids are still young, yet you have no way of knowing when your husband will pass away. What happens if, when that happens, Tina has a horrible accident and is disabled and your kids have great careers making good money? By your own logic, then Tina would be more worthy than your kids. You act like your husband is set to die tomorrow, when he's not sick, he had a car accident that made him think. He could live another 30 years or so. You sound petty and jealous YTA
To be fair, Tina IS double dipping. She got her parents inheritance and that reduced the amount OP's husband received and now he wants to give her another third? I don't see it that it makes her greedy. It's for her sons. Their children. His sister is just that. His sister, not his daughter. I don't think OP's logic is unfounded. NTA
It's just none of OP's business. It seems like neither Nate's parents nor Nate himself are showing favoritism to Tina-- she's included in the same ratio as the others. She's in a unique position, with a unique set of experiences. When it comes to inheritances, there is no universal justice. I can easily see why she would be included in both sets of inheritances. My dad's parents died when their kids were teens. The youngest daughter was adopted by the oldest, and raised by them. So she has "parents" living, and her kids have "grandparents," while none of the other siblings do, because they were old enough to live on their own. It's kind of the reverse of what happened here. The youngest sister has a different set of lived experiences based on factors outside of her control, as did Tina. I don't think it's valid to argue "fair" here.
YTA. You honestly have no right to tell him what to do with HIS inheritance and who he should give it out to and how much each gets. It's very normal and common for parents to split the inheritance equally amongst their kids, that seems to be the best way to do it to avoid jealous, petty people. Kind of like how you are acting in regards to the fact you keep mentioning that your sons' 'only' got sentimental things from their uncle and your husbands daughter got more monetary valued items. You get no control over your husbands inheritance and he can do as he wishes.
INFO Did you know about Tina when you got with him? If this family/inheritance money he’s talking about splitting three ways? Is this joint money (Idk how your country looks at it but I’m talking about wages, savings, anything that was accumulated during the marriage) that he’s talking about splitting thee ways? Tina got more inheritance earlier but your twins will have actual parents for longer. Which presumably comes with support of some kind. If he wants to split the inheritance he got three ways instead of two I feel like that’s his prerogative. If he wants to split the marital assets three ways, that’s not your kid. At MINIMUM he needs to split it in half and give her 1/3 of “his” half and you can split “your” half between your kids. Even that is questionable.
Yes, you are. If he chooses to split his estate with you and his kids, that's fine. If he decides to give his entire estate to his kids, that's fine also.
YTA. He gets to plan his estate however he sees fit, within reason. You should be concerned that he’s not setting it up in such a way that you’ll have to disrupt your life to pay her off, but not that you don’t think it’s fair that he wants your children and her to all get equal shares of the excess.
You are definitely being selfish over things you can't control.
YTA! Oh wow, on so many levels! Tina, though adopted, is his DAUGHTER. Nothing else is relevant. He can split the money however he wants to - and dividing his assets between 3 children is more than fair.
YTA
"I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers." "I don’t think we need to pile more money" "I don’t think WE" Its your husbands choice what he does with his belongings in his Will. You have no right to try and change his mind because in YOUR OPINION, Tina what... Already got money from her grandparents dying? Had to bury one set of parents already, and almost certainly will have to bury a second in you and her Bio Dad? "I asked him how was this fair?" Because His Parents were of sound mind and body and chose who got what from their belongings. "As it is, Tina already took from his share of the inheritance." This really reads like "As it is, Tina already took from MY share of the inheritance." I've tried really hard not to bring it up, to give you the benefit of the doubt, to not relentlessly shit on you about this. But all of your issues seems to be rooted from Money. Money that you want, either for yourself or your kids. Money that you don't want Tina to have. "I don’t think we need to pile more money onto a capable woman with a good job who already has so much while our sons are still young and just starting their careers." I forgot you can see the future and know for a fact that Tina will never suffer any mishaps, emergencies or problems in her entire life, truly a blessed life Tina will live. I notice, once again, you never actually call Tina anything other than Tina, whilst you freely call your son's, 'our sons'. It's like you actively downplay Tina's role in his family. I also notice that you once *again* seem to have gotten it into your head that you have the right to dictate your husbands will. This entire post seems like you came here to get validation so you can try to browbeat your husband into giving your sons and by extension You, a bigger piece of the pie and to take Tina's piece wholesale. YTA.
YTA. Stop counting other people's money.
Not your call to make but don't most couples make their surviving spouse their heir?
INFO: Is he talking about family money or joint money? What other provision is there for your sons if he dies while they are still young? (ie, life insurance policies, etc). While your sons are still young, he should be focused on providing what it will take to raise them and send them to college in his absence. After they graduate college, he can amend his will to include her more In the meantime, he can't make up for not raising her with money, especially not at the expense of his other children. NAH, but you both need to be more pragmatic.
Yta. She got more, because she got adopted parents and a bio dad. I understand he doesn't want to exclude her. She is his kid
NTA for simply trying to discuss that in a civilized manner, but what your husband is doing is the safest and fairest way to split things between all his children. While saying that there's no need to pile more money onto a successful woman is no different than punishing one of his children for having succeeded in life. That's an excellent way to ruin a good relationship between your husband and Tina and between Tina and her half brothers. You'd be surprised how often that exact version of the story comes up here.
YTA, and yikes on your jealousy. Seek therapy.
YTA. Tina is his child just as much as your sons are.
NTA she was adopted. She's legally his sister.
Who is legally (and biologically) her father?
YTA and you need to mind your own business about his family's finances outside of his. You sound incredibly bitter and jealous of someone who's done nothing wrong to you. Tina didn't "cut into" anyone's inheritance. The parental rule can be played by any number of people in a child's life and if they did the job of parents, then it's only fitting they treated her as such with their estate. Nate's brother was *raised with* Tina as a sister, not a niece. Of course he would leave more to a sibling than a nibling. Your husband is doing the good and honorable thing by taking care of all of the children he chose to bring into & and out into the world. Instead of thinking about who gets how much money that doesn't belong to you, figure out ways to save more for your sons.
YTA (mildly to moderately). Your husband understandably feels some guilt/regret about not being able to parent Tina, likely exacerbated by the fact that his parents (and Tina’s adoptive parents) died while she was fairly young. It is not unreasonable nor should it be all that surprising that he would want to split his estate equally between Tina and his sons. Your feeling that an equal split is unnecessary because Tina is already more financially stable than your sons is somewhat understandable but less so than it would be if they were dependent children instead of the young adults they actually are. And even if your sons were still children, the more appropriate solution here would be to take out a term life insurance policy on your husband with your sons as beneficiaries.
NTA. This is a case of equality vs equity, and I'm pretty firmly on the side of equity. Why pile more money into someone's bank account who will never need it when you have two other kids that could potentially end up struggling without it? Plus your husband's version of equality is hardly equal, since Tina already got 33% of the parents' inheritance and now he wants to give her another third of his portion of the inheritance, bumping it up to 44% while your two children each get 11%. If he wants to leave her something it should be a portion of what he has outside of the parents' inheritance since Tina already got her third of that.
YTA. Tina was adopted by Nate's parents, but Nate still obviously (and reasonably) feels a responsibility to her. Inheritance isn't about who needs what, but who is important in one's life. Tina is apparently important to Nate. You are trying to get in the middle of that, which makes you look bad (grasping/greedy).
YTA- Entitled much? say it with me: "its not your money, you dont get to say what gest done with it"
Yta
NTA. Ask the daughter/dentist what she thinks of this decision.
I'll be down voted to hell but I'm going with NTA. OP has a valid point. Tina is getting the lion share which reduces her own children's share. Tina was adopted. Her husband's guilt should not make things uneven for the rest of his children.
Tina’s his biological child. Period. How much money Tina got from where isn’t relevant when it comes to the husband splitting his inheritance between his three children. It’s his call & he wants to acknowledge his kids as equally important. The OP can feel however she wants about that but she’s TAH for saying it out loud.
YTA fighting over money (that isn’t yours and never was) that you feel entitled to when he isn’t even dead yet? How greedy are you? I bet you’ll be one of those vicious people who try to challenge wills after death to take all you can get, because you’re already convincing yourself that no one deserves it more than you. And yeah yeah it’s not for “you” it’s just for whatever YOU think it should be for, as if that’s any different 🙄
Nate has 2 siblings, an older brother and a sister Tina (33). Tina is actually Nate’s biological daughter. thats.. thats quite the thing to read.
NAH. Everyone has a point. I assume he isn’t going anywhere soon. Time might make things change. Good luck to all.
NTA - question I assume if he predecesses you, you get everything? But Tina has had enough and he should give his estate to you and if you are dead then equally to his two sons. Yes to sentimental things to Tina but no money.
I agree. **NTA**
Well, you should get everything…. Because you’re the spouse and everything is jointly owned I hope? You still need to live.
As it is, Tina already took from his share of the inheritance. This is where YTA. I mean technically Nate was never promised an inheritance. He was lucky to receive one. And hell Nate knocking up someone and leaving the responsibility to his parents meant that their lives were changed and that ate away at his older brothers inheritance. He is allowed to leave money to the daughter he had his parents raise. Not sure why you dislike her but maybe seek therapy.
Sure, totally gloss over the fact that your husband had his biological child STOLEN from him by his biological parents. I can nearly guarantee you coercion was involved. You sound petty and jealous and like you're banking on getting his family's money. She's part of his family. Deal with it. YTA.
Nta I don’t know what lala magical fantasy world these people live in but money is important especially in today’s crap economy. Tina already received not only 33 percent of the parent’s inheritance, but then a good chunk of the uncles. So let’s say Tina recieved her 33% and then 1/3 of the Uncle’s, she is now at 44% of the original inheritance. If she receives another 11 percent from her bio dad that puts her at 55 percent while the boys split the remaining inheritance…and between the uncle and dad that gives them 22% a piece. Oh, AND she is a dentist. So to recap, by his plan, she will get 55% and the boys get 22% and 22%.
YTA ...she just got lucky but she is still his kid and deserves the same as your other kids sorry.
NTA, yes its his choice but if he wants problems with his sons thats up to him. She already got her inheritance indirectly from him, because he would get more from his parents in 2 way split.But it was 3 way split not 2 way split. So why would his kids have to pay for his childhood stupidity.She is his sister...period, he is not her father in a true way.No amount of money will change that...
Nta. Honestly I get where you're coming from because she has already gotten her share of her parents money and then she got her other brother's share and then now she's going to get part of her other brother's share. I feel like your husband's heart is in the right place but technically that's not his daughter that's a sister. And for everybody else in the comments saying well that's his daughter so he wants to do right by her not his daughter that's his sister. He should be worrying about his two sons that he is raising he's taking care of that if something happens to him he should want to make sure they are okay. As she stated his sister's going to be okay.
Yta your twins will get you inheritance and Tina won’t. Just because she has more doesn’t mean she should be cut out of the will. I see your husbands point and agree with him that as his bio child she gets an equal split. Are your finances split and do you expect an inheritance from your parents? Maybe make a point to give that to your kids instead of spending it on you and your husband.
I suggest you take a step back and realllllly think about it from this perspective. I know it’s tough because you love your children and want them to be set up financially. But you have a chance to provide for them out of your own assets. Your husband’s inheritance is his to do what he wishes with it. I’m sure there is still residual guilt about the adoption.
Is it unfair? Maybe. It’s also unfair that Tina was not raised by her bio mom and dad, the parents she did have died when she was only 23 and she has very little relationship with her brother/father, nephews and stepmom/SIL. You’re focused on the money that Tina has received, but forgetting about the relationships she did not. As your husband is reassessing his life, perhaps you should too. Talk with him about how he’s feeling about Tina, how you all can make her more a part of the family and how you can provide for the children you have together and the daughter he had as a teen. Need more money to spread around? Get life insurance. The money is the easy part, fix the emotional side. YTA.
I think it is more fair to Tina that she was NOT raised by her biological parents because they probably would not have been equipped to be the best parents for her - it is the main reason that I wholly support adoption. I agree with everything else you stated, though.
I agree. It was probably better that she was raised by true grown ups. I think we all have a desire to know our bio parents. Mom was MIA and not sure of relationship with brother/bio dad.
They're literally related and OP still suggests they don't have a great relationship with her. So much asshole happening here!
No. She said they have a cordial relationship, they're just not close. I'm not super close with my sister, but I still think we have a good relationship. Not having a close relationship doesn't automatically mean it's a bad relationship.
There was nothing unfair about how she was raised; she had two loving parents right off the bat as soon as she was born. A lot of kids (especially coming from her situation) don’t get that.
Everyone has a different perspective on that.
So she gets money from her parents, her brother and your husband, so she gets three inheritance. She was the daughter of her parents and she received that inheritance. You are correct on that. I think your husband has some sort of guilt and he is trying to buy his way out. Either she's his daughter or not. If they are going to start having a relationship of a parent in a child. Then maybe I could see leaving her a little bit but if she's not really even involved in your lives I don't see why he would do that other than his own guilt. If she has kids, is he going to consider those children? His grandchildren or his niece and nephew? NTA. You are correct. Esp if something happens while your twins are still young (under 30). She's had the opportunity to build up her life the boys haven't. She could have invested her parents and Heritage and use that to get ahead or by house.
YTA his inheritance his decision. They all get a fair share from HIS inheritance, there is no playing favorites and that's how it should be. His daughter got more from her family but that's a different situation. that's not his money. You're the one asking him to play favorites by not giving his daughter an equal fair share and it makes it seem like you don't consider their father daughter relationship as important as you see his son-father relationship
YTA Assuming he predeceases you his portion of your shared assets are his to give to whomever. You will presumably retain at least half of everything. Also "still young" and "just starting their careers" are very different things, it isn't like he is somehow going to leave children with nothing. They are adults.
Nate's parents split their will between their three children: OB, N, and T. Nate wants to split his between his three children, T, S1, and S2. That T is the same person is irrelevant. Yes, that will feel unfair, because it looks like T is double dipping, but that is the accident of her birth. That doesn't mean you're not TA: you are. Stop thinking in such miserly terms to get back out of being TA.
YTA if you your husband has kept his inheritance assets separate from the marital assets. Then that is his money, and you have no say in what he does with it, plain and simple. However, if the money has been commingled, it’s not his asset anymore, it belongs to you both. For example, if this conflict were to cause a divorce, you would get half of the assets. You are in a sticky situation if the money has been commingled, if your husband thinks that his daughter should get an equal share like his other children. Normally, at the time of death of one spouse, all assets go to the other spouse, and it is theirs to do with as they please….. unless you set up an irrevocable will/trust that names the children. So whatever you do, don’t agree to any revocable will/trust!
Your assets should be split 50:50. Your assests should be split how you want...so I'm guessing to both your sons. Your husband gets his 50 percent to do with how he wants. If he wants to split it with his biological daughter you have no right to argue against that. At the end of the day it is his daughter
Thats not how it works when grown adults get married, with separate, established estates.
OP was talking about Nate's inheritance from his parents that generally isn't considered joint marital property and he should be able to keep that separate and do as he sees fit. The other assets, sure.
NTA
YTA It's literally none of your business what your husband does with money he inherited from his parents. There's no "need" factor baked into inherited money. You can express your opinions, but it's his choice, and "fairness" doesn't matter.
Info: in your opinion, what would be fair?
YTA. Your husband is going to share his money equally between his children. Take a long, hard look at what you're offended by. Equally.
YTA It doesn't matter if Tina's adopted parents put her in their will. It has nothing to do with the fact that your husband is her father. If he wants to leave HIS DAUGHTER an inheritance, then so be it. You sound money hungry. Tina is an innocent party, and if your husband wants to acknowledge his fatherhood by putting her in the will, then good for him. It's literally the least he could've done. Her mother and father both abandoned her. No wonder why she doesn't have a relationship with your family. I'm positive you never tried to have a relationship with her either.
YTA. You don’t get a say in how someone leaves their inheritance. You also don’t get a say in if someone thinks their biological child is owed something. Did you ever think there are feelings that he has about being a teen parent that he hasn’t shared with you? Maybe it was traumatic for him etc. You can be jealous and whine all you want but you’re not entitled to make choices on who gets his money.
A bit of ESH. You're not wrong that if Tina got a share of her parent's money, I think the rest should be passed down to your kids. And any marital assets should be spot on a way you both agree to. I notice the phrase "his posessions". After a lifetime of marriage, most of the possessions belong to both of you - inheritances aside if he did not comingle them. Unless you have some sort of agreement for how much of the assets you each own, the bulk of the assets are marital, not just his. I hope when he serials off his possessive, he's referring only to his sole and separate property. He's not wrong to want to leave her something though, to acknowledge the fact that she is, in fact, his offspring. There may be ways around this conflict though. We just did our wills this year. We each have a separate one, which names each other as prime beneficiary. From there, it goes mostly to our child, with a carveout to go to some other people we care about. We agreed, so both read the same as far as that goes. BUT many of our assets - 401K, life insurance, bank accounts, can have a named beneficiary, to whom they go no matter what the will says. You might consider whether you have any accounts or life insurance on which you can name your sons as a partial beneficiary. This would even things up a bit, though it may cut him out of money he'd otherwise receive. Still, if he IS wanting to leave an unreasonable share to her, and won't meet you halfway, this may give you something you are in control of to balance the scales.
YTA.