Adopting 'step child' any advice?

[Mamabooksbabynumber2]

Hi everyone, so dd and dp have a solid daughter/ father relationship and we are looking into adoption. We have been together 6 years adoption no he has brought up from a baby. I have no father on the birth certificate but know who the biological father is. Do we still need his permission? How tricky will this be? Thanks. To note: dd knows of bio dad but never seen him nor does he pay any maintenance and me, dp and dd have lived together for 3 years. Thanks in advance xx

Typing.

I was also told that no solicitor was necessary as ours is uncontested. £8k sounds ludicrous!

There was an awful thread a while ago from a poster whose dh had adopted her son. They then separated but he was arguing against having contact, paying maintenance etc because the child was not biologically his. This was distressing the child and the poster was asking about whether the adoption could be revoked. I'm not suggesting that OP's partner would do that but I do think it's slightly naive to not consider what may happen. It would be cost effective, provide both parties with valuable legal protection and obtain the objectives of being a family with PR being obtained without the need for an adoption. Then when your dd is older she can be part of that decision.

You'd be a fool to have a child with gin whilst not married, just read the hundreds of threads on here from women with kids left with nothing when relationship breaks down but they weren't married so no right to share of house / money / pension etc etc, especially important of you plan to stay at home with baby for any length of time

Many thanks to everyone who replied with non judgemental responses. Shame my thread was hijacked by everyone else's opinion which I didn't ask for, just the legalities. My partner is quite stunned at the archaic judgement I never asked for. FYI no one is mad to have a baby out of wedlock which someone just said . Furthermore, an adoption is a decision between child and non bio father as a lifelong commitment. Which is seperate from our relationship. When you adopt a child it is out of love for the child, not dependent on the relationship status with the mother. There are many many children with bio dads who they don't see. My daughter is very blessed to have him.

How very dare we have opinions
People are giving advice, not judging you. You just don't like what they/we have to say.

Wow. I won't check back and read this thread. Far too negative.

You're wrong though, OP. A 'step-parent' adoption in this country is dependant on the relationship status with the mother. That's a very clear part of the legalities - and you asked about them!
If you just want a fact sheet with the basic rules on step-parent adoption you can Google and find them in less time than it takes to start a thread on here. You're never just going to get those on here - it's a talk forum for discussion.

I won't check back and read this thread. Far too negative.

Translation: "Lalalalalalalala I'm not listening!"

Don't really see the problem with getting married? If it doesn't mean anything to you as a couple, fine but where's the harm, when it would give him PR? Why would you be so against it? It will help your kids.

I agree that marriage isn't for everyone and think it's outdated that people should have to be married to adopt especially when people are saying it's about the child's relationship and not the parents! However the op is obviously missing the point! Parental responsibility can be given outside of marriage and that would be a better solution than perhaps adoption. It is still extremely difficult to have parental responsibility removed. As far as the legalities go op should definitely seek legal advice with every option covered.

I think the OP is getting a lot of (unasked for) judgement here. I don't really understand why. She is trying to protect her child from potentially being placed with a bio dad who doesn't want her and keep her with the man who is her dad in every way that counts, should the worst happen.

He has been her dad for 6 years. I actually think the OP is doing the best for her dd by putting her on an equal footing with any new baby she has.
Even if she and her dp split, it doesn't change the fact that to her dd, the dp is dad. So long as the dp knows and understands his commitment, and there is no reason to assume he doesn't, it is a good idea to formalise things legally.
How is giving him PR a better option than formal adoption, in their particular circumstances?

"How is giving him PR a better option than formal adoption, in their particular circumstances?"

For all the reasons PP have already given, including people who have actually looked into it and done it themselves.

But they are not focussing on her specific circumstances. She wants her dd to be on the same footing as any new baby. There is nothing to suggest that the dp is not a fully committed father, who would disown the child if there was a relationship split (as happened to a poster upthread).

Instead there has been lots of docus on the fact that she isn't married, but the parent/child relationship is entirely independent of that. He is already the dad in all the ways that matter, so it would only be formalising it. Waiting until the child is older is fine if you can be sure nothing will happen to the mum in the meantime

But Aderyn, all of those things you list would be achieved if OP shared PR with her partner. It would make him her DD's parent. The difference between adoption and PR is that it doesn't remove the link between a child's biological parent in order to do so. Now, it may be in her DD's best interest for that link to be removed, making adoption a better long term option. In which case, getting married and applying for PR would be a good first step - as it's very quick and makes it more likely that the adoption will be awarded (in my LA at least). Adoption takes much longer and there are many hoops to jump through.

But it is patently incorrect to say that a adoption is only about the relationship between the child and the adoptive parent. It isn't: PR is. Adoption is also about removing a link.

And adoption is also not independent of the parent and adoptive parents' relationship. The legislation makes it clear that they have to provide evidence of being in a committed partnership of long-standing if they are unmarried. In my LA that includes having a compelling reason why couples aren't married. It 'just being a piece of paper' and being 'archaic', which are all we know of why OP is t planning on marrying, are not true and would not be considered compelling.

OP's fed up of us asking why she's happy to tie her child legally to her partner but not tie herself to him legally - she will be asked that every step of the way by social workers, CAFCASS and court. So if she's serious about adoption I think it is good she has encountered that question on here - she needs to come up with a bloody good answer.

Somerville PR would not make the op do her parent at all. Step parent adoption is an excellent option for children to have a father. Why should they be any less than dc in the care system.

Parental responsibility means the legal rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority a parent has for a child. That's the definition of PR.

I don't understand your point about being 'any less than dc in the care system'.

The parent may have responsibilities that doesn't mean the child has a parent. PR also ends at 18 , with step parent adoption the child has a forever parent and is equal to their sibling.

Dc adopted from the care system are adopted where possible rather than long term fostering.

For the OP, adoption seems like the best option - I can't see why she wouldn't want to break links to a bio parent who has contributed nothing and make a formal lasting link to the man who is the father in all the important ways.

I'm a believer in marriage - I think for lots of people it bestows great benefit but the OP can demonstrate a lasting relationship without getting married - she has been with her dp for 6 years!

I do get your point though that she will have to answer these questions and that getting married and applying for PR would be an easier way of getting most of what she wants.

DH and I are starting to think about the same thing (me adopting his DD). We're married & already have a second child together, although I haven't been a "parent" to DD as long as you've been to your stepdaughter. I feel like you've got a very hard time on this thread!

My dad adopted me after he and my mum married. They are divorced now. My dad is still my dad, of course! Adopting me was about my relationship with him, not about his relationship with my mum. This is what I think is important. Even if DH and I split up, I would do everything I could to keep up a relationship with DD - she's already lost one mother.

Just in response to the poster commenting on adoption in the care system. Those adoptions take a massively long time, even people who go have been through the process before have to go through all the same hook again the 2nd and 3rd times. It takes a very long time. I would hope that step parent adoptions were more straightforward but that isn't what people who have been through it are saying.

Step parent adoption take at least sixth months , the same home visits ,background checks , references are carried out.
It is however inexpensive and straightforward when the birth father has no pr.

Well if someone's in the care system, it means they have no biological parents who are willing/able to look after them, doesn't it? So that child's situation is necessarily going to be different from that of a child who already has one biological parent who is looking after them. The existing parent and the authorities may feel that Parental Responsibility is sufficient for a step-parent. No one is saying they can't adopt further down the line, anyway - just that PR is a logical first step in that process.