What can I say--I feel you pain. My MIL has been with us for a little over a year now. I have recently quit my job of 9 years to stay home with her. She is 85 and her mobility is not good, confused on a daily basis, short term memory is bad and right now trying to keep her dressed seems to be the new thing with her. All in all she is a joy--pleasant and loveable but a real handfull sometimes. She stayed alone while my DH and I worked for nearly a year. I lived in fear that she would fall or get hurt while we were gone. We came home and found the house full of smoke and we knew we were really pushing our luck with this. She (for some reason) filled a skillet full of oil, placed it on the stove, turned it on and walked into the other room and forgot it. She didn't even see the smoke. She apparently fell asleep cause she said a loud noise woke her up--smoke alarms. And she still didn't notice the smoke. We came in just in the nick of time. I didn't go back to work. The first week I was home with her I was amazed at how good she was at "hiding" her confusion. Somedays she shines like a little star but others not so good and we are having a lot more not so good right now. I'm really suprised she didn't get hurt--we were so lucky. I REALLY miss going to dinner and running to the store or just going somewhere. It seems like my life revolves around how she is today. I miss doing things with just my husband or daughter. We sort of do shifts--one of us stays with her so the other can get out for a while. Like you we couldn't get any straight answers about the legalitys of leaving her home alone--and still can't . I guess we just have to go with our judgment with this. I keep telling myself how wonderful she's been to me through the years and how I"ll be in that shape one day. It's not easy.

Everyone, thanks for the info. Things have gotten interesting... I did get a response from our attorney and he basically said the same thing Heimert said above, we're not bound to the contract but they could try and file a lien. They never filed a 20 day pre-lien so they won't have much recourse. The brothers (subs) came by the property twice yesterday. The first time our new contractor wasn't there so I asked them repeatedly to come back when the contractor would be there that afternoon (I was becoming uncomfortable with them constantly "showing up" on our property). Finally they became very agitated and I honestly couldn't understand half of what they were saying when they stormed off. The second time our contractor made sure his guys were nearby to hear the conversation and he even went as far as bring a large flashlight out and set it on the bumper of his truck. He has not liked their strong arm approach and the fact that they keep trying to seek me out when he's not around. What did come out was that they did contact our original contractor and he told them (again) that they'd been paid in full for the work they'd done (obviously they still don't agree). Despite this their approach was to tell us that we have two choices, 1) we hire them to complete the job or 2) we pay them 7,000 and then we can hire anyone we want. I had asked our contractor to review the original contract and look over the work that they'd done to date to be sure they were paid a fair amount for the work completed. He agreed that what they'd been paid was a "fair" amount for the work that was completed. I basically told them I would not be blackmailed and our contractor told them that due to the way they've handled things there was no way he would hire them to complete the job. They came back today and began to take pictures. I was not here and when the workers called the contractor he called my husband to come tell them to get off the property. We'll see where it goes from here. I think with the economy the way it is, some people are getting desperate. I actually felt some sympathy for them but not after they came on so strong and tried to strong arm me into paying them money for nothing.

yosemitebill, things turned out very well. Thanks for asking. I almost lost my mind but good people are still out there. I even wrote a book called "Changing My Life Through the Kindness of Strangers a couple of years ago.These forums prove that point so well I think. Like I said after all the days off from work and the comcast people who hung up when they didn't know the answer there is a rose named Crystal who not only got the engineers working on it from her end instead of another tech home visit and then sent me a new DVR. AND, as I think I said, credited me all the way back to when I got the DVRs and gave me all the HBO and several other channels I did not have. She made her employer look very good. Now I must reward her with praise as I have done with other comcast superstars and there are a few. I always ask where they are located and have been successful in getting to one supervisor who was shocked, truly, by my phone call. Yes, dish installation has proven to not work. Love where I live and the people who pioneered through this subject before. Thanks for your kindness, Bill, and followup. I learned some things from you that I will pass on.

**disclaimer: The following is my personal opinion and may not have a legal basis. I am not an attorney and cannot give legal advice. If you need advice on how to proceed, please contact an attorney. 38-1337 Chapter 38.--MINORS Article 13.--CHILD CUSTODY JURISDICTION 38-1337. Definitions. (UCCJEA 102). As used in K.S.A. 38-1336 through 38-1377: (1) "Abandoned" means left without provision for reasonable and necessary care or supervision. (2) "Act" means the uniform child-custody jurisdiction and enforcement act. (3) "Child" means an individual who has not attained 18 years of age. (4) "Child-custody determination" means a judgment, decree or other order of a court providing for the legal custody, physical custody or visitation with respect to a child. The term includes a permanent, temporary, initial and modification order. The term does not include an order relating to child support or other monetary obligation of an individual. (5) "Child-custody proceeding" means a proceeding in which legal custody, physical custody, or visitation with respect to a child is an issue. The term includes a proceeding for divorce, separation, neglect, abuse, dependency, guardianship, paternity, termination of parental rights, and protection from domestic violence, in which the issue may appear. The term does not include a proceeding involving juvenile delinquency, contractual emancipation, or enforcement under K.S.A. 38-1358 through 38-1374 and amendments thereto. (6) "Commencement" means the filing of the first pleading in a proceeding. (7) "Court" means an entity authorized under the law of a state to establish, enforce, or modify a child-custody determination. (8) "Home state" means the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period. (9) "Initial determination" means the first child-custody determination concerning a particular child. (10) "Issuing court" means the court that makes a child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought under this act. (11) "Issuing state" means the state in which a child-custody determination is made. (12) "Modification" means a child-custody determination that changes, replaces, supersedes, or is otherwise made after a previous determination concerning the same child, whether or not it is made by the court that made the previous determination. (13) "Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government; governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality; public corporation; or any other legal or commercial entity. (14) "Person acting as a parent" means a person, other than a parent, who: (A) Has physical custody of the child or has had physical custody for [a] period of six consecutive months, including any temporary absence, within one year immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding; and (B) has been awarded legal custody by a court or claims a right to legal custody under the law of this state. (15) "Physical custody" means the physical care and supervision of a child. (16) "State" means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. (17) "Tribe" means an Indian tribe or band, or Alaskan Native village, which is recognized by federal law or formally acknowledged by a state. (18) "Warrant" means an order issued by a court authorizing law enforcement officers to take physical custody of a child. 38-1348 Chapter 38.--MINORS Article 13.--CHILD CUSTODY JURISDICTION 38-1348. Initial child-custody jurisdiction. (UCCJEA 201). (a) Except as otherwise provided in K.S.A. 38-1351 and amendments thereto, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child-custody determination only if: (1) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this state; (2) a court of another state does not have jurisdiction under paragraph (1), or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropriate forum under K.S.A. 38-1354 or 38-1355 and amendments thereto, and: (A) The child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant connection with this state other than mere physical presence; and (B) substantial evidence is available in this state concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships; (3) all courts having jurisdiction under paragraph (1) or (2) have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under K.S.A. 38-1354 or 38-1355 and amendments thereto; or (4) no court of any other state would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in paragraph (1), (2), or (3). (b) Subsection (a) is the exclusive jurisdictional basis for making a child-custody determination by a court of this state. (c) Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child-custody determination. History: L. 2000, ch. 171, 43; July 1. In my opinion, the SS should not be allowing his wife to keep the child's mother from having contact. The fact that he can't control his wife is going to reflect poorly on him. It's not going to excuse the fact that the mother isn't able to contact her child. He is the parent and it's HIS responsibility to make sure the child has frequent & continuing contact with the other parent. If the mother wasn't calling, he has less of an obligation to seek her out, but she is trying to call her child and no matter how annoyed he is with her or thinks it's not important to her because she doesn't behave how he would like when she does visit (ie. staying on her cell phone the whole time), that's not up to him to decide. She can act however she wants as long as it's not abusive to the child. There are many NCP's that use their time with the child and sit them in front of the TV and don't 'spend time' with them, but that's not up to the CP to decide. If he doesn't realize that his child's mother has rights, then the court will remind him. And it could cost him custody of his child. Not to mention, the child has a right to speak to his/her parent. A step parent does not have a right to interfere with that. PERIOD.