step parent ordered to carry primary insurance

[1974princess]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? IN
Okay, so today in court the Judge is ordering my husband to carry primary insurance on my children, his step children! My ex was ordered to carry the children on his policy thru work since 2005. Can Judge order my husband to carry the insurance? I work part time and dont have the insurance benefit.

 

[Antigone*]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? IN
Okay, so today in court the Judge is ordering my husband to carry primary insurance on my children, his step children! My ex was ordered to carry the children on his policy thru work since 2005. Can Judge order my husband to carry the insurance? I work part time and dont have the insurance benefit.

Why don't you get a job that does carry the insurance benefit? That way you can provide the benefit to your own children.

Is he carrying your children that you have together on the same policy?

 

[Banned_Princess]

Well, he did marry you, and the kids, so why couldnt he be ordered..

not like hes just your boyfriend.

 

[ecmst12]

Pretty sure he didn't marry her kids. This is a very odd order.

 

[Antigone*]

Pretty sure he didn't marry her kids. This is a very odd order.

I think it is odd too, and the OP has not come back to answer additional questions.

If stepdad is covering his wife and their child(ren) already, then there would be no additional to them to cover her children and it would be a cost savings for dad. Under this scenario, the ruling would definitely make sense.

 

[Proserpina]

Pretty sure he didn't marry her kids. This is a very odd order.

Agreed. ...

 

[Banned_Princess]

Well, I mean, he took over the responsibilty to take care, as it were, the woman.. why not her kids.

 

[ErinGoBragh]

Well, I mean, he took over the responsibilty to take care, as it were, the woman.. why not her kids.

Because they aren't HIS. Two parents under the law, remember?

 

[Banned_Princess]

Well, nothing is really that abnormal anymore.

Maybe his insurance is best.

Maybe both parents could not provide for some reason, and instead of the state, the judge decided on the next legally attached person.

Not like the girlfriend of the NCP dad was ordered to pay.

Whatever who knows, stranger things have happened.

 

[ErinGoBragh]

Well, nothing is really that abnormal anymore.

Maybe his insurance is best.

Maybe both parents could not provide for some reason, and instead of the state, the judge decided on the next legally attached person.

Not like the girlfriend of the NCP dad was ordered to pay.

Whatever who knows, stranger things have happened.

It is abnormal. Very abnormal, even in this day and age. Stepdad married mom, but did not legally undertake an obligation to the children- what if stepdad and mom broke up? Then he should, even moreso than before, have no legal obligation to the children.

 

[Proserpina]

Well, nothing is really that abnormal anymore.

Maybe his insurance is best.

Maybe both parents could not provide for some reason, and instead of the state, the judge decided on the next legally attached person.

Not like the girlfriend of the NCP dad was ordered to pay.

Whatever who knows, stranger things have happened.

Re-read what you typed here.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? IN
Okay, so today in court the Judge is ordering my husband to carry primary insurance on my children, his step children! My ex was ordered to carry the children on his policy thru work since 2005. Can Judge order my husband to carry the insurance? I work part time and dont have the insurance benefit.

Technically no, a judge absolutely cannot order that and its something that absolutely CAN be overturned on appeal.

Unfortunately, appeals are VERY expensive and that is why some judges might order something that wouldn't hold up on appeal.

However...if it wouldn't cost anything to add your children to your husband's insurance, and/or the judge took that into consideration in a child support calculation, a judge COULD order that your ex does not have to provide insurance because there are better insurance options available to the children than your ex providing insurance. That likely would NOT be overturned on appeal.

Do you understand what I am saying? There is a difference between the judge ordering your husband to provide insurance (highly appealable) and a judge ordering that your ex does not have to provide insurance because there are better options available to the children (not really appealable).

 

[Proserpina]

Technically no, a judge absolutely cannot order that and its something that absolutely CAN be overturned on appeal.

Unfortunately, appeals are VERY expensive and that is why some judges might order something that wouldn't hold up on appeal.

However...if it wouldn't cost anything to add your children to your husband's insurance, and/or the judge took that into consideration in a child support calculation, a judge COULD order that your ex does not have to provide insurance because there are better insurance options available to the children than your ex providing insurance. That likely would NOT be overturned on appeal.

Do you understand what I am saying? There is a difference between the judge ordering your husband to provide insurance (highly appealable) and a judge ordering that your ex does not have to provide insurance because there are better options available to the children (not really appealable).

Really good explanation there.

 

[1974princess]

Well, the situation is I have full custody of my 2 children from first marriage...Their Dad was ordered to carry primary insurance on the both of them.....when i remarried i gained 2 step children and had a daughter with my new husband....
I offered to my ex husband that IF we got an exemption of one of the children then to save us both some money I would add the children to my current husbands, much better, insurance plan. Although it does not cost him anymore to carry my 2 boys it is the principal that only the biological mother and father are ordered to care and provide for the children.
Why should HE provide better insurance when he is not party to my divorce? And if he does should he not reap the benefits of ONE of the TWO children.

 

[Proserpina]

Well, the situation is I have full custody of my 2 children from first marriage...Their Dad was ordered to carry primary insurance on the both of them.....when i remarried i gained 2 step children and had a daughter with my new husband....
I offered to my ex husband that IF we got an exemption of one of the children then to save us both some money I would add the children to my current husbands, much better, insurance plan. Although it does not cost him anymore to carry my 2 boys it is the principal that only the biological mother and father are ordered to care and provide for the children.
Why should HE provide better insurance when he is not party to my divorce? And if he does should he not reap the benefits of ONE of the TWO children.

I'm confused.

You OFFERED?

And...the offer was accepted and ordered by the Judge?