Help With Nosy Grandparents

[rmet4nzkx]

Everytime OP posts on one of her 2 threads we get a little more info. Now she says that they paid their attorney to inform BioMOm of her rights while she was sitting in jail, separated from all her children, because Dad got state Medi-aid. What was she informed? She also tells us that biomom was too young for children but not how young, or how old her husband was? Lots of facts left out. The Judge will decide the case based on the facts and the best interest of the child. Adopted or not, this child is a pawn. Even mother's addicted to METH are afforded more consideration than happened here. This will look very different with all the facts. Still, no one can say at this point how the judge will rule, but I will say that if there was no malice on the part of OP there should be no reason to be so defensive. I'm sorry, but it's leaving a bad taste in my mouth right now.

 

[LdiJ]

Sorry just can't stand anyone else trying to climb my case. Did not force biomom to do anything and I have tried since the beginning to help my child even before he was legally mine. My lawyer has told us that Troxel case and the fourteenth amendment will be ours and they should have filed before the adoption was finalized most of the web pages I have researched have said the same. Our lawyer should be truthful not just what we want to hear, otherwise are we not unprepared for what could happen?

Your attorney IS telling you the truth. Please don't let Rmet scare you. She honestly believes what she is saying, but she also honestly knows nothing about this particular area of law and persists in viewing it as no different than a parent vs parent case. She also gets really upset if she thinks that someone is either not telling the whole truth or is leaving something out of the story....and tends to put the worst connotation on that

.....oh, and by the way she is probably going to tell you that I have an "agenda" and that I give advice on this issue because I have a problem with my mother. (which is completely untrue, my mom is my best friend)...and she may also throw in a whole lot of other stuff that is equally untrue. I just thought I would get that out of the way.

There have been some really high profile cases in KY in the last couple of years which have established some solid case law. That combined with Troxel really makes it difficult for a grandparent to win a visitation lawsuit in KY. I can't guarantee that you won't encounter a judge that will "buck" the case law, but its not very likely...and if that happened you would have a strong shot on appeal. That is why its so important that you DO NOT agree to anything. That you make the judge hear the case on its merits and rule on its merits.

It can be difficult to stand your ground if you are being pressured to come to an agreement in mediation. So be prepared for that. I will tell you honestly, I have worked with thousands of parents over the last 10 years who were fighting grandparent visitation lawsuits. Much of what Rmet is telling you might have been valid pre-Troxel (pre June 2000) however since then it simply is NOT valid.

In all those years I have not encountered a single parent who made an agreement, who did not bitterly regret making that agreement later. The reason for that is because in a parent vs a third party case an agreement becomes somewhat like a contract...therefore very difficult to change....plus the agreement, and the period of time under which the agreement is used, gives the grandparents the "pre-established relationship" that can be so significant in these cases.

I am working with a family in another state right now that is dealing with the fall-out of just such an agreement. The child adamantly does not wish to visit the grandparents any longer (the grandparents are seriously bad-mouthing the parents and doing even worse things). The child's therapist is SCREAMING for the visitation to be stopped because of the damage its doing the child....yet the judge refuses to vacate the order because it was an "agreement". Therefore the parent have no choice but to spend the money to take it to appeal. Had the parents never made the agreement in the first place the grandparent might not have won visitation.....and the judge couldn't have used the agreement as an excuse to ignore the child's therapist.

So hang in there...stand your ground, listen to your attorney (who appears to know what he/she is talking about) and do what you believe is best for your child.

 

[bradybunchmom]

gp's have no rights

since the mother's rights were terminated,her parents are legal strangers,and have no rights.

 

[tigger22472]

since the mother's rights were terminated,her parents are legal strangers,and have no rights.

However they do have the right to sue and if they can prove they have had a long lasting, relationship with the child and that it's in the child's best interest they can be granted visition. In this particular case I don't think they would win by any means but just pointing out htat just because the bio did a TPR doesn't mean the parents lose all rights to sue for visitation.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Your attorney IS telling you the truth. Please don't let Rmet scare you. She honestly believes what she is saying, but she also honestly knows nothing about this particular area of law and persists in viewing it as no different than a parent vs parent case. She also gets really upset if she thinks that someone is either not telling the whole truth or is leaving something out of the story....and tends to put the worst connotation on that

.....oh, and by the way she is probably going to tell you that I have an "agenda" and that I give advice on this issue because I have a problem with my mother. (which is completely untrue, my mom is my best friend)...and she may also throw in a whole lot of other stuff that is equally untrue. I just thought I would get that out of the way.

There have been some really high profile cases in KY in the last couple of years which have established some solid case law. That combined with Troxel really makes it difficult for a grandparent to win a visitation lawsuit in KY. I can't guarantee that you won't encounter a judge that will "buck" the case law, but its not very likely...and if that happened you would have a strong shot on appeal. That is why its so important that you DO NOT agree to anything. That you make the judge hear the case on its merits and rule on its merits.

It can be difficult to stand your ground if you are being pressured to come to an agreement in mediation. So be prepared for that. I will tell you honestly, I have worked with thousands of parents over the last 10 years who were fighting grandparent visitation lawsuits. Much of what Rmet is telling you might have been valid pre-Troxel (pre June 2000) however since then it simply is NOT valid.

In all those years I have not encountered a single parent who made an agreement, who did not bitterly regret making that agreement later. The reason for that is because in a parent vs a third party case an agreement becomes somewhat like a contract...therefore very difficult to change....plus the agreement, and the period of time under which the agreement is used, gives the grandparents the "pre-established relationship" that can be so significant in these cases.

I am working with a family in another state right now that is dealing with the fall-out of just such an agreement. The child adamantly does not wish to visit the grandparents any longer (the grandparents are seriously bad-mouthing the parents and doing even worse things). The child's therapist is SCREAMING for the visitation to be stopped because of the damage its doing the child....yet the judge refuses to vacate the order because it was an "agreement". Therefore the parent have no choice but to spend the money to take it to appeal. Had the parents never made the agreement in the first place the grandparent might not have won visitation.....and the judge couldn't have used the agreement as an excuse to ignore the child's therapist.

So hang in there...stand your ground, listen to your attorney (who appears to know what he/she is talking about) and do what you believe is best for your child.

Laura (Ldij) has deleted some of the posts, she knows the ones I'm talking about because I refered to them in the past, such as the one about her daughter's legal problems because she was present at a murder and was on house arrest. She thinks because she deleted it that it didn't exist. There was a post where she complained about how controlling her mother was. Here is another thread where she tells the OP to disobey court orders, that she knows better than everyone else. https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=214101

Agenda? Laura is a part of a parent's group that fight's grandparent visitation and rights. So she has an admitted bias.
http://www.childcustody.org/
Re: Blagoyavich passed the Law for GP Visitation

From: Laura
Conditions of use policy: accept & agree
Date: 02 Sep 2004
Comments

Marc, its both more complicated than you are thinking and less complicated than you are thinking. Contact me at XXXXXXX and tell me your situation and we can talk about it. I am part of a parents rights activist group that was instrumental in getting the original IL statute declared unconsitutional. Please don't panic. The new IL law isn't perfect, and will probably eventually fail before the IL Supreme Court again (because it doesn't correct the original problems) but its better than the previous law. Larua

Re: It would never

From: Laura
Conditions of use: Accepted & Agree
Date: 06 Nov 2004
Comments

Ok guys...I have to interject a little realism here. This child is in a 50/50 timeshare with the parents. That means that each parents has their child only about 15 days per month and in all but one or two months a year, only 2 weekends per month. Therefore if grandma wants one weekend, then grandma's child (the parent) is only going to get to spend one weekend a month with their child. Since most parents are working parents...and don't get much "quality" time with their children on weeknights (between dinner, homework and baths) AND its a 50/50 timeshare to boot... its pretty darned selfish of grandma to think that she should get half of her child's quality time with the kid(s)! Lets be real here....."one weekend a month isn't much"...well yeah, its really is LOTS if a parent only gets two of them...and even more so in a 50/50 timeshare. In any case...it isn't going to happen. This one isn't a "winner" for grandma. This is one where I would be advising the parent to join one of the parent's right's groups who fight grandparent visitation so that they can learn how to represent themselves in court and avoid having to spend money on attorneys....because its a "no-brainer". The original poster can contact me at xxxxxx if she wants help. Laura

Re: does anyone know what I should expect?????

From: Laura
Conditions of use policy: accept & agree
Date: 16 Jan 2005
Comments

First, it would really be in your best interests to have an attorney for this case. Second, my recommendation is to agree to NOTHING in mediation. Grandparents are third parties and a judge cannot treat a grandparent vs parent case in the same manner as a parent vs parent case. Grandparents have no "automatic" rights. If you agree to something it becomes a contract of sorts and that makes things very complicated. I am part of a support group that helps parents deal with third party visitation cases...please contact me at xxxxx.....you need to understand what this kind of case is all about and how to fight it. Laura

 

[LdiJ]

Laura (Ldij) has deleted some of the posts, she knows the ones I'm talking about because I refered to them in the past, such as the one about her daughter's legal problems because she was present at a murder and was on house arrest. She thinks because she deleted it that it didn't exist. There was a post where she complained about how controlling her mother was. Here is another thread where she tells the OP to disobey court orders, that she knows better than everyone else. https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=214101

Agenda? Laura is a part of a parent's group that fight's grandparent visitation and rights. So she has an admitted bias.
http://www.childcustody.org/
Re: Blagoyavich passed the Law for GP Visitation

From: Laura
Conditions of use policy: accept & agree
Date: 02 Sep 2004
Comments

Marc, its both more complicated than you are thinking and less complicated than you are thinking. Contact me at XXXXXXX and tell me your situation and we can talk about it. I am part of a parents rights activist group that was instrumental in getting the original IL statute declared unconsitutional. Please don't panic. The new IL law isn't perfect, and will probably eventually fail before the IL Supreme Court again (because it doesn't correct the original problems) but its better than the previous law. Larua

Re: It would never

From: Laura
Conditions of use: Accepted & Agree
Date: 06 Nov 2004
Comments

Ok guys...I have to interject a little realism here. This child is in a 50/50 timeshare with the parents. That means that each parents has their child only about 15 days per month and in all but one or two months a year, only 2 weekends per month. Therefore if grandma wants one weekend, then grandma's child (the parent) is only going to get to spend one weekend a month with their child. Since most parents are working parents...and don't get much "quality" time with their children on weeknights (between dinner, homework and baths) AND its a 50/50 timeshare to boot... its pretty darned selfish of grandma to think that she should get half of her child's quality time with the kid(s)! Lets be real here....."one weekend a month isn't much"...well yeah, its really is LOTS if a parent only gets two of them...and even more so in a 50/50 timeshare. In any case...it isn't going to happen. This one isn't a "winner" for grandma. This is one where I would be advising the parent to join one of the parent's right's groups who fight grandparent visitation so that they can learn how to represent themselves in court and avoid having to spend money on attorneys....because its a "no-brainer". The original poster can contact me at xxxxxx if she wants help. Laura

Re: does anyone know what I should expect?????

From: Laura
Conditions of use policy: accept & agree
Date: 16 Jan 2005
Comments

First, it would really be in your best interests to have an attorney for this case. Second, my recommendation is to agree to NOTHING in mediation. Grandparents are third parties and a judge cannot treat a grandparent vs parent case in the same manner as a parent vs parent case. Grandparents have no "automatic" rights. If you agree to something it becomes a contract of sorts and that makes things very complicated. I am part of a support group that helps parents deal with third party visitation cases...please contact me at [email protected] need to understand what this kind of case is all about and how to fight it. Laura

Thank you Rmet. You have just given me what Mary wanted.

I have to say that its really sad that you continue to lie...and continue to "stalk" me off this board.

I am not the only person that you have lied about.....but I have to admit that I am the only person you have stalked off this board...I think...

 

[READYANN]

rmet

we did not get the lawyer to confront her and make her do anything. she called us from jail you don't seem to understand that. what parent would not jump when an absentee biomom finally says i am done it is over. it means that my child gets piece of mind and got some real time with the family without the mother out there somewhere. I do not feel i have to write a biography to ask some questions. It does not matter if the biomom was young she was an adult when she signed off. you are going off on this do you have some issues here?

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Thank you Rmet. You have just given me what Mary wanted.
Really? Mary can access the thread about your daughter you deleted. Everything is what you posted. I commented that some people have agendas, I didn't name names until you posted to me. OP needs objective advice, not biased advice.

I have to say that its really sad that you continue to lie...and continue to "stalk" me off this board. I didn't stalk you, you are the one who made those posts on the other board, I didn't post your email I x'd it out. I was only using your own words to show that you have a bias and an agenda. You have been asked by others to not post about subjects about which you know nothing, you have some compulsion to post advice that is not state specific, just a guess or an opinion, sometimes wrong or useless. You use absolutes. You insist a judge will rule a certain way when no one can determine ahead of time how a judge will rule. YOU tell people not to obey court orders. We can't do thet!

I am not the only person that you have lied about.....but I have to admit that I am the only person you have stalked off this board...I think...

I haven't lied about you, I quoted you, so unless you were lying in your posts, it shouldn't be a lie. Is there a problem pointing someone to somewhere else where you post advice, I should think you would be proud of your work, why do you do it in secret?

 

[rmet4nzkx]

we did not get the lawyer to confront her and make her do anything. she called us from jail you don't seem to understand that. what parent would not jump when an absentee biomom finally says i am done it is over. it means that my child gets piece of mind and got some real time with the family without the mother out there somewhere. I do not feel i have to write a biography to ask some questions. It does not matter if the biomom was young she was an adult when she signed off. you are going off on this do you have some issues here?

Why do you avoid the questions? Why is your son sad when he sees pictures of his biomom?

 

[LdiJ]

I haven't lied about you, I quoted you, so unless you were lying in your posts, it shouldn't be a lie. Is there a problem pointing someone to somewhere else where you post advice, I should think you would be proud of your work, why do you do it in secret?

Rmet...when you stated that my daughter witnessed a murder, you lied. When you stated that I had problems with my mother you lied. Neither of those were quotes...your lies have been pointed out to you multiple times, and you persist in continuing the lies. Again, you have done this multiple times, to multiple other people as well.

In every board I have every participated on its considered the ultimate in bad board etiquette to quote people's posts from other boards...because they are "out of context". Plus, the fact that you even went looking for them indicates your intent to "stalk".

Grow up.

 

[LdiJ]

we did not get the lawyer to confront her and make her do anything. she called us from jail you don't seem to understand that. what parent would not jump when an absentee biomom finally says i am done it is over. it means that my child gets piece of mind and got some real time with the family without the mother out there somewhere. I do not feel i have to write a biography to ask some questions. It does not matter if the biomom was young she was an adult when she signed off. you are going off on this do you have some issues here?

Please just ignore her. She has labeled you as the one in the wrong and no matter what you say she isn't going to change her mind. Plus, none of that is relevant legally. You have adopted the child. The bio-mother and her other children are now legal strangers.

Yes, the grandparents do have standing to sue. However, their odds of winning are not strong and you obviously have an attorney who is familiar with third party visitation cases and is on top of case law. Let your attorney do his/her job and don't worry about the fact that an anonymous stranger on an internet message board has decided that you are the "bad guy".

 

[READYANN]

people in cyberspace can be rude. thanks for the info and the support. everyone needs some support from time to time.

 

[bradybunchmom]

the child is no longer their grandchild.

im sorry tigger but you are wrong.the maternal grandparents are now legal strangers to the child,and dont have the right to sue for vistation.when the child was adopted,it ended the grandparents relationship with the child,thus,they dont have a case to sue for visitation.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Rmet...when you stated that my daughter witnessed a murder, you lied.
Laura,
You know you posted a thread about the situation with your daughter last summer or early fall but have since erased it because I made reference to it without quoting it since your daughter is a minor. I honestly think your supervision of your daughter is lax to allow her involvement in serious crime and that you should be devoting more time to her and less tme to making responses to posts here that contain incorrect or non relevant information. In you thread and other posts you made reference to, her arrest, involvement in with a murder commited by adults. You related that she was initially charged with driving the get away car but claimed she was in the back seat and was too young to drive anyway, there were other minors present. You talked in your thread about how unjust it was for minors to be held in solitary confinment in juvenile detention while waiting to be charged and for that reason you feared for her psychological health so you agreed to a plea bargin on a lesser charge in return for detention at home, rather than plead not guilty. You were not sure at one point if the charge would be murder or manslaughter and since you deleted the posts, how can we confirm? Later, you were upset because the minors who didn't plead, their charges were dismissed. You deleted this thread, Mary can retrieve it, you cannot manipulate reality, others remember this as well. It does not become a lie because you deleted it.


When you stated that I had problems with my mother you lied.
No, I didn't lie, actually since you delete posts to cover your tracks makes documenting difficult. I am sorry, I was mistaken, it was your GRANDMOTHER, thus explaining your agenda against grandparents rights. I found a reference you made that thankfully, I quoted, https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=208445
Actually I made some of the same references at that time and Mary didn't do anything to me, because what I said was true. Here is the actual link which I located this morning which you could not delete your post because the thread is locked, it is about your controlling grandmother
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=197095
09-27-2004
LdiJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by haiku
I am in a mood, so bear with me don't take it personally LOL

I don't think we have strayed from the control freak issue at all, see in my mind for someone to be a control freak, the OTHER person has to have an interest in some control also.......

Well that does make sense to a great extent. I myself had an excessively controlling grandmother and have an excessively controlling brother....so I know that it doesn't ALWAYS work that way...LOL Sometimes its just people that want to lives their lives without being "micro-managed".

It is a good thread to see your bias.
Here is something you posted about me which demonstrates that in your opinion I wasn't as biased as you. I try to look at things objectively, which doesn't always go over well when posters have strong personal agendas such as you have re grandparents rights. That's not my agenda. That's not why I am here.

You are wrong to "hassle" rmet for her posts. If anything she is normally far more "pro" father than I am.

Both of us see some problems for you and both of us are trying to explain those problems. If WE see them, so will a judge, GAL or evaluator.

Please, please, please....use paragraphs in your posts!!!!!!! They are extremely hard to read....and try to cut down the verbage. If you don't you will lose ground in court.

Neither of those were quotes...
Actually I couldn't quote because you deleted the ones about your daughter and I found the other one, you could have easily corrected me that it was your grand mother, not your mother. I have said I was sorry.

your lies have been pointed out to you multiple times, and you persist in continuing the lies. Again, you have done this multiple times, to multiple other people as well.
They are not lies, I have only quoted you when I was able because you have deleted posts, a sign of another motive. Of course you make unfounded accusations, and have before, as with deleting posts, that doesn't make them facts, nor does it make you capable to determine how a judge will decide a future matter nor give you the right to tell posters to defy court orders as you did in this thread, https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=214101 Please don't delete your posts here. Your posts go into depth not only to say defy a court order, but if OP consulted an attorney that they would say to follow the order as well, but that you believed the order would be incorrect. We can't advise posters to break the law or defy court orders, there is a process, due process, we can advise that, you want to go off line to conspire, Mary isn't going to condone that!

In every board I have every participated on its considered the ultimate in bad board etiquette to quote people's posts from other boards...because they are "out of context".
You brought up the issue of your agenda, it is a matter of facts and relevance not ediquette. Your quotes are not out of context and stand on their own, no matter where they are posted.

Plus, the fact that you even went looking for them indicates your intent to "stalk".
You said I lied, I proved you wrong with your own words, that is not stalking, that is evidence. You are only angry that you didn't or couldn't delete them as well. I quoted them before, so it is not like I was stalking you.

Grow up.

Laura, please get some counseling and try to understand why you are compelled to act as you do.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

people in cyberspace can be rude. thanks for the info and the support. everyone needs some support from time to time.

This is a legal forum, not a venting or support group. You will have to answer questions that you refused to answer here, you know the answers and why you refuse to answer, they will come into play when a judge decides your case no matter what Laura wants you to think. There is a reason your son is upset, please get him in counseling so he can deal with his loss rather than increasing it.
edit:
I see that you have locked you other thread:
Today,
READYANN
Junior Member
Yes I do realize that their are great people on these posts and am so grateful for them. Some people just can't get over their own issues. Thank you very much for all the advice. I have gained alot of knowledge through these posts and info in them.

Ann,
I don't have any issues with adoption, stepparent adoption, grandparents rights. I am trying to let you know that in the future, the facts of your case will be evaluated based on the facts, not on what anyone here says. You have not been forthright here, you will not have that option in court. You need to get your child into counseling and address his losses and why he gets upset or acts out, that is in his best interest, which is what so many here have forgotten, it is not about your rights, but his.