Ok I know this is a statistical probability but I am honestly not trying to debate whether or not homosexuals should be granted parental status in the US.
I just found it very difficult to in this instance objectively say yes or no. If a child can have 3 parents what ethical/legal grounds can be used to prevent a child from having more?
This for me really just blasts the definition of a family outward by ALOT.
How do you logically draw the lines again?
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
I'm not sure how this differs from any couple that split up and then remarried. If the step-parents are allowed legal rights, it seems that should be true in all cases. If not, then not. Does anybody know what the legal rights are with step-parents? Can they only legally adopt the kid if the other parent gives up rights?
Posted by sarahdipity (Member # 3254) on :
As far as I know my step parents never really had any legal rights. *shrug*
My father was only able to legally adopt my stepsister after her father gave up his legal rights.
Posted by sarahdipity (Member # 3254) on :
Actually in many ways this has nothing to do with gay rights. This has more to do with stepfamilies and if all of the parties should have legal rights to the kids. If the father gave up his legal rights this woman would be allowed to adopt.
So, BlackBlade, you are starting a debate about stepparents rights and not gay rights at all.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
I agree... this is about stepparent "rights". I honestly don't know what I think about this. I know that I have a nearly ideal situation (as ideal as stepfamily situations can be.) I live a mile away from my ex-husband's house. The kids live there more than half the month (close to half). Their stepmother is a very nice person. We talk on the phone almost every day to coordinate the calendar, school, and medical needs of the two minor children. She is involved in their lives.
Should she have legal rights? I can't think of a reason to do such a thing, really. She is on their emergency care cards at school. She can take them to doctor's appointments or dentist appointments.
For that matter, her son, my ex's stepson, is a frequent visitor at MY house and has gone on family vacation with me and my kids two years in a row. Like I said, rather a good situation.
But I still don't think I would see a reason for parental rights to be granted. What purpose would it serve?
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
I think it can serve a legitimate purpose. It ties the step-parent to the child directly. If for some reason the step-parent and the parent get divorced, the step-parent still has a say in the child's life. This would also be important in the case of the parent dying. There's also an emotional component to removing the "step".
If there are already two parents that are actively in the picture, I think it would cause more problems than it would solve. If one parent is out of the picture (via death or abandonment), I think this is a good idea. I'm curious what the current laws are about it.
Posted by Karmen (Member # 9666) on :
I wish that step parents had rights. My dad couldn't adopt my step sister cause her dad wouldn't give up his rights, so he wouldn't let her adopt me, even though my bio mom is dead. Rather childish on his part. Anywho, they split and even though I wanted to stay with my mom, he made me move in with him. We could fight it, but I've got 2 yrs. til college and I'd probably be gone before the case ever got resolved.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
What happens after the 'kid' is over 18 in terms of rights if the step or 3rd or whatever it's called isn't 'technically' a parent? For example, does the 'kid' have to sign something that says - yes, this person can visit me (like family) if I'm dying in the hospital?
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
Another factor is that when you give a third person parental rights, you pretty much doom the non-custodial parent to being outvoted. This is not a minor issue.
As things stand in my life, for instance, big decisions MUST be agreed to by both me and my ex. School, religion, etc. Even in such an amicable arrangement as the one we have, there are rather intense conversations that have to take place while we figure stuff like that out. If Tina were to get an equal third vote, it would be the equivalent to me having no say.
Now, if we want to have some things added like Tina can visit them in the hospital, etc., I would have absolutely NO problem with that.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Another aspect where a third and possibly fourth parent comes into play is how adoptions are handled in the US.
The most PC Approved way to adopt is to have a close and lasting relationship with the "Birth Mother" and if known, the "Birth Father". If these too wish to be a part of the child's life, it is to be encouraged.
The legal rights of the Birth Parents is in a state of judicial flux around this country.