If she hasn't completed the court-ordered parenting classes & education about autism, is that not something like contempt of court? I'm sure some of the wise women here who've experienced legal entanglements will know more, but I can at least recommend that you document, document, document; keep a diary, & record every communication, every time she's supposed to be there & isn't (or cancels), etc. Also, print out those facebook posts. Meanwhile, it doesn't sound like she's been around enough for him to wonder why he isn't with her. He might just as easily ask why he isn't with the postman or the Sunday school teacher. If he were to say something, I think I'd practice the age-old parental strategy of distraction. "Oh, I dunno, honey...Hey, look, there's a squirrel in the back yard!"

Point taken, wrychoice, this one does hit home and I'm having a bad day. I think what gets my dander up about hopper2008's posts is what other people have cited (the apparent arrogance and the striking need to prove herself superior, esp. to the former wife & kids), but perhaps I'm taking it more personally because of my situation. The only other thing I really reacted to that other people hadn't already mentioned as irritating is the projection factor. That is, hopper2008 making it out like SD is the one being childish, unreasonable, immature, insecure and manipulative about this situation. Which may very well be the case, but if hopper2008 isn't in some way, at some level, tugging the other end of the rope, then it's a non-issue. If it's a non-issue, then Hopper2008 would simply make sure her husband knows it's okay for him to go to his daughter's wedding without her (and doesn't stand on any principle or misplaced idealism about unity, loyalty or whatever and create a very difficult situation for DH and SD on her wedding day b/c she can't face the reality that she and SD simply don't get along and pushes it at the wrong time & circumstance.) I guess I reacted especially much to the projection aspect because my Dad's wife plays that game of telling herself & other people similar things (i.e. "whatever HE wants to do"; "HE's choosing to do such-and-such"). It's crap, don't buy it if you ever hear this sort of thing. No parent except the lowest form would EVER so quickly and unequivocably "choose", "freely", to leave their kid in the lurch, even if said kid was being a brat. These husband/fathers DO NOT WANT TO TURN THEIR BACKS ON THEIR CHILDREN and they DO NOT do so easily. I mean, unless they are scum, in which case I'd have to ask why anyone would want to be with scum like that. These men (or women, when it's women in these situations) may seem like they are "choosing", but they are BACKED AGAINST THE FRIGGIN' WALL and make these apparent "free choices" under tremendous duress of one sort or the other. For example, I know this because my Dad got me a plane ticket to visit him behind my SM's back (via money order) and always calls me when she isn't around; he called NINE TIMES on and around X-mas ---when she was out--- because he felt so guilty about telling me I couldn't come. Because it wasn't what HE wanted. I know for a fact that SM was telling people "he decided" to not have me there, b/c he was so "disappointed" in me, or whatever the H3LL.... Meanwhile, these "independent decisions" of his always seem to benefit SM, for example HER sister and brother-in-law were there at Christmas in my place, and she got some home improvements done (FOR her not BY her, to be sure). My SM isn't fooling anybody! (Well, I can't say that.... she's not fooling ME and several others ---including my Dad--- but maybe she's fooling somebody somewhere.) In this kind of scenario, if a parent seems to be making a choice to turn their back on their child ---especially on a really important or significant occasion like a wedding that they would otherwise never want to miss--- and their spouse is acting all "my dog ain't in that fight", or more obviously, even GLOATING about the parent's "choice": look closer, ask some more questions. Barring possible reasons such as the most scummy good-for-nothing parent or child on the planet, in most average situations with average people with average issues and flaws, there is more going on than meets the eye. It's more than one person tugging the rope. One way or another, the spouse is also manipulating the situation, or at the very least, is getting a big payoff (emotional, financial, circumstantial, etc.) from just "sitting back" and 'watching" the fight. Saying things in plain English (i.e. "don't go to your daughter's wedding without me or I will be very upset and might divorce you") is only one possible method of getting one's point across. Other methods include: -The Silent Treatment -Sexual Freeze-Out -Generally Being a Stone-Cold B***h Until He Changes the Situation to Your Way -Acting all Hurt and Crying ("Why Doesn't SD Love Me?!?!") to Play the Victim -"Forgetting" to Do Something You Promised (such as get groceries to have food in the house) So He Gets the Hint You're Not Pleased About X situation -"Forgetting" to Give Him His Prescription Medications That You've Made him Dependent On You For So He Gets the Hint... (a favorite tactic of my SM's; actually all of these are) ...and there's probably myriad other sick, twisted ways of controlling a situation that aren't even occuring to me because I'm just not that perverse. (Would have to get in that Stephen King "Misery" headspace to comprehend it more thoroughly.) Admittedly I have some bitterness about my personal stepfamily dynamics (on one side of the family anyways), but apart from any offense it gives anyone, I hope that at least hopper2008 and perhaps anyone else who feels they relate to her will perceive in my words the effect that her apparent attitude may inspire in an SD in that kind of situation. And to just be careful, as kkny said, about the hubris factor. It's humbling to hear it, but hopefully it puts things in perspective b/c it's never a good idea to go around thinking of oneself as being perpetually in a catbird seat. Not with the way our society and relations between men and women tend to go. Plus I think it's good 'tactical' advice, to be kind of Sun Tzu about it: a strategic choice to 'lose the battle' (over being at the wedding) in order to 'win the war', or at least *appear* the bigger person and pre-empt any feeling DH might develop about being on a leash and starting to resent it. (Men tend to wriggle out of a leash millimeter by millimeter... you don't see it coming, and then poof! They're gone! Or even worse, they stay...) This particular advice isn't meant to be about pleasing the man, or the SD, but covering your own behind and not thinking you're invincible or always going to win.... or even always going to be around! So picture the points I made in my last post but with a bit less 'edge'... and hopefully it's illuminating.

My parents were married for 25 yrs when they divorced. Their marriage didn't come first at all. I don't know that even us kids came first...LOL. My mother has not re-married, but my father has. I have been on both sides of the fence with step-families. I was an adult when my father remarried. I have taken my approach with my SS's from what I have learned as a child of divorce, and from the mistakes his wife has made. 1. The marriage to my DH is of equal importance as his children. 2. The children need one on one time with their father regardless of how good our relationship is as a family. Whether intact or not, children need one on one time with each parent. 3. If anything were to happen to my DH, the chilren will recieve all monies from his life insurance policy, any items of his that they want, etc. It has been made clear to me and my siblings that we are not welcome to a personal relationship with our father. We are allowed to have one with him AND his wife (which is fine, but sometimes you need one on one with your parents) When I got married the first time, my father was dating his now wife. He brought her to my wedding. That was the first time I met her. They had come from out of state (about 1,000 miles) to our wedding. I welcomed her openly. She was awful. Very rude to my brothers, my mother, and disrespectful to my grandparents. She made it clear that she didn't feel that I was old enough to get married, and that she would never allow her daughter (same age as me) to get married. (I was young...21) Six months later, her daughter married a meth addict. Nice.... Anyway, over the years she's pulled some pretty crazy stuff. Alienating one of my brothers totally, and pi$$ing of the rest of us. Here's the thing. I still invite her to all family functions becuase she's my fathers wife. I remarried a while back, and she was invited to the wedding, and she sat with my in-laws, etc. I would never dream of treating her with any disrespect. I don't have to like what she does, but she is my father's wife, and that is the choice he made. My relationship with my father isn't what it use to be, and that's pretty sad, but that is his choice. I love him regardless. So, understanding both side of things, my goal is to foster a positive, fulfulling relationship between my DH and SS's. They all deserve it. What's funny, is that my DH would never allow me (or anyone else for that matter) to come between him and his kids. Nor would he allow my SS's to be disrespectful to me. I've been lucky, my SS's are very good to me. I don't know what I'd do if they weren't. I know I'd be crushed. I just don't think it's ever OK to exclude a bio OR step parent. When my SS had his 12th b-day party, he was mad at his mother still (he had moved in with us a yr before)and I told him "you invite your Mom, or no party...period". He got the message. We're teaching him tolerance. It can go a long way, just like manners.

I'm not an expert. That said, my first reaction would be "don't give up whatever current rights you have" -- which is not necessarily the same as "don't let your SD live with her BM". If you're in relatively the same geographical area, on relatively good terms with the BM, if the BM isn't sneaky or underhanded (eg abduction, lawsuit behind your back), and if as you say there's no physical/emotional risk (as far as that sort of thing is foreseeable) then I'd say work out a temporary long-term agreement on your own. Say, half the school year, 3 to 4 months, maybe a little longer -- long enough for the rosy glow to wear off. Talk to the biomom seriously about the realities of what's needed to make that happen. School districts, allergies, missing friends, that sort of thing -- just to be sure she understands. You said that she's already had kids living with her, so I guess that's not a worry. After the trial period is up, everyone could review and see if the experiment failed, if it succeeded, or if things need to be modified. Watch out for the SD pulling people's strings. Soap box: Children are people too, and thus tend to learn personal-type things the hard way. :) Right now, your SD has (at least) 2 possible homes. The best home would have the highest percentage of "good for her subjectively (makes her happy)" along with highest percentage "good for her objectively (physical safety, no emotional abuse, teaching how to get along in life, monetary support, dah-doo-run-run)". I think if you give her a blanket 'no' she's not going to be a very pleasant person to live with. If it's safe for her to learn the percentage lesson herself the hard way, then I say let her learn the hard way. And maybe the hard way is the best way. Even for the BM. You never know. That being said, before I met her my wife allowed her daughter to return to live with her BD -- and it will prob require additional expensive lawsuits and the cooperation of a child who's being threatened and thus unreliable in court to ever regain custody. Possibly even to reinstate visitation. And this is compounded by the fact that custody was *voluntarily* given up.