As step-parenting becomes more of the norm , why do we still b**** about not having any rights and not do anything about it?

I'm not sure what the fight is for.
As for sp having rights, idk not sure if you're new here or not. But from I see, only a few bms/sms are off their rocker completely. Others I think its just different parenting styles.

I guess you can count me in on the list of confused people. What are you really fighting for? Are you legally your SD's guardian or not? Did BM get her rights taken away and you filed for adoption? If so then isn't your issue really and adoption problem?
If SM had it her way she would have rights and leave me completely out of the whole equation... but I'm a very involved BM and I won't stand for another woman who wants to knock me out when I have done no wrong. Marriage licenses should not trump birth certificates IMHO. That would lead to a world of chaos. I just have to say that I don't need SM to step into my position ever. In fact she has recently been barred from taking our son to any eye or dental appts or filling out any paperwork because she leaves me off completely and puts herself as BM. Which the mediation counselor found very disturbing. I have to say as a CP mom with 50/50 physical and legal ...it is very disturbing.

I do agree that Stepparents should not have rights when both BPs are active in the childs lives. But as far as stepparents not having a place to attend appointments or school functions I think that is excatly why Blended families have so much trouble. I really dont see how there can be a healthy household and family atmoshpere when the SP is being seperated from certain parts of the childs life. I am not saying that the SP should have the "RIGHT" but they damn sure should be given the choice to be included sometimes. I do not believe all the posts that say that SMs should and are expected to be chauffeurs, after school tutors for homework and cooks. Its these attidudes that drive the negative mentality that people have for SMs.
Quoting kristinbugg:
Umm...no. A stepparent does not need rights to a child whose BPs are active and able to attend appointments and school functions. A stepparent has no place at either of these things.

Quoting liltigersmom:
You adopted her so she is your dd.
I'm not sure what the fight is for.
As for sp having rights, idk not sure if you're new here or not. But from I see, only a few bms/sms are off their rocker completely. Others I think its just different parenting styles.
I understand that completely. I just feel that step parents, custodial expecialy, should have more rights than they do for the safety, health and wellbeing of their stepchildren. That go's for men and women though I know this is a womans group! As the laws stand now, if one parent dies the other parent has no legal obligations to allow the stepparent, half or stepsiblings the rights to visitation with the children that parent had in commonwith the decieced. I know this my fight is basically over. But I've seen all the dirty nasties that go on in the step parents world. The whole reason I never wanted to be a step parent was I wasn't allowed to visit sometime my own stepmom after being placed in foster care. A woman I call mom who raised me for 9 years was taken away. The courts view only the rights of the birth or adoptive parents. The hide behind the guises of what's best for the children but a child emotionally see's the removal and strange placement as a kidnapping victim or abandoned child would. Of course it depends on age.
I'm not saying a total stranger who married a parent after two weeks should have rights. But a CSP certainly should.

Also, as you say, stepparenting becomes more of the norm ... bear in mind that the track record for second marriages is even worse than the track record for first marriages. What happens in case of multiple step-parents? Since 3rd marriages are also becoming more of the norm, what happens with the rights of SM1 after divorce?

Quoting thickerthan:
But in cases were the BM has little to no custody the rights should go to the CSM.
Negative. A BM may have little to no custody and still be actively involved in the child's life. If she chooses not to be a part of the child's life, there may be an option to terminate her rights and allow CSM to adopt. If rights automatically went to CSM, however, then responsibility for financial support (CS) should also transfer with it. Your child, your responsiblity. And as such, if CSM and DH were to separate, how does CSM remove herself from continuing to support that child through the age of 18?
For all the CSMs that want rights, I doubt there are many who would agree that BM shouldn't have to pay CS. But you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either you claim ownership of the child and all that it entails, or you accept that it's not your kid and that BM is responsible for supporting her children - regardless of how involved or uninvolved she chooses to be in their lives.
- thickerthan
on Sep. 11, 2012 at 11:12 AMTo your last comment, if both you and your ex were unable to care for your child for an extended period of time. Would you rather have the am whose been in the childs life for a few years be able to keep cuoulstody of your child? Or would you rather have CPS come in and place your child in a complete strangers home?
Please understand, I'm not singling you out. You just made good comments that I read first!