Omg you have opened a kettle of fish in my house hood tonight lol
I have only been living with my partner for a few months and we have not had this discussion lol

My partner and I have been together for years and have four children - two mine and two his. We are not getting married because having both done it before there is no feeling we need to do it again.
Financially he provides for his children and I provide for mine. The wills stipulate his super goes to his children and mine go to mine. Essentially anything in individual names will go to the individuals children. Joint assets will be shared evenly. If either party die the partner retains use of the house until their death or a time when they no longer want to be there. The family home is currently in my name and was bought by me and when it is sold proceeds will go to my children.
I don’t need to provide for his kids as they have two parents. My kids just have me.

You are right he is wrong. I wouldnt be happy with this either.

Superannuation is dealt with separately from a will so any super you have will go to the beneficiaries you've nominated.

If the title of your property is in both names as tenants in common the house will automatically pass to the surviving spouse regardless of what the will stipulates as tenants in common do not have shares, they both own 100% of the property. It's the same for joint bank accounts.

If the property is only in one name or in both as joint tenants, which is when the share is determined at the time of purchase, then that share can be willed to anyone. Same with individual bank accounts. However a spouse can absolutely make claim for the lot irrespective of what the Will stipulates.

Do you share any kids together? Is the house in both your names?

Maybe you should stay in your own hombres 5 but share time between them?
This is a sticky situation but i wish you all the best.

It doesnt actually matter that much what your will says, the court will do what is fair, taking into account what you each bought to the relationship. They will consider your wishes sure but it wont override the ultimate decision if the wishes are unfair.
But Im confused about the house. Why would it go only to his children? Is it his house or both of yours.

When my partner and I decided to move in I had a financially binding agreement arranged which protected all my assets for my children only.... that included our family home which I paid for which entitles him to retain and live in until his death at which time it will be sold and the money dispersed to my children and not his. There were stipulations no new spouse or partner could retain the property after his death.
I had two investment properties and substantially more super and savings than him.
Essentially it reads that was is retained solely in my name is for my kids upon my death. Super is for my kids upon my death. All property retained in my name only is for my kids upon my death. All accounts and any property retained in joint names is considered “family property” to be retained by him 100% - but we will never have jointly owned anything. It is the same for him in reverse.

I’m sorry but it’s just not ok for anyone to spend their life working their ass off to pay for someone else’s kids .... especially when they have two surviving parents. Mine only gave me.

As others said make sure your name is on the deeds to the house, if not don't hand over your money. Do your own wills separately and leave everything to your own children.

Why does he get to make all the decisions?

I would not be happy with that at all. After years together you and your kids should not be left penniless.
If you have been, or could be, together 40 years, then that obviously counts for nothing with him.

As men get older they seem to become more and more concerned about, and focussed on, their own biological kids, to the exclusion of everyone and everything else.

If you are de facto now, you have much greater rights than you would if you were married. So its no advantage to you at all.

In this situation of mixed families, you should never sign any will without getting your own independent legal advice. If you were going to even have a "financial agreement" you would both be required to obtain independent legal advice.
I especially recommend that you get independent legal advice yourself.

I was in a defacto relationship, we had a financial agreement, (fully developed and produced by lawyers), and I paid totally cash for the house. He put in nothing. I paid all rates and any improvements. And also most of everything else.

His family thought they were entitled to half the house, and it cost me $70,000 in legal fees to defend the claim, plus a $30,000 payout from me after court proceedings. There were no dependent children when we got together.
I was just lucky I had the money to defend it.
Do not underestimate the cost of the consequential costs of legal action if it becomes a mess. Get legal advice before you sign anything.

In a previous relationship I found out my defacto was siphoning off money to his kids, and protesting about any expenditure for things my kids required. In the end he went bankrupt, and we both lost all of our substantial assets, so there was nothing to share. I had to start again from zero. And he had been using the business that I was not involved in, but was mortgaged against our previously freehold house, to enrich his kids. We had been together 18 years and our 4 kids were "supposedly" treated equally.
There are lots of traps. You really need good legal advice.

I have one child and my husband has two ( no kids together), I have left everything to my child not my husband. My life insurance and super goes into a trust for my child, and my half of the house goes to my child, but my husband has a life time tendency.

The reason for this so I can continue to support my child. If I leave everything to my husband there is no guarantee that my child will see any of it.

Go and see a lawyer. If he wants to maté sure his kids are taken care of, he can give you a life interest in the family home you share so you won’t be forced to sell it. He may be worried that if he dies in the near future his kids won’t be taken care of if he leaves you with everything and you don’t pass on the money they are entitled to.

It’s really good that you are working this out now. Don’t be pushed into something you are unhappy about and don’t marry him until you’ve reached a good agreement. A good solicitor is worth it in these situations because they present all the possible options.

My SIL made her DH get an insurance policy just for his kids & she'd get the house & his Super (they have a DC together). Otherwise, if he passed, the step kids' mother would control the house as the kids were under 18 & as well as losing her partner, she would lose her home, or at least part control of it. They get along, but still not a nice thought!

I'd be making him understand as his partner he needs to consider & care how you'll be affected. I get that he wants to ensure his kids are taken care of, as stories of bio kids being left with nothing & partner's kids benefitting are everywhere. I'd be putting to him in reverse scenario - whoever the kids' trustees are would control your half of the house (trustee shouldn't be him, should be two people who won't benefit/are impartial). Would he want to be forced to move?

He can increase his Super insurance policy & entail both of those to his kids, then let you have the house so you're not left with nothing. Otherwise I would reconsider marriage or make damn sure I didn't contribute one cent more than half to the house & bills & save it for yourself & kids & making sure your will reflects that your half of the house/savings goes to your kids.