Savings Accounts and Children (Step Family)

clearingout

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Persoanlly i would open a savings acc for your daughter and start saving and let your husband sort out your step daughters acc...

how can they do that when they have pooled their money, though?

Person_one

Maybe theit should be something added in to the wedding ceremony when either already has children:

"I hereby swear that I accept your children as an equal part of our loving family."

You knew he had a daughter, if you didn't want any responsibility for her you shouldn't have married him.

Poor kid has to deal with her parents splitting up which is still tough no matter how common it is these days, then her mum doesn't work so she has an austere home life, then her stepmum makes it clear that she's only a half member of her dad's new family.

Treat them equally. She is a child of your marriage and a part of your family just as much as the ones that you share DNA with.

moneybags13

clearingout wrote: »

so basically, 'cos you can't 'control' your step child in the way you would want, because you view her mother as 'second best' 'cos she's on benefits (probably because of her relationship breakdown as happens to many single mums at some point) and because neither mum or dad alone (or together) have as much money as you (moneybags, indeed), your step daughter is automatically irresponsible and therefore doesn't deserve to be treated the same by her father as your daughter?

You have opened a can of worms with your husband which, if you're not careful, will lead to your own lone-parenthood. Not that it will matter 'cos you're better than the rest of us, right?!

What?!

I haven't said her mother is seond best because she is on benefits, and I haven't said that I am better because I am not. In that respect though, I do not have a high opinion of people who choose to live on benefits when they do not need to. She is more than capable of getting a job, but chooses not to.

That is beside the point though, and is not the reason why I would want to give my SD less in savings. I feel that both parents each have a 50% responsibility over their child. Me and my husband combined have 100% responsibility for our child and her savings, my husband has 50% responsibility over my step daughter and her savings.

That was my logic when working out how much to pay and to who.

Bluemeanie_2

clearingout wrote: »

so basically, 'cos you can't 'control' your step child in the way you would want, because you view her mother as 'second best' 'cos she's on benefits (probably because of her relationship breakdown as happens to many single mums at some point) and because neither mum or dad alone (or together) have as much money as you (moneybags, indeed), your step daughter is automatically irresponsible and therefore doesn't deserve to be treated the same by her father as your daughter?

You have opened a can of worms with your husband which, if you're not careful, will lead to your own lone-parenthood. Not that it will matter 'cos you're better than the rest of us, right?!

I don't think this is what the OP was getting at, at all. She never said the Mother was second best at all. As you have suggested in the bit I have highlighted, the OP is saying she wants her husband to treat his kids the same. But at the end of the day, the step child is not hers.

moneybags13

fluffnutter wrote: »

How do you even know this will happen?? You say you love this child! You don't seem very impressed by her. Poor kid. How come your daughter will use her money for buying a house and travelling yet your step-daughter will use hers for partying and drugs? They've got the same father !!!!!!! One would hope they've got some consistency in upbringing. Or do you simply hate her mother. Because that's what it sounds like.

If you care about this child, then get involved in her life and be a good influence.

Did I say that my step daughter would be the one doing the drugs and partying? No! I would be able to stop my daughter from having her money if she was that way inclined but not with my step daughter.

Person_one

moneybags13 wrote: »

Did I say that my step daughter would be the one doing the drugs and partying? No! I would be able to stop my daughter from having her money if she was that way inclined but not with my step daughter.

Why not? If its coming from you and your husband jointly you'd make a joint decision wouldn't you?

fluffnutter

moneybags13 wrote: »

That is beside the point though, and is not the reason why I would want to give my SD less in savings. I feel that both parents each have a 50% responsibility over their child. Me and my husband combined have 100% responsibility for our child and her savings, my husband has 50% responsibility over my step daughter and her savings.

That was my logic when working out how much to pay and to who.

But that's not all you're saying though is it? You're saying that neither of your step-daughter's parents would bother saving for her. You're asking whether her savings are 'your job'. You're also saying that you don't want to save only for your money to be 'spent on partying and drugs'.

Like it or not, you're making judgements about all sorts of things. This is not about a nice neat calculation of who's responsible for what even though you'd like to portray it as such. This is about your resentment that your money is being spent on someone you don't value as much as your own child.

TBH, that's your right. No one's asking you to love your step-daughter as much (although it would be nice if you tried). The fact is, you say your money is pooled with your husband. In that case then, he's got the right to contribute equal amounts to each of his children.

clearingout

moneybags13 wrote: »

What?!

I haven't said her mother is seond best because she is on benefits, and I haven't said that I am better because I am not. In that respect though, I do not have a high opinion of people who choose to live on benefits when they do not need to. She is more than capable of getting a job, but chooses not to.

That is beside the point though, and is not the reason why I would want to give my SD less in savings. I feel that both parents each have a 50% responsibility over their child. Me and my husband combined have 100% responsibility for our child and her savings, my husband has 50% responsibility over my step daughter and her savings.

That was my logic when working out how much to pay and to who.

your attitude throughout this thread is one of a superior parent who knows better. Or at least that's how I read it.

You also know nothing at all of the mother's circumstances and whether or not she 'chooses' to live on benefits rather than work. You have no right to judge her on what your husband says - 'cos as all us nutter ex wives know, our ex husbands never, ever tell the new squeeze the truth of the matter! Unless you have been on benefits, you will struggle to understand how difficult it can be, particularly as a single parent, to come off them and make ends meet. I agree, of course, that it's no excuse not to work if you are able but sometimes getting your head round the bigger picture takes away some of the anger and frustration that occurs with 'blended' families and the lurking ex!

I have said I appreciate your frustration. But what I don't understand is why you are happy to pool your funds with your husband in all areas other than saving for your respective children. You are, seriously, setting yourself up for problems in your relationship.

fluffnutter

moneybags13 wrote: »

Did I say that my step daughter would be the one doing the drugs and partying? No!

That's a bit of a disingenuous response. In the context of talking about paying money into a saving account for your step-daughter you make the point that you don't want your money to be spent on partying on drugs.

Who else are you talking about then??

moneybags13

fluffnutter wrote: »

That's a bit of a disingenuous response. In the context of talking about paying money into a saving account for your step-daughter you make the point that you don't want your money to be spent on partying on drugs.

Who else are you talking about then??

If you read my replies carefully you would know that I was referring to BOTH of them.