That number is based on custody, as per court filings. Even where no dissolution, unless amicable, there will be court filings. I doubt many mothers have given up or lost custody without any court filings. And I have no reason to think that unarried families have different stats. Do you have anything to back up including all the families the percentage would increase? I think just as likely where dad didnt even marry the mom, the stats would decrease.

I think your working in DSS gives you a very biased viewpoint.

There may never be a completely accurate statistic as I found several conflicting ones. does it really matter? My husband has custody and the order filed in the court has 50/50 on it. She signed an agreement that will be filed with the court, but she did hand over custody without an order or filing it with the court. My ex NEVER had an order regarding custody. His ex wife simply left. when my sister divorced her first husband, their son stayed with his dad and they didn't go to court for a custody order. She married her second husband, who has sole custody of his daughter (her mom is a drug addict living out of state and doesn't see her) I don't know if they have a custody order but my point is, that just within my family, there are at least four instances of dads having primary custody of their child. Considering there are only four of us, and two are married (in nuclear families) that seems a little more common than 10%.

dads having CP is probably more common than 10% in families with drug abuse, neglect, children being born outside of marriage etc. Although it might be common, it is really not a typical family.

what is a typical family? no one on here has a typical family. that's a redundant comment at best.

am I from a typical family? Parents married, had four kids, divorced after 19 years of marriage. The two older children were grown & moved out on their own. Dad had custody of my sister. (which again, wasn't filed with the court) Mom had custody of me. Dad remarried. Mom didn't. Dad paid child support. Mom didn't. Dad worked two jobs. Mom expected dad to support him and her.

My point is that all custody arrangements are not filed with the court. Fathers do have custody. There are bad mothers that don't pay child support, that don't visit their children, that are not there because they are selfish or have problems in their own lives. It may not be the majority but those things exist. If TOS or KKNY are not comfortable with the number of step mother's that live in a situation where their husband is the custodial parent, then perhaps there is a forum that is designed for custodial moms dealing with non custodial dads and their wives. But this is a stepfamily forum and we don't get to decide which step moms/dad come here. KKNY has repeatedly stated the statistics as if that matters. To a stepmother that is raising someone else's child because that mother can't or won't raise their own child, the statistic of how many people are in that same situation is irrelevant. That's like telling a victim of a crime how unlikely it is to be the victim of that crime. They are there living it so the statistics mean nothing to them.

Do you think it makes a difference between families that you consider "typical" or ones that have social problems? (which I believe ALL families have social problems) They are still families with children and they count. (or should we only consider it relevant if they are of a particular race, income level, etc.)

Talking statistics really doesn't help situations here. Here it appears a fair number of Bio dads have full custody and dealing with difficult bio moms. Years ago you only heard about dads walking out now days that simply isn't true. There are a lot of moms that walk out. The people on this stepparent forum want help in their situation. It is sad so many threads scare posters off due to going off topic, stating statistics and it appears not believing some posters. Many of these posters are in very difficult positions.

Ima,

And my custody says 50/50, but at most Dad has dinner with DD once or twice a month. So my guess is at best it averages out (mom vs. dad with more time than scheduled).

I guess by typical I meant more or less normal: no drugs, no sleeping around, no jail sentences and at least being legally married. Also when women trick men to get pregnant, it is very predictable that there will be some kind of custody issue in the future. I personally know a lot of people with 50/50 custody or custodial moms. I do not know too many CPs fathers in my surrounding. I know very few families where fathers are CPs. There usually is some kind of trouble involved. Moms are on drugs, in jail, or both parents are somehow involved in something questionable. I applaud those fathers but in my over 40 years of life I haven't meet that many of them.

I wonder in how many families actual visitations are different than what is scheduled? I think if a parent spends every single weekend with NC child, it is a pretty involved parent! On the weekdays kids are in school most of the day anyways. I would not call a parent picking up kids every weekend uninvolved. It is 3 days out of 4. Almost 50/50. My X used to have DD every weekend at some point. I always thought it made him pretty involved parent. But he was never CP. So how much do you believe custodial papers?

My H supposedly has EOW and one evening a week visitation, and two weeks in the summer. He has never allowed all of the younger ones to visit for even one week, he cut way back on visitation very quickly, and it has been years since he has allowed most of them to visit more than about once a year. My sister's ex-spouse saw even less of his kids. I have met exactly one custodial father in the over 50 years I have been around, and his children spent the entire summer with their mother.

I have met custodial fathers- because mothers died. And then few more cases where moms are on drugs or something like that-actually I can think of two right now. I meet a lot of families due to my occupation, but fathers having full custody is still a very uncommon thing. Or they do have 50/50 or moms see kids every weekend, which is a lot.

Imamommy: THANK YOU for this: "To a stepmother that is raising someone else's child because that mother can't or won't raise their own child, the statistic of how many people are in that same situation is irrelevant. That's like telling a victim of a crime how unlikely it is to be the victim of that crime. They are there living it so the statistics mean nothing to them."

I believe it was my post that started this whole inane banter about stats and honestly, I was not inclined to reply. It is insulting for KKNY and TOS to write from their silvery perches about how "they don't know any men who are CP's" and how it must be the worst of the worst situation for the father to get sole custody. That is not the case in my situation - the BM did something specifically related to her child that got him taken away from her. My fiance is college educated, professionally employed, a great father and an honorable person who did what was right for his child. I'm sorry if that makes him some kind of mythical creature in the mind of TOS or KKNY. He's real, he's mine, and believe it or not, my situation, although different than most, certainly comes with it's fair share of challenges.

eandhl: thank you also for your comments, "The people on this stepparent forum want help in their situation. It is sad so many threads scare posters off due to going off topic, stating statistics and it appears not believing some posters. Many of these posters are in very difficult positions." --- So true!

Hlmhr

My X is has college and graduate degrees, profecssional job etc. Which may be part or all of what made him attractive to his GF.

From the step moms who posted regarding the bio moms being possessive of the children, I am wondering if "any of you" are actually bio-moms yourself, and have to send "your" children over to another woman who is also in the role of "mom". Until you yourself have walked in the shoes of a woman, who is ordered by the court to send her children to her ex husbands place, where his newest girlfriend, or new wife, or the woman he met in a bar last week, will either try and win their hearts to impress him, or treat them badly...until you have walked in her shoes, please don't be so hard on her. It takes a strong woman to hand over her children to another woman who is now in the role of "mom" to her children, not to mention who now has her husband too. Unless you yourself are walking in her shoes, sending your own children to "your" ex's new woman, have some compassion for what this must feel like for her.

"Or the woman he met in a bar last week" lol That's the funny one.

I wonder how my X's exwife feels now when he left her for TOW, who he has a long affair with. I wonder how she feels sending her son to TOW who stayed for over a year in their house, slept in a guest room, ate dinners and all this time slept with the host's husband!

And this TOW will be talking that she is a good wonderful SM and maybe will critisize BM. My XMIL says that my X's exwife cries all the time of embrassment that she welcomed a woman in her house who slept with her husband. And now when her son is with his dad, he is there with that woman! It sucks big time. In fact little boy does not want to go there because he knows his dad left for another woman! I wonder if TOW will be calling him "my son" and encourage a boy calling her "mommy".

My colleague's husband left her for TOW just about a month ago. Now he already showed his preadolescent kids pictures of "his GF". And soon he is going to make them meet her. Poor woman, kids were terrified and asked mom: GF? What the...? Do you expect her to be all warm and fuzzy and tell her kids to call a GF/TOW "mommy", or what?

I think any woman who dates a man while he is still legally married has shown she has no integrity and does not care about the children. But it doesnt seem to bother some people here. I think any one who isnt brain dead will listen with sceptism the stories re marriage is dead, we're seperated, etc. etc. But some women dont let it bother them.

I asked my X why did he leave his wife so unexpectedly. He told me because marriage was dead for a long time. When I found out that he cheated on her for a long time and left for TOW (wife of his friend, ew...), it ocured to me that he probably told the other woman that marriage is dead! It gave green flag to jump right in.

But the funny thing is that his wife did not know it was dead, she was clueless, they never argued and she saw only one problem is that he was always gone on business trips (of course! he had an affair), but other than that she was absolutelly unprepared.

So when man says I am free for dating because my marriage is dead and I am on the path to divorce or I am separated blah blah, his wife might have no clue!!!

"From the step moms who posted regarding the bio moms being possessive of the children, I am wondering if "any of you" are actually bio-moms yourself, and have to send "your" children over to another woman who is also in the role of "mom". Until you yourself have walked in the shoes of a woman, who is ordered by the court to send her children to her ex husbands place, where his newest girlfriend, or new wife, or the woman he met in a bar last week, will either try and win their hearts to impress him, or treat them badly...until you have walked in her shoes, please don't be so hard on her. It takes a strong woman to hand over her children to another woman who is now in the role of "mom" to her children, not to mention who now has her husband too. Unless you yourself are walking in her shoes, sending your own children to "your" ex's new woman, have some compassion for what this must feel like for her."

bnicebkind,

I don't know if you read my post earlier but I am a step parent now. But, when my biological son (now 20) was going to his dads growing up (from age 4-12) and I did have to let my son go and I know how it feels. My son's step mom wasn't very nice to me and it was very hard to accept her doing things that I felt were "MY ROLE" as a mom. But, I didn't want my son to be treated badly and have her resent him because I was being a b*tch to her or encourage him in any way to treat her badly (and thus possibly giving her cause to resent his existence). Your child is entitled to see both parents (unless the court decides one is so unfit to stop visits) and when there is a step parent involved, then that person is going to be around your child. Like it or not. Making waves only makes the situation that much harder for YOUR child. I'm not saying step parents don't cause problems. She slapped me on Christmas morning one year during an exchange. But, unless she did something to my son, the courts were not going to halt visitation. I had to take the high road and hold my tongue so many times. Unless the step parent (or dad) is abusive or neglectful of your child, then you really have no say in what dad does in his home. (and that doesn't mean just because you don't agree with their rules or lifestyle) It's hard to see another female in your role as mom. I felt jealous at times when my son came back talking of the fun he had with her. I resented that I had to share my child with someone I really didn't like and didn't like me. But I did everything I could to keep it to myself and not let my son know how I felt. He surely knew I wasn't crazy about her but I certainly always told him that he's to mind her and follow her rules in her house.

bricekind,

But according to imamommy's earlier posts, her misgivings about the SM were well-founded - imamommy eventually was able to halt visitation after the SM rammed the car in which the child was riding with his father and his father's OW.

In most cases, if the mother feels uneasy about sending her child to visit the father while the father's latest GF/OW/wife/hook-up is there, there is a good reason for it.

I don't know what that has to do with how I felt letting my son go to his dad's where he had a step mom.

but yes, visitation stopped (when my son was 12) after my son's father and step mom had separated. My son was riding in a vehicle with his father's new girlfriend when the step mom struck the new girlfriend's car. I'm not defending the step mom in any way because her actions are inexcusable, but she may not have known my son was in the vehicle with the new girlfriend. At that point, the step mom was no longer living with my son and even after that, his father did not pursue to have visitation reinstated, which he could have. If theotherside is implying that it's mother's instinct that if she has a problem with the new girlfriend or wife, then there is good reason, she's overreaching. It bothered me more when my son was 4 or 5 years old and less as he got older. My son, even today, tells me his step mom was nice to him. Neither of us think she was trying to hurt my son that day in the car, but I wasn't going to keep him around his father's love triangle where he could get hurt unintentionally.

and I would like to add that my son continues to have some contact with his former step mother. She is the mother of his half brother, who is eight years old.

He has also resumed contact with his dad after he turned 18 and moved to the town where his dad lives.

He just moved back in with me a couple of weeks ago.

I do think that "mother's instinct," AKA misgivings, should not be ignored. I would certainly be concerned that if someone were to assault me, that they would also assault someone they might see as an extension of me, i.e. my child.

Guess I have walked in those shoes....

After 15 years ex left for TOW and my children visited every weekend. Two years ago my son moved in with his dad and SM and reversed visitation he came to visit me on weekends. My son moved back in with me in Sept. to attend high school and now visits his dad on weekends. We do not have a court order there is no written visitation agreement.

As far as being possessive.... teachers call the children in their classrooms "their children". Are you going to go raising he11 in a school because the teacher became possessive?

More and more fathers today are stepping up to the plate and mothers are walking away. Guess it could be the drug using mom's but I know of quite a few ..."professional women" who are weekend mom's. Years ago and in older generations ... fathers were "supposed" to walk away... but so many grew up without fathers ... that they sort of "vowed" not to do that to their own children. No matter what or how they feel about the ex-wife they put their chidlren first and deal with vindictive women for the sake of their children. Years ago vindictive women were left to fester and blame the world for their problems.

Nothing should come before your children... career, drugs, friends, partying, mid-life crisis, etc.

Although I do subscribe to put your marriage first ... if parents are not happy neither are the children. As the little ditty goes ... first come marriage then comes "junior" in the baby carriage.

Yes...for the first year or so... I was bitter.... she wanted you she should have known you were a package deal... you didn't come alone you came with two children.
Seven years later I don't think she is going anywhere... so I guess it worth "getting over it" ... She is good to "my" ex and good to "my" kids.

"weekend" moms is not the same as none exisiting, "walk away", abandoned, uninvolved mom etc. Some SMs described BMs as pretty much nonexistant and yet mom comes and picks the kid up every weekend or EOW. I would not call it nonexistant parent. That's what all NCP do. If a father sees kids EOW it seems to be fine but when BM is on the same arrangment she is called "nonexistant mom who abandoned her SKs".

Why do you say that NCP walk away? Sometimes children choose one parent over the other one, or sometimes it is better for the kid to live with the particular parent, or sometimes parents split the kids, all different reasons, sometimes parents trick the judges and come up with bizzare ways of winning the custody etc. I would not call NC parents "walked away". I know that some people win custody because they make more money, are married (and other parent is single), live in a better neighborhood, multiple reasons. Not because the other parent walked away.

I know that my BF's grown daughters do not like to stay with mom because mom is not a push over and has rules and expects everyone to stick to plans while BF never had any rules and spoiles both women rotten up to a ridicilous point. For an outsider his X must look like horrible BM (and I at first made this conclusion) who abandoned them because kids would rather hang out with dad all the time. But if you look deeper it is not the case. So i would not necessarilly make conclusions why children choose a parent.

They are grown but young children do that too. whenever angry at me my DD used to say i will go live with dad. And then sometimes while with him she would call and say: he makes me do this and that I am coming home. So who knows why and how parents got custody.

cawfecup, why would "anyone" care whether a teacher called students "my children"? Or feel that was in any way possessive? Or one teacher telling another teacher that "my kids" have the computer room from 10:30 until 11:00. Or "my kids" will be at recess at 1:00? Or telling the students that "my children" will behave when changing classes and set a good example in front of the other students or teachers. Why would anyone care?

On the other hand, it is a whole different ballgame, when "the other woman" who had an affair with a married man, and destroys someones family, is now calling another womans children, "my kids". O.K. She has her husband, and now she is trying to claim the children as her own? Can't imagine that would go over very well.

I was at an outdoor concert once (a type people bring families to). Sitting in front of me was a family of four. At first I thought how nice it was that mom and dad were so in love, as they kept kissing. It did not take long to realize that only the dad acknowledged his young sons at all...actually very rarely. As the concert continued, and I watched the situation around me, I realized how uncomfortable the two children were. They must have been around 5 and 6 years old. I finally figured out why. Throughout the concert, dad was making out with his new honey. Serious making out, in front of his two young sons. He completely ignored them, and was totally into his new girlfriend. He was absolutely oblivious to how his behavior affected his sons. I imagine in his mind, they should be grateful he took them to the concert. And he will probably have no clue why his sons don't want to be with him. He will probably say his ex wife is poisoning them against him. I saw the same situation played out on an airplane once too. This time it was mommy who was behaving this way, and her daughter was watching her mom do this throughout the flight. When she tried to get her mommies attention, her mommy would snap at her and tell her to be quiet. Her mommy continued to make out and giggle with her lover, and the little girl was completely ignored, throughout the very long flight. The little girl was like 6 years old, and apparently an only child.

If only mom and dad could step back and look at this behavior through the eyes of their children. And if only they could "feel" what their children must be feeling watching the behavior of mom and/or dad with their new love.

" * Posted by theotherside (My Page) on
Mon, Dec 17, 07 at 8:16

I do think that "mother's instinct," AKA misgivings, should not be ignored. I would certainly be concerned that if someone were to assault me, that they would also assault someone they might see as an extension of me, i.e. my child."

TOS actually makes my point with this statement. The courts were NOT going to stop visitation because she assaulted me. It was brought up in court and the court stated she did nothing to my son. I HAD to send my son to his dads. If I had given her attitude or reacted to it by being hostile back to her or whatever TOS might have done, it WOULD have given her a reason to view my son as an extension of me and possibly she would take it out on him. I chose to diffuse the situation and not fuel the fire with her. I parented my son when he was with me and let his dad parent him (or allow her to parent him) when he was there. If I had let my feelings or resentment get in the way, my son could have been affected.

and I don't see too many posters here saying mom completely walked away. I see moms that are inconsistent, come around when it's convenient for them (without regard to the effects to their children), that put their own wants before the needs of their children. Sure, there may be SM's and BM's that just don't like each other because they are in a tug-o-war over their "territory" and role.

As for weekend mom's that think it's their "RIGHT" to tell a full time Step mom what to do in dad's house, those are the mom's I take issue with. The same goes for weekend dads telling custodial mom (and step dad) what to do in her house. That seems to be one of the themes in the case of NCmom's. They like to scream "Those are MY kids" yet they can't, won't or are not fit to have them live with her. The kids are NOT property that belongs to you. and it is less likely for a NCP to be just as involved as CP, they have all week to plan a "fun" weekend. My SD comes home from mom's house very happy that she baked a cake, rode skateboard, went rollerskating, chuck e cheese, and played video games all weekend. She hasn't brushed her teeth or taken a shower and her hair is matted from not brushing it. Her mom complains that I don't let her play video games in our house. Instead, I have her practice her cursive handwriting like her teacher asked. I'm glad she has fun at her mom's house but it's hardly the same involvement that a CP has.

and finedreams, I think your BF's ex sounds like a WONDERFUL MOM. I think the kids should be with her and not a pushover dad. (I realize they are grown now) and that is the problem i had when I left my ex. The boys didn't want me with my rules and structure. They wanted to have fun. They got it and they are dealing with problems in their lives because of it. And if my child said "I'm going to live with dad" and then wanted to come back because HIS rules were too strict, I'd probably hesitate to let him come back so soon. That is what is a big problem in our society, that kids bounce back and forth to what is easy and they never learn boundaries. The parent's that LET them go back and forth are NOT doing their job as parents. They need to be a team, even though they are no longer together.

They are not my children... its my fall back... I can just say "not my fault, not my kids".

I have heard the TOW/SM refer to "my children" as our children not the same I guess. Took me by surprise but wasn't ready to physically attack her over it.

Not just their new love ... how they behave or react to everything in day to day life... if your parents fall apart everytime something comes up ... thats how you will deal with things as an adult.

My BF's daughters are not troubled by no means, they are very well adjusted. But they certainly like to be taken to expensive restaurants, meals cooked for them daily, stuff purchased, and dad catering to them when they visit etc. Mom wouldn't do it. He (and mom) did have rules and still has but they are in regards to do well in school and pursue a good career, don't sleep around and don't do drug and don't get pregnant at 15. They are very well adjusted and they brought them up properly. They are just spoiled and mom wouldn't participate in this spoiling. It is different from not having rules at all and then dealing with troubled kids.

To add: My BF and his X divorced after children were already grown. But if divorce would happen earlier in life, I bet kids would prefer him for reasons I described. And then when he would be CP he would talk how BM is a "weekend" mom and how she walked away. I am not so sure about reasons behind some BMs being "weekend" moms.

Well she used to be thurs night and sun night mom... now she is weekend mom.

Two overnights per week Thursday afterschool drop off at school and Sundays at 5:30pm overnight drop off at school.

Hubby asked her to pick 3 nights a week any 3 nights but one had to be either a friday or saturday ... she said take me to court... the Judge gave her two nights a week friday and saturday... thats what makes her a weekend mom.

I cringe when I imagine how that must make the child feel.

I know two women, one of whom is a friend, the other a distant relative, who voluntarily let their husband assume custody after the divorce. In the one case, the children were all boys approaching their teen years, and mom thought that the kids needed to be with their dad more. In the other, the woman knew she would have to work shifts, and the kids would be with sitters most of the time they were home from school, so the kids were better to stay at dads.

In both cases, I think these women were selflessly thinking of what the kids needed first, and themselves second.

ANd yet, I am sure on this board, both those moms would be condemned. WHy is it that we can admire when a man does what is best for the kids, but not when a woman does? In the real world, these two women have had their share of people who revile them, because they cant understand that the kids well being was FIRST. They could only think of what they would do, and lack the ability to empathize with anyone else.

In most situations, both parents are decent enough parents. We may not like the way the other person parents, and its human nature to critize our "rival". In reality, someone has to be the custodial parent, and both parents should be respected, regardless of who has primary custody.

TOS-I am shocked by some of your posts. Being a SM is completely different than being a teacher or a babysitter!

#1) A teacher, babysitter etc....does not live with the child like the SM would.

#2)The SM is the one who is married to the dad...not the teacher or babysitter.

Does your child's teacher or babysitter cook their dinner for them and wash their clothes? Do they have to scrub glue off of the floor or try to plunge the toy out of the toilet??? Those are things that SMs do...just like BMs do.

My fiance has 2 kids (twins) if they are coming to our house to stay the weekend and they are painting my walls a lovely pink color and running around the house with a lighter etc....I have every right to do something about it. What I am supposed to do...tell the kids "well what you are doing is bad but I won't do anything about it because I did not give birth to you...even though you are living in my home and I am married to you father"??????? That would be crazy. Kids aren't stupid either. If they think that BM is going to be upset with SM for correcting them on something...they will use that to their advantage. Trust me...I know. In the end it leaves SM's confused on where the boundries begin and end. That is not fair. BMs love the kids unconditionally but a SM has to learn to love that child and it takes a lot of work sometimes. What comes easy for a BM does not always for a SM. BMs are so quick to bash SMs though and I do think it is because they are insecure with their own relationship with their child or because the dad left them and causing problems with the SM would make them feel better. Very childish! I think the BMs (not all of them....I am also a BM myself) are jealous that the dad is remarried and has a helping hand with raising the kids. It then becomes BMs goal to destroy that. No one ever stops to think that it is the kids who get hurt in the end though.

The day that I am told that I can't correct the SKs when they are doing something bad or I can't cook, bake, clean for them. That is the day I am out the door. Which is what maybe the BMs who feel this way towards SMs are hoping will happen. To make things so complicated with boundries and such that the SM will eventually throw in the towel and walk away. I refuse to be a SM and help raise my husband's children but have no say in their up bringing at all. If that is the case then I would have to be someone who does not have kids. The way I look at it if the dad is happy with how the SM is being a S-T-E-P-M-O-M....then the BM has no say in it.

To imamommy....yes I am also a BM. So..I have walked in the shoes of a SM (fiance and I live together and he has 6 yr twins) and I also have a 10 yr daughter myself.

yes I am also a BM. So..I have walked in the shoes of a SM (fiance and I live together and he has 6 yr twins) and I also have a 10 yr daughter myself.

"Too many mixed motivations. Is wife doing it to keep DH happy (role as part of team with DH)? What happens if marriage folds?"

Regarding your comment above about the marriage with the dad and the SM folding. Well...if there is a SM in the picture then apparently one marriage already folded. Don't think that should be a concern for the ex-wife...to worry about the new wife and dad possibly divorcing.

Bookworm,

The difference is the mother will always be the mother, dont know re stepmother (or series of GFs). The point is SMs who want to be treated as parent have different relationships. The issue is what happens to relationship with the CHILD.

Well, which is it???

You are quick to point out that second marriage fail more often than first. And equally quick to point out that step moms should have boundaries and keep their step child at arms length, which as you probably are aware, makes it harder to live in a blended family. Thus, leading to the failure of the marriage.

I keep hearing "what happens then?" So, tell me, what happens? Are you going to encourage YOUR child's step parent to stay in his/her life? Or tell your kids, "good riddance, didn't I tell you THAT wouldn't work out?"

I don't even think you have to respond. Your answer is painfully obvious.

So what valuable advice or opinion do you have to contribute? Or are you just here to say once you have kids, you should never get remarried if it doesn't work out the first time? That may be your choice in life and your situation is not the same as most of the step families here. You are not saving anyone any pain or helping with anyone's problems by your vindictive contributions to this board.

And I wanted to add a thought that goes back to the earlier part of the thread. It has to do with "possessiveness"

I'm a stepchild. My step mom came into my life when I was 17 and when I was 27, she had an aneurysm. She's been home for nine years and I've been caring for her since her own daughter quit because she couldn't deal with it anymore. It was a few months later, that she (and her brothers) filed to take my dad to court (worried about their mom's money) and since she was co-conservator (care only),she would drop by for ten minutes once a week. She would criticize some of the care her mom was getting and write notes in the care log. Her visits gradually went from weekly, to bi weekly, to monthly and we haven't seen her for several months now. But when she did come around, she always had something to say about what we were doing with "HER" mom.

Let me tell you that I change her mom's diapers. I give her mom a bath. I feed her mom formula five times a day through a feeding tube. I clean her mom after bowel movements. I give her mom her medication on a schedule. I clean her mom's trach so she can breath. I hold her mom's hand and talk to her. I comfort her when she looks distressed.

I am there and she isn't and what gives her the right to come in and tell me what to do? And that's no different than being a step parent. The BM isn't there when the SM is doing what needs to be done in her absence and instead of griping about it, she should be thanking the SM for it.

"I am there and she isn't and what gives her the right to come in and tell me what to do? And that's no different than being a step parent. The BM isn't there when the SM is doing what needs to be done in her absence and instead of griping about it, she should be thanking the SM for it."

Agreed, Ima!
Another example, but a positive one...
My SM had breast cancer about two years after she and my dad married. Her oldest daughter lives about 4 hours away and wasn't able to be around after her mastectomy to help care for her. Her younger two daughters lived in the city and were at the house almost every day for about three weeks to help her bathe, change dressings, aid with her physiotherapy and so on. I was the only one of the seven total kids who was living at home, so while I didn't help with the "personal care", I did most of the food prep, house cleaning and so on. My sister came over to help a few times too. My SM must have mentioned this to our oldest stepsister, because next time we saw her, she said "Thank you for helping my mom after her surgery. I couldn't be there and it was nice to know that she had you two as well as my sisters."
Now I think that's a healthy attitude about stepfamilies!

No

Ima, I mean to encourage both biological parents to do their share, and not push off on steps.

I can't speak for other steps but I do for my step daughter because I love children. Is it convenient for my husband? perhaps. Can he do some of those things? Of course. He does his share. He does what he would be doing if he was still with her mom, and that's work to pay the bills and spend time with her in the evenings and his weekends. If they were still together, she would be taking her to doctor visits, and activities while he was at work. And before she moved away, she lived close enough to do those things for her daughter all the time, even during his weeks. And now that she can't do those things because she chose to move away, what gives her the right to call up and be angry that I do those things in her place?

I'm sure he could put her in daycare (like she was a few years ago) and he could leave work early to take her to the doctors, but since we are married, we are a family. Why should we incur the added expense because her mom moved away? When I said my vows to my DH, we also made vows to each other's children. It wasn't pushed off on me by my DH. If anyone has pushed their share on me, it's the mom that ran off with a guy she hardly knew for a week. And yes, I resent her for that. It would be fine if she does her thing and accept that she chose to leave and not complain about me or tell me what to do, but then she resents me and treats me like I've done something wrong for stepping up and being the mom she refuses to be. How is that right?

I never said that anyone - SM, teacher, babysitter, friend, whatever - should let a child run around with a lighter. Anyone can take the lighter away. Only the biological parents have the right to ground the child (or whatever appropriate punshment) for running around with it.

sure they do. Teacher's "ground" kids all the time. What do you call it when they have detention or lose a recess? In a SM's home, she sure does have the same right to restrict an unruly child in her home (unless DH disagrees and that's between them: Not BM)

I definitely would NOT call detention "grounding." It is not the same thing at all. And I don't think detention or losing a recess are effective methods of discipline. Detention just punishes the parents, who have to leave work to pick up the kids because they can't take the bus home, and missing recess is the last thing you would want to do to kids who have trouble sitting still to begin with. And no, my kids have never gotten detention, and the only time they missed recess was when the whole class did. I have only grounded a child twice in all the years I have been raising my kids, and those times were when they did something dangerous.

If a child is purposely throwing away her glasses, it is important to find out why. Kids who see better when their glasses are on generally are willing to wear them, even when they are only toddlers, unless someone or something else is involved, such as teasing or a serious self-image problem. All my kids have had glasses and they all wore them willingly as soon as their vision was bad enough that the glasses were a noticeable improvement. They have broken several pairs, but not intentionally.

Kids do not throw away their glasses, skip school, flunk out, or annoy their siblings just to drive the adults around them crazy. There is a reason behind what they do, not always an obvious one, and it helps to find out what that reason is rather than using punishment as a knee jerk reaction.

Posted by theotherside (My Page) on Mon, Dec 17, 07 at 22:04

I never said that anyone - SM, teacher, babysitter, friend, whatever - should let a child run around with a lighter. Anyone can take the lighter away. Only the biological parents have the right to ground the child (or whatever appropriate punshment) for running around with it.

TOS-I never said you said that kids should run around with lighters. Your missing the point. That was an example...one that I had happen to myself recently. As far as the bio parents being the only one to discipline-I strongly disagree. I don't mean that I should have a right to beat my SK until they can't sit down...as a BM I wouldn't do that to my own child even. If a SM doesn't have any parenting part in a stepchild's life then why are SMs given the title Step-Mom. It does not mean that I would ever take the place of the BM...I respect that she is their BM. However if a SM lets the SKs walk all over her because she is afraid that the BM will get upset....then that is exactly what the kids will continue to do...walk all over the SM and they know that they can get away with it. I can't count how many times in the past I get that look from the kids when I say "No, don't do that". They give me that look like you are not my mommy and if you punish me for being bad..I'm telling. If the BMs and the SMs could work together and realize that instead of 2 parents (not to step on the toes of the bio parents) but that there are 3 or 4 parents to help raise the children...the children could actually benefit from it. Bio parents seem to forget that when you make the decision to divorce the other parent...things are going to change and that may include your child having a step-parent. I am a step-child myself and I am a BM and play the role of the SM too. In a perfect world everyone would stay together and raise THEIR children together but we don't live in a perfect world. I just think that BMs need to let go of the jealousy and anger towards the SM. Sometimes being a SM is not a picnic and it can be a real challenge. I have struggled with blending families for a while now. If I am going to have the SKs stay with me and I am the one helping to look after them..they are not going to walk all over me and disrepect me because I did not give birth to them. I will love them and treat them (which includes correcting them) as I do my own child.

Posted by TOS-"Kids do not throw away their glasses, skip school, flunk out, or annoy their siblings just to drive the adults around them crazy. There is a reason behind what they do, not always an obvious one, and it helps to find out what that reason is rather than using punishment as a knee jerk reaction."

TOS-I don't know about your kids but I know plenty of kids who do things like what you mentioned above to drive the parents crazy. It is called "rebelling". Most all kids have done something at some point to rebel against their parents...Bio and Steps.

For an example-last weekend SD is taking a fork and grinding into my coffee table as I am demanding her to stop. I have to take it away and of course I wasn't going to say "Oh..hunny that was bad but I'm not your BM so I can't do anything about it". She was sent to her room for it. Was there a reason behind her purposely taking a fork and scratching up my coffee table which I can't fix without it costing me money??? If so...I would love to know the reason. She may be able to do those things at her BMs house but not mine and just because I am not her BM does not mean I will let her get it away with it. I wouldn't let my own daughter get away with it.

In my case the BM doesn't really discipline the kids at all. They pretty much do as they please when they are with her...so due to her wonderful parenting...by the time they get back to us they are out of control. I don't feel for one minute that I don't have the right to set them straight when they are in our home.

Book,

I am confused? You have stepchildren? Last I thought I read you had a fiance, which I assume means you are not married?

Does it really matter if Bookworm simplifies on this forum by calling her fiance's daughter her SD?
I know what a pain it is to use "my BF's son" all the time on here, so that's why I just shorten to A__. She can shorten to SD if she so chooses.

We also see cases where the original parents weren't married but posters refer to them as EH or EW for brevity... And nobody seems to have an issue with that.

I hope our poor use nomenclature you can't accept doesn't keep you up at night! (Although, lack of sleep could explain your sometimes disagreeable disposition)

*bites my tongue* ha! Very funny Ceph!

Sorry....

Bookworm, I can't blame you, I'd have sent her to her room too. Who teaches these kids to be destructive like this? I know it's not normal. I have an enormous family with multiple neices and nephews. Each and every one of them different and parented differently, but I can't see them doing something like that.

SD did something like that with a silver magic marker on the black fridge. Now I have "i LuV YoOh ZaCh", hearts, "UR So HoTt", and various and sundry other things on my fridge. Who taught her that this was acceptable?

book,

Perhaps tos & kkny would agree and suggest you send a bill for a new coffee table to BM instead of sending SD to her room. It IS BM's child and at the very least she should pay half the cost to fix or replace it. (especially if you are NOT her step mom, then you have absolutely NO legal ties that suggest you should eat the cost of HER child damaging your property)

My SD destroyed a coffee table too with a knife when DH and I were dating. He replaced it with his when he moved in and we got married. But, had BM said a word about how I handled it, I would have sent her a bill to fix it. Fortunately she didn't say a word. (and SD's punishment was pretty much the same, time out... no games or activities. She just sat on the couch the rest of the day, looking at what she had done.) She hates being bored and just sitting there.