I have no familiarity with Canadian law,  but that's just goofy.  I'd be stunned if that was in fact the law anywhere. 

I'd ask for the law name and number. A quick Google search showed me that stepparents have NO legal rights to stepkids, and their legal responsibilities begin and end where they do for any other adult. You have the PRIVILEGE and AUTHORITY to discipline, but not the RESPONSIBILITY.

Please tell me other people called this person on their BS.

I'd tag it #makingUpRandomBullsh!tFTW

OMG! I'm in BC and never heard of this. 

As if a HCBM would allow that to happen.  What a line of BS.  What is it with sharing falsehoods like this? Alternative facts much?   I'd be reporting this troll for sharing lies.  

to this nonsense and put this ridiculous person in their place! 

These types are the ones that give us the bad names. Dad sits back while SM does all the work and LIKES it. 

Maybe the Canadian version of a Karen (insolent loud woman that complains if everyone doesn't bow down to her unmanicured feet) had one too many gummies for breakfast, ha! 

That has to be a troll

She is referring to as by law there are only 2 parents legally responsible for the minor kids and thats their bio parents listed or a legal guardian. You are none as a stepmum with no legal responsibilities legally enforced by the courts or any law

a stepparent by legal definition is someone married to your bio parent who isn't your bio parent. It is legally the bio parents responsibility to parent and raise their kids or the legal guardian, it does not bypass to a stepparent because they can't be stuffed, can't parent well and don't want to be the bad guy setting boundaries and clear responsibilities and basic expectations.

that troll just typed up alot of nonsense.

according to following link:

https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/11025_07
 

""stepparent" means a person who is a spouse of the child's parent and lived with the child's parent and the child during the child's life"

Also according to canadian justice department the following link:

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/fv-vf/about-apropos.html
 

"If a child is neglected, child protection authorities could intervene and remove the child from his or her parents."

note it refers to their parents (ie; bio parents)

Also following link regarding child maltreatment in canada:

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/health-promotion/stop-fa...
 

"

Child Maltreatment

Child maltreatment refers to the harm, or risk of harm, that a child or youth may experience while in the care of a person they trust or depend on, including a parent, sibling, other relative, teacher, caregiver or guardian. Harm may occur through direct actions by the person (acts of commission) or through the person's neglect to provide a component of care necessary for healthy child growth and development (acts of omission)."

note how it refers to parent and guardia as in legally their bio parent and legal guardian who by law are responsible for the care of that child. A minor child isn't dependent upon a stepparent when they have 2 living bio parents unless court ordered that stepparent has legal custody. In your case you have no legal custody.

Neglect in the link is defined as "Failure by a parent or caregiver to provide the physical or psychological necessities of life to a child"

just referring to an australian government link below:

https://aifs.gov.au/resources/policy-and-practice-papers/child-maltreatm...
 

"However, from the child maltreatment data it was apparent that stepparents or defacto parents were over-represented as maltreaters, especially in cases of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. In neglect cases, where the vast majority of abusers were natural parents, step and defacto parents were under-represented."

It's considered abuse say if the bio dad and stepmum refuse to feed the minor child, refuse to ensure they go to bed or have them attend school and lock them in their room 24/7. However a stepparent disengaging from parenting responsibilities for a child not legally theirs when they have 2 bio parents is not abuse or maltreatment especially for a child old enough and independent enough to do alot of things. 

we aren't talking like a newborn baby left in care of stepmum as bio mum did a runner and not in picture and bio dad fulltime works and stepmum put into role as a primary carer of newborn and refuses to feed newborn and do diaper changes etc and if doesn't want to be in that role, does not force bio dad to deal with that (situations like this are rare and not the daily example the troll is trying to paint you as an abuser).
 

If she wants to be a doormat have right at it but most of us with a functioning brain know if there are 2 bio parents who refuse to stepup and do their bloody jobs, it doesn't become stepparents responsibility to step in or have that responsibility automatically deferred to stepparent.

its like the gold digging bio mums who see kid as a free paycheck but refuse to care for or parent their own kids and tell the ex husband to take kid and when he says no it's your custody time and i need to work to be able to pay cs and she says well its your wife/partners job to do it for free like a doormat, no it really isn't not legally not ever

" otherwise you do not meet the legal qualifications of one "

OMG, that is hilarious! Legal qualifications of being a step parent?! Does that mean that there's some sort of contract that you sign at the same time you get married to be a legal step? What happens to that contract if you get divorced? Do you have to get a judge to nullify it? 

There sure are some strange people out there ...

Honestly even if I did adopt my step child, I told my wife that I would still relinquish my rights through the courts, if she passed away. He could go live with his grandma and I don't feel bad about it! 

Sounds like a SM's MIL from Hell's posting!  "How DARE you force my son to parent his own children!  Besides they are practically perfect in every way. "

I would respond "MIL is that you?"

Ontario here. I've never heard of any specific law regarding this; however.... a word of caution...

In my first step relationship way back in the day, I had SS5 and SO at the time did not have benefits with his work and was on my benefits plan. SS5 had a lot of medical and dental expenses and SO had to pay 80% of as BM had no insurance either. It would have cost $0 to add SS5 to my plan. I was smart enough to ask my lawyer who was working on something else for me about it and she said that she recommended against it because the court could perceive me as accepting responsibility for SS5 as I am now insuring him through me and that should something happen to SO (job loss, death), BM could ask a judge that supports continue as if SO and I were still providing them, whether temporarily or until SS5 would age out, whatever those supports may be. Note that I was making 4x BM's income and same was SO at that time with us just starting our high earnings potential and hers being capped at low wage due to education, etc. She was also psycho and I did not trust her to not pull some stunt with me.

Scared me enough to not add SS5 to my benefits plan. No links, no assumed risks, no assumed responsibility, no commitments.