Step-Parents rights ??

[pamalex]

I agree that the step-parents should have boundries!!!! For a step-parent to think that they have just as much rights and equality as the bio parents is incorrect.
I would not have let her in the room.
If one of the parents is unable to "take care" of the child the other parent is. As far as I am concerned "I DO NOT THINK SO"

 

[casa]

Personally I would prefer she wouldn't be involved at all but I didn't pick her. As I said before we don't get along. I have never asked her to wash, cook or clean after my child. I feel that if my child is going to visit his father he should get off his ass and do for our child. Bio dad and I have agreed that he and I will be the only ones doing the transporting, being involved in educational decisions etc. and acting as co-parents solely on our own without any interference from step parents or co-habitators. I'm not so naive to think she's not caring for my child and I'm not saying I don't appreciate her doing so. However, if she is allowing bio dad to make her into a Mamme, that's not my problem.

By boundaries I mean allow me to be the mom. Just because a person may be a stepmom or stepdad doesn't mean bio mom or bio dad loses that personal intimacy of being with their child. The step parent does not and should not be involved EVERY moment. The hospital setting was not the time for stepmom to be involved "in the hospital room." My fiance was not in the room. Not because he didn't care but out of respect for my son's father. He was there for me in the hospital lobby if I needed him. He realized my son's father was fully capable of being dad at that moment.

I have friends who grew up with step parents who they thought were wonderful stepparents. However they always yearned and desired for a time when it was just their mom & dad at their play or school function (at least once). Not because they wanted their parents back together but because they wanted to share that time with just their bio parents!

Just like there are times when mom needs to spend time with each child separately and just like when adults need to spend alone or personal time with each other without the kids, bio parents should be allowed special moments with their children as well.

I have two soon to be step sons that come over every other weekend. Sure we do family things together and I have been to a their games. But I also realize they need time with their father, whether that may be at home or school functions. Just like he respects that my children need time with their mom without soon to be step dad. I take care of them as my own and love them as my own but I also know legally and sometimes emotionally they are not my own and allow their bio parents (who are very good parents) to do their thing.

I think your bitterness is transparent.

I have had my step-parent present on more than one occasion re; medical procedure. I also had my father share the aisle with my step-father when I got married.

If your child is worthy of both you & father's love...why must you set a limit? Are you saying a child can have TOO MUCH love or involvement? That's completely ignorant. Did it ever occur to you that the stepmother may love this child and may have been just as concerned about how they were doing?

I agree that bio father & mother have ultimate legal rights...but this is not a legal question- this is a moral dilemna, one you fall short on.

 

[casa]

Don't minimize the damage that can be done by a step-parent who shares VASTLY different values than you they start teaching it to your child as if they have the right to do so. This is HELL for the child. In one household (household's are frequently dictated by a SM but may potentially either gender) there is one set off rules and in the other something totally different. The child can become resentful, conflicted, confused or just stop trying or caring if it’s impossible to figure out what is right and what is wrong (and they will try). They may feel guilty for allowing themselves to enjoy drinking a soda everyday when other parent only allows one every week.

Does anyone care that a step should be able to tell your child that they must participate in buddists chants, when you are raising them as christian? Imagine having a step fail to take your child to emergency to seek traditional medical treatment for your child’s severe asthma attack because they are christian-scientists, a step throwing a birthday party for your child when you are raising them jehovah’s witness, or giving your child a bahmitzfah if you re catholic all while your ex passively practices no religion?

It's frustrating and unfair when this happens because a step can abuse power and never be accountable like a parent if they behave in a similar objectionable act that the other parent can't control. If no crime was committed against the child by a step, you probably can't go to court and have a judge make an order to make a court order the force the SP to stop especially if the ex claims they allow SP to do it. Ultimately, if the situation isn't resolved, the only way you'll feel you can rescue your children from the SP, is to restrict the custodial time of the other parent at which time you will probably be painted as trying to alienate the child from that parent (and possibly a scorned ex) in the expensive and nasty custody battle that will ensue. You have now entered into the "step parent trap".

Said child will then learn to play one parent (and/or step) against the other and that will leave you wondering what you did wrong and how your child(ren) came to so disregard your rules and the answer will be that well they witnessed their parent allowing a step to disregard your rules as they grew up, so if you couldn't respect it how dare you judge me for not respecting either.

For the record, I believe it's the re-married spouses' responsibility to draw proper boundaries that respect the rights of the other parent, but the reality is that once the relationship has been established on a balance of power that allows a step to have a certain measure of control over the household and/or step-children, trying to change the rules later will probably destroy the marriage.

I’m not picking on any religion (just examples) and I’m not picking on step-parents either, I know plenty of them are angels in disguise who flew in and took on responsibilities that bio parent failed to attend to, and since frequently the only reward a parent and/or step parent will see for their efforts is the accomplishments of the child, the step can be reward for their positive efforts without ever having to be accountable for their bad ones. I hope I haven't offend anyone, but with each passing day, I find it harder and harder to see children get hurt in the middle of these situations.

Anybody catch the 20/20 special on Thursday, August 18, 2005? I’m watching it now, and needing a Kleenex.

All the best to everyone's child(ren), natural and step.

I think you are confusing the issue. A step-parent can be an a$$hole, just like a bio. parent can! All step-parents aren't jerks- and there are just as many bio. parents who are jerks! My nuttyX is such a whack job, I WISH I could have the stepmother co-parent instead of him! In fact the best parenting decision he's ever made is hook up with her because she takes better care of our child than he ever did!

Making general statements is not helpful for anyone. If your X's new partner is obnoxious- that's for your X to remedy. If the don't- that's on them...that doesn't mean every single step is a monster.

 

[casa]

Thanks for the replies. As i said before, I agree with some parts of this -- but others I don't. There HAVE been issues in the past, that when father had insurance on the child, SM was listed as mom, and not me. I was not allowed to inquire about records or anything... so in that instance, it was a serious problem. There have also been issues in which I would try and talk with Father in regards to child, and SM and Father's other children would get involved about any and most situations. His children should not have any say or input into any conversation that regards my daughter (their youngest sibling). These are adult matters, and should not involve his other children. I do have some issues with SM, which may seem petty to some, One being that SM insists my daughter call her mom, and me by my first name. I feel that is really disrespectful. I have tried to talk to ex about this, and he said that if the shoe were on the other foot, he would have an issue about it too -- but he does nothing more about the situation.

There IS much more that Father has put into parenting plan -- including a Heirachy of Family -- for special holidays, birthday etc... in which him first, me second, his wife 3rd, his mother 4th, my mother 5th, his kids, and then my family... I don't feel there is a "rank" if you will to family. Family is family period! Sorry had to vent on that issue. But yes, there is MUCH more, and this was just a small portion of it.

The stepmother has nothing to do with your Rights to access your child's medical or educational records. It is your responsibility to contact the school and doctors to make sure you are listed as the parent- and even if you aren't you simply provide documentation and that's the end of it.

The insurance issue is one even a bio. parent would deal with. Whoever is the policy holder is the only one who can access insurance records/information. That is completely different from doctor's records and school records.

 

[phoover]

Are you kidding me?

My ss lives with me. And I too was raised by a sp. Guess what, I never yearned for my bf to be near me. All he was to me was a sperm donor. And as for my ss, his mom wants nothing to do with him and forgets to pick him up for her regular visitation. She's not even allowed to be on his campus to see him for school because she causes sucha s&*$% stir they have to call the police, which my husband happeneds to do for a living which makes it look like a civil matter. And just as of yesterday, I took him to get his shots for school again like I do every year bc she is to lazy and doesn't believe in going to the dr's office. I resent the fact that closed minded people think that sp's are "over stepping boundaries" and there should be a law" WHatever! My ss knows that I would never take the place of his mother, but when she is not including herself and he wants to be loved then yes I WILL be there for him. I only hope that if the tables were turned I would be as fortunate to have someone just as caring.

 

[onmytime]

I think your bitterness is transparent.

I have had my step-parent present on more than one occasion re; medical procedure. I also had my father share the aisle with my step-father when I got married.

If your child is worthy of both you & father's love...why must you set a limit? Are you saying a child can have TOO MUCH love or involvement? That's completely ignorant. Did it ever occur to you that the stepmother may love this child and may have been just as concerned about how they were doing?

I agree that bio father & mother have ultimate legal rights...but this is not a legal question- this is a moral dilemna, one you fall short on.

I applaud you for having a blended family that works and you making it work by having everyone involved. However, I believe you have misconstrued what I said. I never said that I didn't want my child's stepmom not to love him or care for him. I believe everyone wants their child to be loved. No child can receive too much love. What I said is that I'm the mom and the stepmom was going to love my child from the hospital lobby and not in the room.

If you were to go to work one day and saw someone else was occupying your office and doing your job that you so passionately loved even though your name plate was still on the door, how would you feel? Like they shouldn't be there and it's not their job. Especially if you are capable of doing it.

If you are the star quarteback on the team you have a backup if you get hurt or can't play the backup comes in the game. If not the starting quarterback stays in. My point is that blended families act as a team but there are always the "starters"(bio mom & bio dad) in the game. And the OP's situation involving the parenting plan is ridiculous. The step mom needs to know her boundaries, her position, sometimes they need to ride the bench and let the starters play. It didn't appear as if the OP sounded as an unfit or uninvolved parent. Let her do her job as a mom first.

 

[pamalex]

Step - Parent

State of Kansas
Yes, I am very bitter my child is 16 and her step mom thinks because of a battle she can try and court my child for having her own thoughts. As far as a moral issue. The judge even agreed with me in saying they (father and sp) are going very low.
This particular sp is a liar, she skeams, cheats to get what she wants. Is that something appropiate to teach children no matter what age? I do not believe so. So who draw the line between moral and what is right or wrong?

 

[youdontknowme]

IMHO I would be concerned that if I signed such a document affording all of these rights to a step parent

But it doesn't give them "rights", per se...a plan like this "allows" them to do certain things as long as it doesn't undermine the other parent.

1. It could place a step-parent in a prime spot to recieve visitation rights with a child who is already split between two homes(plus grandparents etc), if the marriage did not survive.

No, it couldn't.

related scenario: What happens if the step-parent is seperated(but not legally) from the parent and decides to pick up the child from school etc on the parent's time? They have a legal right to do so based on this document.

If they are separated, then the other parent MIGHT have an issue -- depending on the reason of separation. The other parent certainly could make an argument that it's not in the best interest of the child to be around the other stepparent because their ex is having marital problems (emotional issue w/child, etc.)

2. It would make co-parenting nearly impossible. (See below)

I'm a co- parent and a step-parent and have no natural children with my husband. From both sides of that equation I can tell you from experience when situations with either set of parents and or children arise is it much easier to resolve the issue when the co parents are the only TWO decision makers who come to the table in a time of crisis or conflict. The more people involved with a vested interest trying to resolve a problem the more difficult it is - it simply becomes a power game. If there is a history of conflict here as other posters are suggesting -will make the risk of such a situation inevitable. Seems to me a parent who is pushing for such verbiage in the agreement is intentionally trying to take advantage of the imbalance it would cause.

Actually, I have this similiar language in my SPP...it simply covers all the bases. A stepparent should not be making significant/major decisions -- unless approved by the other parent. But your 'everyday' decisions are nothing.

I would agree to a clause that the step parent can complete any duty relating to the care, transportation of the child as long as it does not usurp the rights of any parent (in cases of right of first refusal or similar special circumstances) and only if it occurs solely during spouse's visitation time.

That is the presumption of the SPP. i.e.- If one parent is at work or stuck at work and the child needs to get to an after-school activity, then the stepparent has the right to take that child to the activity, without calling the other parent to make sure it's ok. I can understand why this type of language is in there...all you need to do is look at some of the threads on here by some of the control freaks -- then you'll understand exactly why it's included. It's the reason why it's in mine! LOL

I dont have a problem with the parents each being expected to speak kindly of the other parent and anyone residing in either parents home or their families in the presence of the child and including it in the agreement. Realistically that is nearly impossible to enforce or prove - so it is really just throwing them a bone.

It looks like a plan from deltabravo.net -- and it's pretty comprehensive. Nowadays in plans, you need to have everything covered. That mistake was made when they used to have "reasonable visitation" and other vague language -- it was tying up the courts. These comprehensive plans are so it's out of the courts as much as possible.
These SPP's are not giving any "legal rights" to the stepparents of the child.

 

[youdontknowme]

I wouldn't sign this myself. I wouldn't sign any order that referenced a stepparent at all...except perhaps when it comes to badmouthing.....and I think that if dad really thought about it...and thought about the potential of a future stepfather...that dad wouldn't want it signed either.

The agreement as written simply isn't appropriate.

Excuse me for being late on this one...so I am catching up!

I simply see this plan as putting boundaries on what a stepparent can/can not do. Unless I am reading this wrong. Overall, the stepparents can't make major decisions -- period! I really don't see the big deal in some of the stuff that addresses picking up/dropping off at events, activities and the such.

I know in mine, I have removed all medical references because I did not want the stepdad making any medical decisions -- not matter how minor they were and regardless if mom said 'ok' -- without consulting with me (and especially since I am paying the insurance ). I also clarified the order to state stepparents may not attend school conferences and the such UNLESS the parent wasn't able to make it. I don't care about school plays/concerts/games, etc.

Some may think *I* am being too controlling, but I don't think so. I don't mind the stepdad being involved here and there -- in MINOR ROLES -- but there are certainly things stepparents, IMO, have no legal rights to decide on, regardless.

 

[youdontknowme]

That's exactly the point that's getting missed. It should be the BP's who agree on what the SP role should be (I admit they usually can't agree), not the SP to take it upon their self unless there is no other choice (which IS the case many times).

Smart SP's know when they should and should NOT get involved and know where it's not their place. But, as we all see, that's not the case, which is why parenting plans like the one we're discussing are written up. My wife butts out and doesn't get involved, but if the kids do something that is not right, then she has every right to say "don't do that" to the kids.

And my ex thinks her hubby can do what he wants with the kids. Let me correct that -- THOUGHT he could do what he wanted. My plan specifically says what he can/can not do (well both parents, but my wife knows her boundaries). There are other parents out there who think just like that and stepparents who think they can do whatever they want. So that's why comprehensive plans like this exist.

It spells it out for the control freaks out there!

If you can't deal with that reality, DO NOT sign on to be a SP, you will have a much less happy, and probably much poorer life than you intended or planned because custody and CS fights are very, very costly. It's the unpretty life of a SP and the unpretty facts of divorce.

That's a ridiculously stupid comment. That couldn't be further from the truth for very many. My wife doesn't regret for one second being with me because of the kids or my ex. We know she's a nutjob, so we've dealt with it and have certain restrictions in place for a reason. Why let some emotionally-insecure ex ruin your new life. You DO have rights when it comes to protecting your right free from harassment and the such. My wife and I have even filed menacing charges a few times on my ex.
My wife adores these kids as if they were her own and the kids absolutely love it when they are here with me and my wife. No, we don't spoil them or anything like that.
If your ex is a whack job -- then do something about it. We did!

 

[pamalex]

I think some sp know. I am speak from experience with a bad one. My ex's new wife, my daughters sp, has to have control of everthing. My daughter had been living with me, went on a weekend visit, supposably. Was never to return. Why? Because the sp decieded she was in harm. Even though they / she had all summer to do something, they / she decieded one weekend before school started.
When I called them and notified them of an emergency hearing, the very next day, which was the day of the hearing she had my daughter an appointment at North emergency center. Which is a psych hospital.
This has been an on going issue with the two of them. I took her to a psych here and they said she had nothing wrong with her.
What they are doing to her is very inappropiate. Trying to make here think she has problems, is only causing more problems.
At this point in time I think she should have limited time with my daughter. I have set another hearing and that will be brought up. Until then my daughter is dealing with it the best way she knows how.
I just thought that as sp, bp you were to bring kids up to be ready to face the real world as adults. We have so many teens who have no concept of reality, or try to get away with things they know are wrong. I really would like to see her ready for the real world, and with this person in her life, I just don't see that happing.
My daughter did tell me that where she is (MASS), that the sp had to call the bp to be able to sign the release forms.
So does that mean some states have laws have sp guidelines?

 

[psfunkytek]

I sat here and read this over and over again and I just can't help but reply. I too believe in certain boundaries as a step-parent, however by the tone of your post I have a desire to start sounding like Mammy in Gone With the Wind. Step-mom is good enough to wash the kids' clothes, feed them dinner, transport them when needed, care for them in their home but HOW DARE she be allowed in a hospital room? Are you kidding me?? By boundaries you mean on YOUR terms. It's ok for her to be the nanny but step outside the circle!

You know, usually it's BD, NOT the BM that turns a SM into a nanny with the full knowledge that they have no LEGAL rights. Again, it's the unpretty truth of a SP.

 

[psfunkytek]

That's a ridiculously stupid comment. That couldn't be further from the truth for very many. My wife doesn't regret for one second being with me because of the kids or my ex. We know she's a nutjob, so we've dealt with it and have certain restrictions in place for a reason. Why let some emotionally-insecure ex ruin your new life. You DO have rights when it comes to protecting your right free from harassment and the such. My wife and I have even filed menacing charges a few times on my ex.
My wife adores these kids as if they were her own and the kids absolutely love it when they are here with me and my wife. No, we don't spoil them or anything like that.
If your ex is a whack job -- then do something about it. We did!

Again, the point is getting missed. When you meet someone who has kids from a prior relationship, you need to analyze that situation and understand the dynamics you are signing on your YOU. That doesn't mean no one should become a SP, that means what ever situation you are signing up for when you marry someone who already has children, you need to ask yourself, can I deal with this. My child was born late in life and before that, I didn't date people who had children, because I didn't want to be second place to all that is required. Now, I won't date someone who DOESN'T have children because often, THEY don't understand that they have to be second to all the things I have to do as a parent. It creates an uncomfortable imbalance when I am priorty one for someone and something else (someone else) is priorty one for me and that is also tied to a whole other person that they cannot control or even negotiate with. That's difficult and while some people can handle it, others cannot, but sometimes, people aren't honest with theirself about that.

 

[casa]

I applaud you for having a blended family that works and you making it work by having everyone involved. However, I believe you have misconstrued what I said. I never said that I didn't want my child's stepmom not to love him or care for him. I believe everyone wants their child to be loved. No child can receive too much love. What I said is that I'm the mom and the stepmom was going to love my child from the hospital lobby and not in the room.

If you were to go to work one day and saw someone else was occupying your office and doing your job that you so passionately loved even though your name plate was still on the door, how would you feel? Like they shouldn't be there and it's not their job. Especially if you are capable of doing it.

If you are the star quarteback on the team you have a backup if you get hurt or can't play the backup comes in the game. If not the starting quarterback stays in. My point is that blended families act as a team but there are always the "starters"(bio mom & bio dad) in the game. And the OP's situation involving the parenting plan is ridiculous. The step mom needs to know her boundaries, her position, sometimes they need to ride the bench and let the starters play. It didn't appear as if the OP sounded as an unfit or uninvolved parent. Let her do her job as a mom first.

I think comparing children to 'jobs' is a ridiculous analogy- First off because if someone else wanted to do my job for a day, yippee! Call me in the break room (I'll be reading magazines) Secondly, your statement that the SM can "love her from the lobby" is biased...Do YOU want to love her from the lobby? No? Why not?

I have 2 stepmothers to deal with...1 is better than the X, and the other 1 is a pain in the behind. The one I can deal with, I do deal with- and the other I bypass and speak directly to the X. If the obnoxious stepmom tries to interfere/intervene, I correspond in writing/e-mail to the X. Simple as that. However, if it were an emergency situation such as the one you described, I wouldn't waste my time and energy on whether or not the SM was there- I'd be focusing on the child and what the Dr. said etc. You have a choice to refuse to participate in the animosity. The child doesn't need that friction on top of the ordeal of the emergency.

Remember we set examples by our actions and the child has a lifetime ahead of dealing with people they may not necessarily 'like'...some of those might be at jobs where they have no choice but to deal with it.