*sigh* I think SD's grandparents have went too far.
We've tried being as polite as possible toward SD's grandparents--especially since they lost their daughter and their connection to SD. But it's becoming impossible.
Last night, they showed up at our house--unannounced. We didn't know they were coming. And when they arrived they said they were 'taking SD for the weekend'. They insisted they had a right to take her because they have BM's role now.
Okay--#1 that's rude. You shouldn't show up to someone's house unannounced. And #2 No they don't have a right to take her. And it's ridiculous that they think that they do.
They DID ask about a week ago if SD could come stay with them over memorial day weekend. DH told them NO. He said that we had plans, and that even if we didn't--that over spring break when SD stayed with them they didn't follow our rules and didn't respect our boundaries. Until they learn to do that, SD's visits will be limited.
Apparently they didn't like that. So they decided to try to come and get her anyway. DH told them he was sorry they drove two hours for nothing, but SD isn't going anywhere. They then had the nerve to tell SD to get into the truck. SD still isn't great about standing up for herself (She's 12), so DH told her to just go upstairs and play, so she did.
That's when they decided to get into a big argument about how bad of parents we are! About how we don't take SD to church and haven't got her baptized, about how we let her hang out with 'those lesbos' *(DH's sister and her wife) and how we let her 'dress slutty' (I have no idea what they're talking about here. Unless they mean tank tops, because that's the only clothes she has that aren't appropriate by school standards. Or maybe a few pair of shorts she owns that aren't quite to school standards because she's grown.
Either way I think it's ridiculous). Never mind the fact that since SD has come to live with us that she's gone from a C-D student to an A-B student. Never mind that she's made more friends, is happier, and healthier.
DH was really mad when they called his sister and her wife 'those lesbos'. But he remained polite and ASKED them to leave. They said they weren't going to leave without SD. DH said he'd call the police if they didn't. They then said they'd sue for custody of SD, because they 'have a right to her'. They also accused DH of being abusive because he let SD see an R rated movie. (I had to roll my eyes at that one. My mom is one of the strictest parents I know, and she let me watch some R rated movies when I was 10!) After that they finally left.
And of course SD heard most of the argument (how couldn't she? They were yelling half the time) and is really upset about them coming over here.
DH and I both would feel bad cutting off SD's only connection to her mother, but we're not sure that her spending time with these people is a good idea. Especially when they won't respect our boundaries or our rules. Over spring break they punished SD for refusing to copy bible passages (which we told her she could refuse to do if she spent a couple of days with them) and punished her by 1. Spanking her (which we don't think is appropriate punishment as is, and they know it) and 2. Sending her to bed without dinner (which we also find inappropriate. I'd never send a child to bed without dinner. Especially a child who's so skinny that if she lost any weight the wind would blow her away)
They just don't seem to care about having a real relationship with SD. I don't think they'd stand a chance in court. Especially since she and DH have a great relationship. The two of us are even starting to bond a little. Our biggest fear is the court might order visitation. I'm not sure that it's in SD's best interest (and DH definitely doesn't think it does). I'd hope the court would agree.
I would love for it to not have to go that far. But I feel that if they don't respect our boundaries that they never will if we just let things go the way they are. It's like we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. If BM were alive, when she was with her it'd be up to her if/when she sees them. But Bm isn't. And I think DH and I have a duty to do what's best for SD irrespective of what BM's wishes are/were/would be.
I would document everything
I would document everything in case they try to sue for grandparent's rights, since that is a possibility with BM being deceased. I doubt they would have a case for getting custody but it sounds like they might try to alienate her from her own father and his side of the family, so, I would not want her with them unsupervised.
I'm sorry, but I'm not okay
I'm sorry, but I'm not okay sending a child to bed without dinner. If other parents want to do that with their children--that's up to them. But I would never send any of my kids to bed without dinner. I don't think I could sleep at night thinking one of my kids was hungry.
And I don't think it's unreasonable that we set which punishments are and aren't acceptable. Timeouts are fine. Making her do chores is fine. (She usually does them anyway, so I'm not sure that's a great punishment for SD) I'd say take away her video games, but they don't let her have any when she's over there as it is. Find some other punishment (We usually make her write a paper explaining what she did and why it was wrong, which is what my mom did when I broke the rules.) Call DH if she's acting up.
And all she did was refuse to copy bible passages--something we told her that she wouldn't have to do if she didn't want to. (This wasn't a punishment, even though it certainly sounds like one)
Actually, you're wrong. I'm
Actually, you're wrong. I'm legally her parent because I adopted her. And in any case DH agrees with me.
A school has legal authority to punish without the parent's permission. A grandparent cannot supersede parental authority. (And even then a parent may remove a child from their school) What punishments we find inappropriate is grounds for requiring visits to be supervised.
You're a very rude person.
You're a very rude person. I can see that your parents did a very poor job raising you. Maybe you should find your own hobby.
And yes, I am a step parent. Stepparents can adopt their stepchildren. As it is defined by the Cambridge English dictionary: "a woman who is married to the father of a child but is not the biological mother" Oxford defines it as such: "A woman who is the wife or partner of one's father after the divorce or separation of one's parents or the death of one's mother."
Meow...someone is a bit testy
Meow...someone is a bit testy this evening.
FWIW, you're not a stepparent either, neither are your children a part of a step/blended family. While members are not required to be a stepparent to post here, it's rather amusing to see a non-stepparent tell a stepmom who adopted her stepchild to go elsewhere or take up knitting. :O
I was about to say the same
I was about to say the same thing. I don't know what she's doing here since she seems not to be a stepparent and it's galling that she would chase off someone who is with such a statement.
(No subject)
:O
}:)
Shame you don't know the
Shame you don't know the dictionary definitions. Which I posted btw. But I'm guessing reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
And given that people here have said that YOU aren't a step-parent and don't have kids that are step-parents, who are you to tell anyone to be on this board or not?
Maybe you should take up knitting yourself, since you seem to suggest it to everyone else. Then again if you're as good at it as you are at giving advice... I wouldn't waste the yarn.
There are stepparents on this
There are stepparents on this board who have adopted skids or had their bio adopted by their partner. It's a unique situation with uncommon issues when a stepparent becomes an adoptive parent. There's no DNA exchanged or gained, it's just an 18+ year legal responsibility with more than average baggage attached. Boards for adoption AND stepparenting would apply to OP's situation.
Heavenlike is a SD who thinks her father has two wives and second marriage vows are not as important as the first. Funny that someone who has zero experience being a step parent will tell someone else to get lost.
Though I understand what you
Though I understand what you are getting at.... a SParent who adopts a Skid still has to deal with the various and sundry Sparenting crap in most cases. Just because we get papers does not instantly reset the Skid's brain... or anyone elses for that matter.... to align with an adoptive situation.
I adopted my kid and we did not get a revised Birth Certificate from the State of Sperm Land. Had we done the adoption there ..... then we could have gotten a new BC. I suppose with the adoption order from TX we cold petition for a new birth certificate in SpermLand but it is not a big deal for us at this point.
When my bride was adopted by her StepDad in 2014 it was all done in her birth state and she did get a new birth certificate.
HRNYC, Though not with any
HRNYC,
Though not with any official backing, many SParents take on the full responsibilities of raising their Skids as their own. In our case the adoption order was just a piece of paper that made official what had always been the case since he was a toddler. I would have gladly adopted him when he was a child if the SpermClan would have allowed. It really didn't matter that they didn't approve. I have always been his dad and he has been my son. Not much different than if I had adopted him when his mom and I married the week before he turned 2yo.
Though there was a CS order in place since before the Skid turned 1yo the SpermIdiot never paid a penny of his CS obligation. SpermGrandHag and SpermGrandPa paid it for him which was a fun one to bring up in court when they tried to get my income factored into the CS calculation. The SGPs about stroked out when we motioned for their income to be factored into the CS calculation based on their assumption of the CS obligation for my Skid, the SpermIdiot living in their investment property rent free, and the three younger SpermIdiot spawn being raised in the SGP's home without help from their waste of skin son. }:)
Now that was fun.
Others answered your question and so will I. He asked to be adopted when he was 22.
https://www.steptalk.org/node
https://www.steptalk.org/node/214822
Seriously? So Christian like
Seriously? So Christian like of you (don't you proclaim to be a Christian?).
She is in a unique situation, being a step parent who, through adoption, has legal status. Her questions, vents, and wanting comments and opinions are valid.
You are so nasty, sometimes, "HeavenLike" (heavy on the sarcasm). Are you even a step parent? No? Why are YOU on a step parent site? Please, do tell. I guess you don't like knitting?
My point is, OP has every
My point is, OP has every right to be here asking questions and getting advice, if she so chooses. She did not adopt the girl at birth and was a step parent first, and the girl likely still sees her as such. Regardless of all of that, HeavenLike was rude, suggesting she take up knitting instead of reaching out here. If this site is truly only for actual, legal step parents, HeavenLike needs to take up knitting, herself.
Heaven like, Why are you so
Heaven like, Why are you so aggressive? I don't see where op was ever rude to you.
You aren't a stepparent either, you are neither married nor in relationship and your kids are not in any kind of stepfamily. If this site is strictly for stepparents then you have no business to be here yet no one says it to you. Why are you so angry?
When you posted about your DD arrested for drug possession, no one said go to parenting forum or legal forum. Or when you post your difficulty with finding job, no one says go to job search sites. You post all kind d of stuff here that has nothing to do with anything stepparents at all.
Yet when op shares what she and her DH struggle with in their home, you tell her to go elsewhere.
Why??
Yes many post off topic, then
Yes many post off topic, then why are you telling her to leave?
Topics you post about have nothing to do with stepfamily as you have no experience in that at all but many of topics you bring up aren't even related to family issues whatsoever. None of your issues are related to stepfamily
Yet you are here. Who are you to decide if her topics belong on adoption forums? Your topics are also better suited elsewhere. You want people to support you in Your struggles yet you behave like a bully when others are in need
She isn't. Her kids aren't
She isn't. Her kids aren't part of stepfamily either.
She isn't. Her kids aren't
She isn't. Her kids aren't part of stepfamily either.
Although I understand that
Although I understand that anyone might have good advice about anything and anyone as well as everyone can join any kind of forum, I find it's weird that someone would spend that much time on forums that don't pertain to them at all (and know nothing about it neither personally nor professionally) and be so very aggressive towards people who are dealing with issues that pertain to said forum!
It really makes no sense. It's like if I signed up on a forum or group of widows (me not being one) and chastised them about how they do things plus told other non-widows to leave the forum. It's just bizarre. If you want to hang out on forums that focus on topics that you know nothing about, ok, but don't be nasty about it.
I brought widowhood example up because I was telling my DD about BS I am reading on here and she reminded me how people wanted to tell her when she supposed to start dating and how she supposed to run her life now (she is a widow), and some of these people never even been married let alone lost their spouse unexpectedly!
I dont think the OP should
I dont think the OP should leave steptalk, but the fact that the child is her daughter changes things.
As the child's mother,she is free to tell the grandparents to go jump in a lake. There's no need to wait for husband to decide how he wants to handle things. She has every right to say what will or will not happen with her child.
Yup. So very true
Yup. So very true
No, I don't like them. I'm
No, I don't like them. I'm not going to be shy about that. They're rude, abrasive, and massively homophobic. SD doesn't even like them very much, and they're her family. But we've tried being respectful and empathetic.
A child might not perish from missing dinner, but DH and I don't feel it's an appropriate punishment. If I have grandkids, and my kids tell me I can't... put my grandchild in a timeout because they think it's inappropriate--guess what? I'm not going to put them in timeout. Even if I disagree. Because that wouldn't be my place as a grandparent. I expect my mom to follow my rules with my bio-kids. And I'll expect myself to follow my kids rules with their kids when/if they have them.
We don't want them pushing their religion on her. I don't think that's unreasonable. They're free to talk to her about their faith--but I don't think they should be making her copy bible passages against her will. If they want to say "This is what we believe" that's fine. When they speak badly about DH's sister, they're only making themselves look bad. But making her write bible passages, and telling her "Don't you want to go to heaven and see your mom again?" That's emotionally manipulative and unacceptable.
If it was BM, it'd be different. We'd probably be annoyed by it--but it would be her place as a mother. (For the record, I'm pretty sure BM was an atheist who probably didn't want her parents pushing religion on her kid either) It's not their place as grandparents to be pushing this on her.
I don't think OP's own mother
I don't think OP's own mother is any more appropriate to be around this child totally unsupervised.
"She basically said she doesn't see why she has to be nice to my husband's 'illegitimate child'. I get the feeling she doesn't like the fact that my husband had a child he never knew about, and she blames him for not knowing about her even though it's not his fault. And it's certainly not her fault either."
OP's mother dislikes this kid and makes no bones about it.
https://www.steptalk.org/node/232676
That's why she is posting on
That's why she is posting on this forum both then and now about how to handle things She seeks advice in tough situations and its commendable
Probably so. I do find it odd
Probably so. I do find it odd that she accepts one grandparent to mistreat the child but disapproves of the other grandparent.
My 2 cents thinks neither of these grandmothers are the best to be around this child. She's seems willing to tolerate one of the grandmother's behavior because it's OP's own mother, but the biological grandmother does not get the same consideration.
A few hours once a month or once every couple months with the biological grandmother I don't see any more objectionable than the one who is tolerated even though is mean to the child.
If this is all about the grandparents beliefs and being detrimental to the best interest of the child, such as being implied for reasoning, than neither grandmother should be getting access.
She's wiling to make an exception for one, IMO she can make a working limited exception for the other. I gave my thoughts on how she could allow limited/restricted occasional visits to the biological grandparent in another reply I made.
I actually believe the very limited exposure to the religious bible thumper with the narrow mind can help teach this child how not to be. Can help build awareness as to why intolerance (the same sex couple, for example) is wrong and a shallow view on the world. Blah blah blah. Pretending people with the old hag's beliefs don't exist isn't doing the child any favors. On a level of intolerance and unacceptable behavior, the other grandmother with her condemning the child for being illegitimate and somehow not being worthy of love and kindness is actually no better or worse than the other grandmother .
My point in putting up the old post was to give thought to the OP.
It's a good point. Child
It's a good point. Child might actually learn how not to be of terrible sets of grandparents. My DH was actually raised by terrible father and had one set of terrible grandparents, all it taught him is HOW not to be. And he is a wonderful man.
I still believe that visits with these supposedly religious, but unkind people (both sets of grandparents) should be strictly supervised
My mother has been rude to SD
My mother has been rude to SD at times--but she's never mistreated her. She's certainly never spanked her, or forced her to do anything that we didn't approve of. She's kept her 'illegitimate' comments to herself too after that Christmas incident. We've also never sent SD to stay with my mom either. And we never would. (I doubt my mom would agree to it in any case). She also accepts our authority as parents--something that the other grandparents don't do. And if she ever called SD an 'illegitimate daughter' to her face or anything inappropriate, she'd quickly be shown the door (though saying it behind SD's back isn't much better)
Also I should note my mom was extra cranky that Christmas because my sister's kids weren't around because their dad took them when he wasn't supposed to have them, so she didn't get to see them. (My sister seriously needs to learn a few tricks from some of the sneaky bio moms I've read about on here) This past Christmas she was a lot better. I mean it doesn't excuse it by any means--and that's why I had a talk about it with her. That's another big difference between her and the other grandparents--my mom will actually listen.
Your explanation makes sense.
Your explanation makes sense. A
I feel for these grandparents
I feel for these grandparents and the child. This man went years and years without even knowing the kid existed. Who was there and around for the kid? Her mother and grandparents until the mother passed.
Yes, your state has grandparent rights. Yes, there is a chance the grandparents could go to court and legally receive visitation rights.
Speak to a lawyer. Dad may find it more in the kid's best interest (and his) by negotiating a suitable arrangement for visits without letting the court decide. If it's two hour drive, for example, Dad might offer limited access during x amount of weekends a year. Maybe one a month or one every two months. In your town. Grandparents at hotel and child having daytime afternoon visit (zoo, park, shopping, movie, out for lunch) with child returning home at x time and available for breakfast the next morning.
At this point without a court order there is no need to send to grandparents home for weekend or longer visits. Dad can control length of time and somewhat type of visit. Surely grandma/grandpa are not going to bore kid to death for 3-5 hrs nor spank her (for pete's sake she's 12, 12 yr old don't get spanked!) and no need for faith based writings.
If they are willing to come have socialization time with access to the child set in boundaries as I've mentioned Dad would be working at maintaining their relationship with their grandchild, but doing it basically under his supervision. Unless these grandparents are a flight risk to running with the kid it seems harsh to ban them. I'm sure this child spent a lot of time with these people for the first 9-10 years of her life.
Of course he took her in.
Of course he took her in. She's his child, even if he didn't know about her. We're just fortunate that one of BM's friends were able to contact us after BM died. She regrets not doing it earlier, but didn't want her friend to lose custody of her child because it would send her more over the edge. BM didn't name her parents guardians for a reason too. DH would NEVER abandon one of his kids.
If DH doesn't think something is appropriate, and they don't listen--then DH has to take recourse. If someone other than the mother of your child let your child do something you didnt' find appropriate, I'd hope that you wouldn't give them free reign with your child. If a bio-parent does it, then it sucks (and I'd know, because my sister's exhusband is a total disney dad who gets on her last nerve) but you can't really do anything about it. If it's not a parent though, a parent has a right to step in.
Visitation rights, contrary
Visitation rights, contrary to what you seem to believe, don't create parental rights in the person (or people) who are granted visitation.
Looking into it, I don't think they'd be granted even visitation rights. They'd have to show that they have a parent-child relationship with the child, which they don't. I know of a similar case where visitation rights were denied, even when the grandmother cooked and babysat regularly for their grandchild, because such a parent-child relationship was not established. One is not established between SD and her grandparents either.
Document, document,
Document, document, document.
When a grandparent gets visitation rights (not custody) most courts offer explicit instructions that the purpose of visitation is to foster a relationship between the child and the grandparents. It is NOT to give parental rights (such as picking a religion, etc) to the grandparents.
I would not be afraid of court at all. Your DH's willingness to foster a relationship is good. But that does not have to mean that your DH must abdicate parenting to the grandparents. They do not inherit BM's parental rights - they just do not lose their rights to a relationship with the child.
A grandparent without custody DOES NOT HAVE the right to override the parent's choices with regard to the child's upbringing. Sounds like these GPs could use a good slap down from a judge. Supervised visitation is what I would aim for if they can't act right.
I think you took the words
I think you took the words right out of DH's mind. We had agreed to limited access (at least until they prove that they're able to accept DH's authority). I think we're perfectly reasonable. We'd rather not go to court simply because we'd rather we not waste our time (and not put SD through that either.)
Them showing up like they did gets on my nerves. And then starting a fight in our home? I doubt they'd like it very much if we went to their house uninvited and unannounced, and started a fight with them.
Yes, BM overdosed, but I
Yes, BM overdosed, but I don't think I've ever said that here. (But I might have)
I think DH has dreamed of
I think DH has dreamed of saying that to them, but hasn't because he doesn't want to speak badly of BM when SD might hear. And because he doesn't want to say something like that to a grieving parent either. I mean I think it speaks volumes of their parenting skills that they didn't seek help for BM when she needed it most.
Yes, I do know that. But
Yes, I do know that. But also having dealt with many drug addicts, I also know that having a support system is important. And they didn't provide that for her. Nor did they provide a support system for her daughter.
Actually the reason I know
Actually the reason I know they didn't give her a support system is because of what SD's life was like with her mom. As you said--when they're that bad off, they're not raising their own kid. And Grandma and Grandpa who are now so interested in her, were nowhere to be found. SD was alone when she found her mom dead, which was pretty traumatic for her. And her relationship with her grandparents wasn't great even before we entered the picture. They were around some--holidays mostly from what we can tell. It's possible they were there for her some. I'm not going to say they weren't. But from the best I can tell, they didn't support her very much if at all.
I'd rather not fight with them, but they want to fight with us. They consider us an 'unsafe environment' simply because we're not a Christian home. I think if they knew that when we first got custody of SD, they'd have probably fought for custody themselves. SD has new clothes that fit, rather than old ones that don't. She's doing well in school. She still has some issues--she's bound to given all she's been through.
Bullies like these
Bullies like these grandparents never apologize
You have no obligation to be
You have no obligation to be polite to these people. Make sure everyone in your house knows they are not allowed in the house, and no one is to answer the door when they show up. If you or DH want to talk to them at the door, that's fine, but you can close the door in their faces whenever you decide you've had enough.
That's exactly the point. The
That's exactly the point. The girl is way too old to be spanked even if one accepts spanking in general. No one should try to spank a child whose parent has said no to that, even if they are 4 But at 12? Super creepy.
Bible verses? Are you kidding me? It is dad's right to supervise the religious instruction of his child. Not gramma's. Dad can teach her bible if he wants to and he can choose which edition of it and which denomination. He can choose any other religion or atheism or philosophy. If this situation were mine I would not let such grandparents around my kid without my being right there to comment if I want to when they spout their fundamentalism so that the child gets some clear direction instead of undue influence or fear-mongering.
Since the child has aunts who are gay it is particularly heinous of these gparents to try to turn her homophobic and estrange her from people who are willing to love her.
And their obsession with the child's tank tops has a great ick factor to it.
And I haven't even started on their intrusive and aggressive behavior and then threatening you in your own home. Refusing to leave my house? You are dead to me. Cops will deal with you from now on.
Let them take him to court.
Let them take him to court. As far as I'm aware, it's very (VERY) rare for grandparent scheduled visitation to be granted--especially because it was not outwardly denied (you let them maintain contact but have rules they have to follow which is reasonable.) Treat is as you would a crazy ex--except in this case your husband has the upper hand because it's his child.
Have it in the CO, if it comes to that, of all the things that you don't want the child exposed to including religion, medical, etc. and IF they break those rules, that visitation will be revoked. Then keep hitting them with contempt until they get it (if they don't follow it.)
They are mad that the father
They are mad that the father didn't get the child baptised??? The mother, their daughter, didn't get the child baptised.
I'd keep a dated, with times, log of contact will them. And, I'd write down the conversation while the details are fresh in my mind.
I know that someone said copying Bible verses is equal to writing a behavior statement, but I can't agree. While I might be ok with my child copying some Bible verses there are others I would not. I would not want my child copying verses that they think support their homophobic views.
Spanking this child would not be ok. It's not their place. She's too old. Unless they agreed not to spank they would not be alone with my child.
I wouldn't worry about court, but I would meet with my lawyer and find out what grandparent rights are where you live. Grandparent rights definitely do not include the right to show up and demand the child after being told she was unavailable to visit.
I don't know much about every
I don't know much about every faith, but I always thought getting baptized was something someone CHOSE to do. Not something they did because they were told to.
Some religions baptize when
Some religions baptize when the child is a baby (Catholic and Methodist for example). That is a choice by the parents. It's a commitment to raise the child in the religion. Others - Baptist - it's a commitment by the child who needs to be of an age to make that decision themselves.
A woman that I knew (Methodist) had her grandchild baptized behind her son's back. He was FURIOUS, and I don't think has ever forgiven her. I do not approve of that at all - yet I do not think that had any real religious impact because if you do not believe in baptism then it wouldn't matter if it happened - especially with an infant who has no memory of it. It was very disrespectful of the GM to do that but in the grand scheme of things it did not have any "magical" effect on the infant.
I think they could be allowed
I think they could be allowed to have visits but supervised. Meet at the park or all go to dinner. I wouldn't completely deny them access to SD.
But I'd not send my child alone anywhere where she is spanked, send to bed without food and made to write bible passages against my wish. No freaking way. What kind of dark ages these homophobs came from?
I am 100% that if we punish and made SGD do ridiculous crap, SD wouldn't let us be around her unsupervised. and she'd be within her rights to do so
Spanking 12-year-old young
Spanking 12-year-old young lady might be considered sexual abuse/molestation under certain circumstances. What are they doing touching girl's butt????
Generally I am a proponent of
Generally I am a proponent of corporal punishment as a disciplinary option ... when age appropriate to an infraction. However, if all else remains equal and the GPs spanked SD for refusing to write Bible verses that is not okay IMHO. Neither is sending her to bed without being fed for refusing to write the Bible verses.
I think that DH needs to get on the stick and get an attorney on line and start the firm legal beating of these toxic moron GPs. Document, document, document .... particularly the refusing food and the spanking. Though I am a proponent of corporal punishment.... I am not an idiot and if the GPs spanking the Skid gives you a big stick to beat them with in court.... then by all means swing away with that stick.
Time for an RO/PO that keeps them far from your family and your property. SD nor anyone else in your family needs to be exposed to their ranting crap.
Own their asses and have fun doing it. Document, document, document. Keep a log, video tape and record any interface with them (check for legality in your area), and build your comprehensive information archive to keep these GPs under control. IMHO it is not a factor of if you will need the information but a factor or when. If you don't have it when you need it then it will likely be too late. Stay on top of the related record keeping.
Bring the pain. Sometimes that is all idiots can comprehend.
Good luck.
Lots of misinformation in
Lots of misinformation in this thread regarding grandparents right. These case are very rarely even heard in front of a judge. Legally, a grandparent is a stranger to a child and like some have said, only when there is a parent-child type relationship established will a court even consider writing a grandparents rights visitation order. I don't understand why people here are talking about these grandparents as though they have some sort of custody. They do not and they would smart to shut their mouths and take what they can with the SD becuase dad doesn't have to give them jack.
Tell them to bring it on if they threaten court, any decent attorney will not even take on the case because it's pretty fruitless.
Even in intact families
Even in intact families parents might just want grandparents to come over with visits/dinner etc but don't want kids to go to grandparents for a sleepover or weekends. No court would force parents to send kids out of the house for unsupervised visits with grandparent or aunt or anyone else if parents don't want to
Great post!
Great post!
Wish we had a "LIKE" button!
Wish we had a "LIKE" button!
If I was the dad in this
If I was the dad in this situation I would engage an attorney to press any option I had to nail the GPs for their participation in the kidnapping of my kid and sucking them financially dry for causing me and my daughter so much heartache. I would leave those crotchety old farts living under an overpass if I was this dad.
SA, you get this stuff like no other. Thanks for your wisdom.
Agree with Stepaside. OP
Agree with Stepaside.
OP are you or DH aware that,,A biological parent 'right' (decision) to whom their minor child associates with IS HUGE. Look at Granville v Granville.
Unless there is a court order GIVING Granny Grandpa visitation she has none UNLESS bio parent approves.
I know this to be a fact.
Update: So DH talked to our
Update:
So DH talked to our lawyer today, and yeah... they pretty much have zero legal standing. We've decided to eliminate overnight stays, and unsupervised visits. Either DH, myself, or DH's mom or another family member will have to be around (We already talked to my MIL about it, and she said she's okay with them coming over for a visit when she has SD, and I trust her judgement to know when they're out of line. I also know that when she tells a guest to leave, they better do it.) Then maybe if they can be civil we'll allow unsupervised visits. They can still call SD, and email her as well. (Currently SD's email account is still monitored by us, but she'll be able to get her own soon). And they're free to come to SD's events (not that they ever have. So that feels a little like an empty gesture).
But the first time they step out of line, and we're cutting out even the supervised visits. They can get phone calls, and emails and that's it.
I appreciate the support I've received on here. It's made me feel a lot better about our decision. I think we're being more than fair, and if they have a problem with it I'm sure they can waste some lawyers time instead of ours.
Rhiannon, You and your DH are
Rhiannon,
You and your DH are setting a great example for blended family couples on partnering for what is best for your family and for the Skid. Thanks for that.
This young lady is fortunate to have you both in her life.
No doubt the BioMaternalGPs will take issue with the new normal but ..... they are the ones that forced your hands on this.