applying for residence order and parental responsibility for me (stepmum) - mother going nuts!

[ladydeedy]

hello
sigh.. sorry, another post (have only just come across this site in the last few days and cant seem to stay away right now!).
Anyway... DH and I are applying for a residence order for his son who has come to live with us and wants to stay (and we want him to stay too!). All happy there. He is 14 and very clear that he doesnt want to go back and live with his mum.
We are making a joint application so that I would also have parental responsibility. This is because DH often abroad for work and it means that practical stuff for son can be dealt with by me if necessary, e.g. signing school/medical forms, without me having to find the mother and get her to sign.
So we thought it would all be a matter of course but...
the mother now going apopleptic with rage saying she doesnt give a f*ck that he lives with us but that she absolutely wont allow ME to have any "legal rights" over the son and will fight tooth and nail as she "doesnt trust me".
Not quite sure how I feel about that, given that I have been his stepmother for years and we have a great relationship! Also if she is happy for me to care for him, then why the big issue over any parental responsibility?
I guess this means she will contest. I dont have a problem with that personally but think this may cause anxiety to the son who may have to go through interviews etc with cafcass as a result.
In addition I'm thinking... any lawyer would ask questions about why she is so adamant and would advise her to forget about it? She basically chucked him out and took his key off him - I'm not sure her view about parental responsibility would really holds much value in the eyes of the court? (although of course she is still his mother).
any thoughts or advice out there? Anyone else been through this? and if so, my sympathies!!

Well, it might be nice if Ladydeedy would stop filling in gaps with assumptions about the mental health of the mother too, as Ivykaty suggests. You can't go before a judge and allege that someone has mental health issues as you can here. It is not a perfectly legitimate observation for a layperson to make in court.

If Ladydeedy contemplates saying this to a family court judge, what she will be doing is making an allegation of fact. I'm not at all sure if the judge will be impressed by her diagnostic expertise without a medical qualification. And anything the mother may have said about herself is called 'hearsay' where the courts are concerned. The reason there is a hearsay rule is to prevent people making stuff up and presenting it as fact.

As for the triumphal ! accompanying her comment -- if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then chances are it's a duck. You can't separate the exclamatioon point from the rest of the sentence or pretend it has nothing to do with what you want to convey.

The mother suffers from depression and is on medication for it. She often throws this into the conversation and is very open about it. I am not making assumptions.
You chose to interpret an exclamation mark as a sign of triumph, as well as fact that I have stated that the boy has "chosen" to live with us (I could as well have said decided which maybe would not have created such an emotive reaction?), these are statements of fact. They are not triumphal. He has stopped self harming and we took him to a doctor, as some of his previous self harming had caused an infection, and he is receiving treatment and had the opportunity to discuss his self harming with a doctor.
I am not aiming to compare myself with the mother, just stating some facts to couter some of the assumptions that some posters have made.
Equally, I do not intend to dictate to a court. They will, with the aid of cafcass and mediators, decide what is in the best interests of the child, as you say.
If the mother choses to contest any part of it, that is her choice.

I havent said anywhere that I intend to speak to the judge.
I will be in court as I have received papers requesting my presence.
Thank you

ok!

yes that is what we were hoping originally, only it all blew up when discussing it on here and exw deciding she might fight against the fact it was a joint application for residence.
She doesnt seem to have an issue with him living with us (as it makes her life easier) - just doesnt want my name on anything, for whatever reason she has for that, and prepared to make life difficult because she cant handle it. Thanks mj.

"Quite honestly I had no idea that this would cause such a reaction and my understanding from our legal friend/rellie is that applying for PR as a stepparent with resident stepchildren is relatively common and not a big deal. It appears that it is! (to some)."

I have been a step-parent with majority residency for the past 10 years and have never applied for PR nor thought to. I know a fair few other very involved step-parents (not just partners of McDonald's Dads) and I not one of them has applied for PR either. Perhaps this 'common' idea means different things to different people.

You stated earlier on this thread that the mother was clearly depressed and refusing treatment. Now she is taking medication for it. So which is it?

"They will, with the aid of cafcass and mediators, decide what is in the best interests of the child, as you say.
If the mother choses to contest any part of it, that is her choice. " And it will wind its way through the system if she contests it until the child is no longer a minor, with relations between all the parties concerned getting worse as the hearings progress.

And if you are allowed to tell the court that the mother has a mental illness, can she not say exactly the same about you?

The standard of proof in civil cases (which includes the family court system) is not the same as the criminal courts, but there is still a burden on the petitioner to provide evidence of any allegations made. The court can only make findings of fact where the evidence justifies the findings -- gut feelings, concern, things you may or may not have heard the mother say or things the boy may have reported to you, do not justify such a finding of fact absent evidence. They are allegations until you prove them to be facts, which can be a long and difficult and bitter process. And the more serious or improbable or unusual the allegations you make, the more evidence a judge is likely to require. The burden of proof rests on the party making the allegation.

I think any sane mother would contest giving up parental responsibility over her son.

I'm suprised your suprised she's contesting it.

you're

She is taking medication but was also offered counselling (which was thought would help her better longer term) but she refused.
Sakura - she's not giving up parental responsibility for her son - she will continue to have PR as she is his mother. That's not being taken away from her.
It's a case of both adults in the house where he now lives having PR.
Yes she can of course tell the court that I have a mental illness if she choses to do so. We know that she takes medication as she a) talks about it all the time and b) gets the older boy to go and get her prescription for her "happy pills" as she calls them.

I wonder if her feelings regarding PR would be different if she were in a stable relationship herself, with a man who is a good step-parent to her son and there was a chance for both step-parents to gain PR of the boy.

Sakura - she's not giving up parental responsibility for her son - she will continue to have PR as she is his mother. That's not being taken away from her. Was going to write the exact same thing. Why do people keep assuming if a step-parent gains PR of a child, it means it is being taken away from a biological parent? A mother's partner can ask for PR of a step-child too.

I agree ChocHobNob - and we wish she were, because we think that would be a good situation for everyone (not least her) but sadly that isnt the case.

I actually dont think she understands what the PR issue means, perhaps like some of the other posters on here, and thinks that something is being taken away from her, when it isnt.

So she is taking treatment, then. What sort of treatment anyone chooses for depression is entirely up to them and none of anyone else's business, you do understand that? I would love to know how it has come about that you are (A) privy to this woman's personal mental health history and treatment, and (B) an expert on what is better for her long term. Her medical treatment is a private matter between her and her doctor. You have no right to the details. You have no right to be telling all and sundry here on MN any of the details of someone else's mental health problems and treatment. It is very disrespectful of you. She has a right to privacy where her mental health and treatment are concerned.

The way she probably feels about the PR is that Ladydeedy will be accorded the same parental rights as she has. And that is the heart of the problem. While Ladydeedy cannot see what her problem might be with that, I think I can. However inadequate she may be as a mother and however fabulous Ladydeedy may be as a stepmum, she has a right to resent the fact that giving LD the same PRs as she has effectively knocks her down to the same level as a stepmum, or sets LD up at her level as a parent, or defines her parental rights, which up to now have been assumed by virtue of the fact that she gave birth to the child. Giving LD parental rights is a huge thing to accept, emotionally, for a biological parent. She can accept your DH having parental rights, naturally, as he is the boy's father. But you are not the boy's mother. She is. There is clearly something elemental and bone deep there, and I do not know why you dismiss it.

There is something too cold and logical about LD's explanation of how this PR thing works. The inability to put yourself in the mother's shoes here, the idea that you knows best wrt this woman's depression treatment and her relationship with all the parties involved here, makes me shake my head. What if the situation was reversed, Ladydeedy -- what if you and your DH divorced and his new wife wanted to have parental rights for whatever reason. How would you feel? Could you really just accept the logic and go along with it?

"knocks her down to the same level as a stepmum, or sets LD up at her level as a parent"

What are you saying exactly? That a stepparent is somehow "inferior" or at a lower level than a biological parent?

Shame on you.

Of course everyone has a right to privacy regarding their medical/mental health issues. In this case though, the mother has quite happily been sharing that information with anyone who will listen, which is why I know about it.

I think if my DH and I divorced, and if we had any children of our own, and he remarried and I kicked "our" child out, and that child went to live with his dad and his stepmum that he'd knowns since he was 3, and knowing that they both loved and cared for him, I would happily allow the stepmum to have parental responsibility. Why would I object so very strongly?

Math - I think a lot of stepmums would feel their hackles rising at this. Are we really such lesser beings in the great parenting hierarchy? Personally I think it is deeply offensive that we have a legal system which requires any natural parent to ask for PR. Most of us who are members of stepfamilies will have had to cope with many things we resent and find hard to deal with. In the end the guide has to be what's best for the kids and if this gives LD's SS some security which seems to be what he was asking for then perhaps his birth mother needs to accept that regardless of how hard it may be for her, it may be best for her son.

I'm looking at it from the possible perspective of the mother, Ladydeedy, something you are seemingly completely incapable of doing. I do not know why you cannot even get close to seeing things from the mother's pov. She is not just some nuisance you can swat away, some obstacle to be rolled over by the tank of your logic and superior appreciation of what's best for everyone.

What exactly I am saying here is that you are not the child's mother. Like it or lump it, you simply are not.

I can guarantee that you would see things completely differently if you had a child of your own and circumstances like this arose. Logic would be the first thing to fly out the window once you beheld your child for the first time, and outside the window it would stay. You would object so very strongly because your child is your own flesh and blood, and that is what makes all the difference.

You can bleat 'shame on you' however much you want. You would be better off, and so would the child, and possibly the mother, if you were to expend some of your considerable energy trying to see things from the mother's point of view and working with those insights you gain. The attitude you have, that a stepmother and a mother are fungible, will obviously get you nowhere with this mother. Even from the pov of going through the courts quickly and efficiently and getting this thing settled, it is misguided. This woman clearly needs her primary role and relationship in her son's life acknowledged. Instead you seem hell bent on dismissing her.

Can you achieve what you want without going for the nuclear option (the PR)? Because that is what this is. You are using a sledgehammer to deal with something that requires a much more delicate instrument. The best step-parent-biological parent-child relationships I have seen are those where everyone takes pains to acknowledge the primacy of biology over legal definitions.

Whether the mother has shared information with you or not, you have no right to post it here, or share it with people in RL, unless she has given her permission, just as she should not post your medical details if she knew them.

The best step-parent-biological parent-child relationships I have seen are those where everyone takes pains to acknowledge the primacy of biology over legal definitions.

Disagree again with this. The best step families I have known that work well is where the biological mother/father also acknowledges the role of the step-parent and doesn't regard them as some lower being. This isn't about primacy or being number one. This is about mutual respect and acting in a way that ensures that the children don't suffer/don't feel bad about enjoying being with the "other" family.

She is his mother, yes. I am not his mother. I dont have a child of my own. I am aware of those facts.

She "needs her primary role and relationship in her son's life acknowledged"?

She beat him and threw him out of her house and told him to go and live with his dad.

She's now phoning him up and telling him she can force him to go back to live with her (presumably to continue to be bullied by her).

We should "acknowledge the primacy of biology over legal definitions" - are you for real??????

There's a big difference between treating someone as a 'lower being' (which I didn't say, and do not feel, btw) and having to accept that someone else has the same rights, which involves having your rights defined by law instead of by nature, especially in this case, where a child has decided or chosen one household over another. There is an element in this case of loss for the mother, which Ladydeedy needs to acknowledge. Even though she may have kicked the child out, there is an element of loss, and possibly hope on her part that the relationship can be mended.

What Ladydeedy contemplates is a loaded move for this mother. And since she can legally object to it, her feelings do come into play. To suggest that every dispute in the family courts should or could be resolved by all parties simply putting the children's interests first is simplistic in the extreme. All parties have the right to interpret what the best interests of the children are, hence the family courts' existence.

I don't see any mutual respect here, Libby. I see Ladydeedy broadcasting the mother's mental health circumstances, painting her as a very poor example of a mother, not trying too hard to see where the mother may be coming from, assuming the situation is cut and dried, assuming the court will 'learn the facts', and things will quickly go her way. I see the child caught in the middle.

Continue to use the sledgehammer here, Ladydeedy, and see how far and how fast it gets you. You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

If you are planning on making these serious allegations against the mother in the court, you will have to prove them. With evidence.

I would be utterly devastated at the thought of another woman having parental responsibility over my DC. Those feelings may not be logical, but I agree it's something elemental, biological and instinctive, and at a time where this particular mother is feeling very vulnerable in terms of her position, I don't think it should be dismissed or ignored unless absolutely necessary.

Mathanxiety, I have never said that I will even speak in court.

Let alone that I will make "serious allegations" against the mother.

You're making the situation out to be something that it isnt.

You also dont know how I "treat" the mother. You seem to think that I dont show her any respect. Whilst my own regard for her is not particularly high, and I acknowledge that, I have always treated her with respect and courtesy when I meet her or speak to her.

I act that way because it is important for the children to see that we can all behave as adults, whatever differences of opinion we may have.

"To suggest that every dispute in the family courts should or could be resolved by all parties simply putting the children's interests first is simplistic in the extreme." Really? I thought that is what they were there for?