Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

PA court rules ex has in loco parentis rights

Posted by on May. 8, 2016 at 1:06 AM
  • 16 Replies
Mother and step-father appealed the trial court’s decision, and the appellate court upheld the trial court. In support of its decision, the appellate court noted that mother’s former partner provided sufficient evidence that she acquired “in loco parentis” standing to seek custody of the child. The appellate court stated that “while it is presumed that a child’s best interest is served by maintaining the family’s privacy and autonomy, that presumption must give way where the child has established strong psychological bonds with a person” who has lived with the child and provided care, nurture, and affection, and assumed the role of a parent in the child’s eye. The appellate court also found that the gradually reduced periods of custody were a limited intrusion and sufficiently provided for the best interest of the child.
by on May. 8, 2016 at 1:06 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
pusheen-kitty
by Battler on May. 8, 2016 at 1:09 AM
Mom split from BD, had a relationship with someone else (SM) ends that relationship and marries someone else. SM sued for custody.


Full article:

http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/appellate-court-upholds-decision-to-52563/
LogansMom1113
by Member on May. 8, 2016 at 1:13 AM
Thats awesome just because Mom is mad that child shouldn't lose some9sje loves
soonergirl980
by Platinum Member on May. 8, 2016 at 1:32 AM
2 moms liked this
Sorry I find it complete bs. I do not believe in third party rights to child period.
BHLF4
by Silver Member on May. 8, 2016 at 2:55 AM
This seems reasonable to me. Especially since they are phasing the time with SM down. It is giving the child an adequate adjustment period to the separation
luckyinlife
by on May. 8, 2016 at 10:52 AM
Agree!

Quoting soonergirl980: Sorry I find it complete bs. I do not believe in third party rights to child period.
codysara
by Platinum Member on May. 8, 2016 at 10:54 AM
I wonder what the reason for sm to do this was. When bm remarried did she try and keep ex sm away? Was it vengeful?
I don't think it should be granted to any third party unless there is sufficient evidence of neglect or abuse by the bp.
Shabby_Chic
by Silver Member on May. 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM

So, kid called her mommy, she did what lots of SMs seem to do (think they need to take care of the kid for the parent) and fought for custody based on the laundry list of chores she did. Thankfully this isn't a well known case or else we'd have lots of third parties feeling entitled to other people's kids (using the internet as my anecdotal evidence here). 


tiafez
by Platinum Member on May. 8, 2016 at 5:08 PM
1 mom liked this

why do peopleput children through these things?


tiafez
by Platinum Member on May. 8, 2016 at 5:08 PM

a child is already torn between two parents, let's thear the poor kid mre. 

JustOneAndDone
by on May. 8, 2016 at 6:30 PM

While I think it's crazy that any third party would be granted legal visitation, it makes me wonder what kind of evidence there was to support this decision.

When I left my ex DF after being a full-time CSM, he was great about letting me see his DD.  We did just as they did in this article, without having to go to court.  She called whenever she wanted, he made arrangemens for her to spend time with me when she wanted to see me, never objected to me sending her birthday cards, etc.... eventually I was "phased out" so to speak, but it was on HER timeline, not his or mine.

I'm really grateful for ex-SDs sake that her dad was not an ass.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)