The original poster (OP), a 35-year-old woman, met her current fiancé two years ago. The relationship appears stable, as her four-year-old son gets along well with the fiancé, and even the OP’s ex-husband approves of him.
The central issue arose when the OP disclosed her finances for a prenuptial agreement. She had won a significant, though not life-changing, sum in the lottery three years prior, most of which (75%) was placed into a dedicated savings account for her son, accessible at age 21. Upon learning this account held five times more than his total assets, the fiancé became extremely angry, left the lawyer’s office, and refused contact for two days. This led the OP to end the relationship and ask for the ring back, but the fiancé returned a week later, now demanding a share of the money for his previously unmentioned five-year-old daughter, arguing it was fair since the money was won by luck.
Future ex-fiancé is angry because I don’t want to share my son’s money
As financial therapist Dr. Brad Klontz explains, “Financial infidelity—the secrecy surrounding money—is a major predictor of divorce.” While the OP was not secretive about the existence of the money, the fiancé’s reaction suggests a profound misunderstanding or misrepresentation of her financial reality, which he seems to have believed was much larger and potentially shared.
The fiancé’s behavior exhibits strong entitlement issues, particularly his justification that the money, obtained through luck rather than performance, should be shared, especially with a child he failed to disclose until the moment of maximum leverage. His immediate escalation from financial shock to demanding a split for a previously unknown child suggests a transactional view of the relationship, where financial security outweighed the relationship itself. The OP was correct in setting a firm boundary regarding her son’s protected funds and ending the relationship when his reaction proved his motivations were suspect.
The OP’s actions in returning the ring and terminating contact were appropriate responses to discovering a significant undisclosed dependent and witnessing a severe lack of respect for her autonomy and her existing child’s security. Moving forward, the OP should maintain the distance established and consider consulting legal counsel regarding the harassment. Future relationships should involve full transparency regarding personal assets and dependents from the outset to avoid similar power plays.
HERE’S HOW REDDIT BLEW UP AFTER HEARING THIS – PEOPLE COULDN’T BELIEVE IT.
The OP is currently facing emotional pressure and harassment after ending the engagement due to her fiancé’s reaction to her financial disclosures and subsequent demands regarding her son’s lottery winnings. The core conflict centers on the fiancé’s belief that his daughter should benefit from the OP’s luck-based windfall, directly opposing the OP’s decision to secure her existing child’s future with that money.
The situation forces a decision between honoring the financial commitment made to her son and navigating the demands of a partner who feels entitled to her assets based on the chance nature of the win. Should the OP ignore the external pressure and maintain her boundaries regarding her son’s inheritance, or is there an ethical obligation, given the new information about his daughter, to reconsider the allocation of funds?
