ex living in motel with children

[hexeliebe]

Just in case you actually care if you're right or wrong, check out the following:

Texas: Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (third parties may bring original action for custody of child);

Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (allowing court to grant visitation to interested parties).

Jacobs v. Balew, 765 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Ct. App. 1989) (stepparent does not have standing to seek custody absent another reason, such as the unfavorable environment provided by the parent).

American Bar Association Guide to Family Law. Chicago: Times Books, 1996. Self-Help KF505 .Z9 A47 1996.

John DeWitt. "Blood Ties: A Rationale for Child Visitation by Legal Strangers." 55 Washington and Lee Law Review 351 (1998).

Addresses issues that arise when "legal strangers" such as stepparents, foster parents, grandparents, or same-sex partners seek visitation rights. In several cases involving same-sex partners seeking custody of a former partner's biological child, the courts have ruled against in favor of the biological mother. Stepparents fare better with the courts; several states have statutes allowing visitation by stepparents and grandparents. The article notes that in Arizona, the law allows "any party" to request visitation (ARS 25-803 B). The author concludes that "courts and legislatures should support legal parents" rights to raise their children without unwanted interference from legal strangers," and that only on rare occasions should the court contradict a parent's decision about third party visitation.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Just in case you actually care if you're right or wrong, check out the following:

Texas: Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (third parties may bring original action for custody of child);

Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (allowing court to grant visitation to interested parties).

Jacobs v. Balew, 765 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Ct. App. 1989) (stepparent does not have standing to seek custody absent another reason, such as the unfavorable environment provided by the parent).

American Bar Association Guide to Family Law. Chicago: Times Books, 1996. Self-Help KF505 .Z9 A47 1996.

John DeWitt. "Blood Ties: A Rationale for Child Visitation by Legal Strangers." 55 Washington and Lee Law Review 351 (1998).

Addresses issues that arise when "legal strangers" such as stepparents, foster parents, grandparents, or same-sex partners seek visitation rights. In several cases involving same-sex partners seeking custody of a former partner's biological child, the courts have ruled against in favor of the biological mother. Stepparents fare better with the courts; several states have statutes allowing visitation by stepparents and grandparents. The article notes that in Arizona, the law allows "any party" to request visitation (ARS 25-803 B). The author concludes that "courts and legislatures should support legal parents" rights to raise their children without unwanted interference from legal strangers," and that only on rare occasions should the court contradict a parent's decision about third party visitation.

My response:

The problem with these publications, dear Hexy, is that they pre-date "Troxel". Remember, that case was decided in 2000. Most, if not all of the views expressed in these publications are no longer valid law.

IAAL

 

[hexeliebe]

Which is why I posted it. A history if you will. Besides, do you think this 'person' would know what you're talking about when you mention 'troxel'?

I have a feeling TexaxNative would simply tell us it doesn't apply because S/HE knows better. S/HE went through the same experience.

<note> although I have read troxel, (per your previous posts) I haven't actually studied it as I have these references

 

[TexasNative]

Just in case you actually care if you're right or wrong, check out the following:

Texas: Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (third parties may bring original action for custody of child);

Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.003 (West 1996) (allowing court to grant visitation to interested parties).

Jacobs v. Balew, 765 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Ct. App. 1989) (stepparent does not have standing to seek custody absent another reason, such as the unfavorable environment provided by the parent).

No where did I say "she" has the right to fight for visitation....As I stated "THEY", what she is referring to as "WE" have that right....As long as she is his wife, she has that right to be a part of "HIM" during this time...

American Bar Association Guide to Family Law. Chicago: Times Books, 1996. Self-Help KF505 .Z9 A47 1996.


John DeWitt. "Blood Ties: A Rationale for Child Visitation by Legal Strangers." 55 Washington and Lee Law Review 351 (1998).

Addresses issues that arise when "legal strangers" such as stepparents, foster parents, grandparents, or same-sex partners seek visitation rights. In several cases involving same-sex partners seeking custody of a former partner's biological child, the courts have ruled against in favor of the biological mother. Stepparents fare better with the courts; several states have statutes allowing visitation by stepparents and grandparents. The article notes that in Arizona, the law allows "any party" to request visitation (ARS 25-803 B). The author concludes that "courts and legislatures should support legal parents" rights to raise their children without unwanted interference from legal strangers," and that only on rare occasions should the court contradict a parent's decision about third party visitation.

You are "quoting" something (as stated above) of a "FORMER" partner.......No where does she say she is divorced and "still" wants visitation, she is stating "they", as she says "we", want our visitation.......Talk about confusing the poster....We went from "THEM" wanting their visitation, to them being divorced and her tryting to "take control" ........lol If you read the post you made, it clearly states:


"The author concludes that "courts and legislatures should support legal parents" rights to raise their children without unwanted interference from legal strangers," and that only on rare occasions should the court contradict a parent's decision about third party visitation.


HMMM NOW WHO HAS THE CHOICE????? On "RARE" occasions should the court contradict " A PARENT'S DECISION" about a third party visitation..........Looks like the parent has that choice.....

 

[hexeliebe]

The more you post the more idiotic you sound.

O.K. enjoy your delusions. You're not worth the effort.

 

[TexasNative]

Which is why I posted it. A history if you will. Besides, do you think this 'person' would know what you're talking about when you mention 'troxel'?

You knew this?????? You didn't know this you mean......lol You thought you were going to be smart on this one, but guess you got busted...........Go back to reading your books.....

I have a feeling TexaxNative would simply tell us it doesn't apply because S/HE knows better. S/HE went through the same experience.

TexaxNative...It is TEXAS.....How can you study the laws here in Texas if you can't even spell it.....


<note> although I have read troxel, (per your previous posts) I haven't actually studied it as I have these references

So just because you studied it, does that make you a pro? Guess you studied it so your an attorney now right????

 

[TexasNative]

The more you post the more idiotic you sound.

The reason I sound idiotic to you, is because you aren't smart enough to understand Intelligence.....

O.K. enjoy your delusions. You're not worth the effort.

The effort wasn't to try to prove something to me, the post is (again your off track) to help the original poster in her quest for advise. Sounds to me that you've been beat.........

 

[Tinaa]

TexasNative, please change your user name. I am embarrassed for you and do not want people thinking all Texans are idiots like you. Stop before you look like a complete moron.

 

[stealth2]

The problem is that what did or didn't happen to YOU may or may not be in the least bit applicable. It is unlikely that your situation is EXACTLY the same as hers. Are you in the same state(s) that apply in hers?

As for stepparents and their rights. Of course she can enforce her rules in her home. So can the child's friend's mother - in her home. But that's about it. Legally (unless a court says otherwise, and there ARE situations where they have), she has no more rights than a friend's parent or any other "stranger" to the child.

And (just one of my pet peeves - not being a b*tch) - you adviSe someone, but you give them adviCe.

 

[TexasNative]

TexasNative, please change your user name. I am embarrassed for you and do not want people thinking all Texans are idiots like you. Stop before you look like a complete moron.

No name change needed here.... As for "looking" like a moron, who can say that? I think by a post, someone could only "sound" like a moron..... And your post just made you sound that way....

 

[TexasNative]

The problem is that what did or didn't happen to YOU may or may not be in the least bit applicable. It is unlikely that your situation is EXACTLY the same as hers. Are you in the same state(s) that apply in hers?

My situation wasn't exactly the same as hers, but that doesn't mean that she still can't contact the Attorney General's Office, just like "we" did......That is where "we" were able to do something to where I could be involved as well.....

As for stepparents and their rights. Of course she can enforce her rules in her home. So can the child's friend's mother - in her home. But that's about it. Legally (unless a court says otherwise, and there ARE situations where they have), she has no more rights than a friend's parent or any other "stranger" to the child.

She can inforce her rules at anytime the child is in her custody, whether it be her home, the mall, the gas station, etc......It doesn't have to be in the home only....As for all her rights, some are limited as to what she can do....That is the reason I advised her to go to the Attorney General's Office... They have forms that the father and step mother can fill out that gives the step mother (or father) rights to anything pertaining to visitation, child support, court records, etc. Just something she can check out (as I stated before)....

And - you adviSe someone, but you give them adviCe.

Are you a Spelling Teacher by chance? lol

 

[stealth2]

Are you a Spelling Teacher by chance? lol

LOL No, I'm not. Tho I do make a living correcting such errors.

 

[TexasNative]

LOL No, I'm not. Tho I do make a living correcting such errors.

I guess what they say is true.... You learn something new everyday...lol

 

[stealth2]

I guess what they say is true.... You learn something new everyday...lol

And I've found that to generally be a good thing.

 

[TexasNative]

And I've found that to generally be a good thing.

I do agree with you there.