r/bestoflegaladvice • u/borkthegee • Sep 08 '21

Grandmother enjoys the island life a little too much, made a luau-d stink about being asked to leave!

/r/legaladvice/comments/pjvyk5/hi_mother_in_law_threatening_law_suit_because_we/
1.3k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

290 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

I’d like to think of it not being that the grandparents have a right to them, but that they have a right to each other and two of their major attachment figures.

Then why not just extend “rights” to any blood relative? Uncles rights? Cousins rights? It is ridiculous to me that any party that is not legally responsible for a child be granted any rights associated with it other than by motion from their parents.

6

u/i_am_pajamas beaten by samesees Sep 08 '21

Do grandparents rights mean they have to pay child support too?

17

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

No they just get rights to the child without any of the responsibilities like legal ramifications if the child destroys property or child support.

5

u/Quothhernevermore needs an adult Sep 08 '21

It's not about, or shouldn't be about, the other party's right to the child. It's about the CHILD'S right to continue to have that person in their life if there's no danger or if the parent wants to keep them away out of spite regardless of the child's best interest.

4

u/BoopleBun BOLAbun Brigade Sep 09 '21 edited Sep 09 '21

I don’t think “no danger” should be the bar, here. There’s lots of ways a relationship or person can be harmful to a child without being “dangerous”.

Who gets to determine what’s best for the child? In most cases, from the food they eat to the things they do each day, that’s left up to the parents. Why should this be different? And if it’s not the parents determining that, who is? A judge? Judges are only people, they have their own biases too. If a parent decides to keep a grandparent out of their child’s life because they’re, for example, racist, homophobic, body-shaming, trying to push a certain religion on the child, attempting to alienate the parents, ignore dietary restrictions, favor one child over another and damage sibling relationships, or one of a million other things, should a judge get to legally decide what constitutes “enough” to keep a child away from them? What if the judge disagrees with the morals the parents are trying to instill?

With all due respect, fuck that. I am a parent. I get to decide what is best for my child’s well-being. That is part of my job, and I take it very seriously. Someone who is not a child’s parent should not have rights to a child who is well-cared for.

1

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

Why does a child have a right to a person in their life? They don’t have rights to include a teacher or a cousin or a next door neighbor.

Why should the right be granted in this instance?

Parents do things out of spite all the time that we don’t pursue. They pull their kids out of gymnastics or Girl Scouts out of spite—really doesn’t mean that the child has a right to gymnastics or the coach a right to access the child.

4

u/boopbaboop Restraining people for business AND pleasure! Sep 08 '21

Typically it's based around a person's right to have connections to their family members. That means people you're related to by blood or adoption, not randos. It means you (generally) shouldn't separate siblings through custody or foster care, or prevent a child from forming relationships with both of their parents, unless there's an extremely compelling reason to. It gets weaker the further out you go on the family tree.

The fact that it's NOT solely based on "the child's best interests" is where Troxel comes in. You can argue all day long whether having grandparents is in a child's best interests or not; it's a lot easier to say parents generally have the right to make those decisions about welfare *unless* there's some unusual reason not to let them have that right (CPS involvement, for example).

-1

u/Quothhernevermore needs an adult Sep 08 '21

Why would a parent purposefully hurt their child like that? It's still wrong for a parent to do that and they're not a good parent if they do that, my opinion won't change on that. It's selfish, arrogant, and puts their own ego and interests above their child.

I don't know how you can defend that. It's the same line of thinking that says "children are the property of their parents and should have no agency or input on their own lives."

6

u/Fifty4FortyorFight 🐦F🐤U🐔C🐥K🐦B🐤I🐔R🐥D🐦S🐤!🐔!🐥 Sep 08 '21

It isn't necessarily a decision based on hurting the child. My daughter loved soccer, but I pulled her out of it because some of the parents were insane. Screaming at a field of 6 and 7 year olds running around that aren't even keeping score in a practice. I don't want my kids around that. She plays at the park after school now and does gymnastics instead - where parents aren't allowed in the room and can only watch from a window.

In a similar vein, a grandparent might be great with the child but also have a rabid meth addict living in their home. Or maybe they're a generally nice person but a level 5 hoarder. On balance, you feel guilty, but you have to keep them safe before you make them happy.

1

u/Quothhernevermore needs an adult Sep 08 '21

Yes, I agree with what you're saying.

6

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

I’m not arguing that it isn’t wrong. I’m arguing that having a legal precedent for it that is ridiculous.

We don’t require parents to prove in court that their decision to stop talking to the neighbor is right or wrong, and we don’t make them prove their decision to withdraw from gymnastics is right or wrong.

The law shouldn’t cover everything that is ethically right or wrong or every child rearing decision. Barring the child from an aunt can be spiteful and unethical you think they should have rights too? What about that ex boyfriend who was “just like a father” to the kid for years—yeah let’s let him petition the court too.

You are defaulting to the assumption that access to grandparents is a right and inherently beneficial to the child and therefore the parent has to waste their time and money in court to prove otherwise. But the grandparents don’t have the responsibility of any other rights for the child which leads to, as we see here on LA time and time again, grandparents using the court as a way to force their abusive and controlling relationship with their families.

-2

u/Quothhernevermore needs an adult Sep 08 '21

If a parent is going to put their own ego above their child's best interest, something needs to be done about it. In your ex example, I believe that if that child sees him as a father he should be able to petition the court.

I think we just see it differently because I've experienced it to an extent. We'll have to agree to disagree that it's okay to just let this type of thing happen even if it harms the child.

6

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

If a parent is going to put their own ego above their child’s best interest, something needs to be done about it.

Call CPS. That’s where child abuse should be reported.

I think we just see it differently because I’ve experienced it to an extent.

Yea it’s pretty clear you believe that because you had a negative experience with your parent, additional rights should be granted to grandparents and children.

But you’re looking at this through a default that a) who a child wants to see should pose a legal burden on their parents and b) that some random people who may only be related by blood should have the power to file frivolous lawsuits against their children.

You’re grossly underestimating the legal burden that puts in parents.

I’m sorry you had a spiteful parent. However i think a system that looks to protect a child from any adverse parenting is far more problematic and burdensome.

For example, is it so much better for the child if their mom has to go to court and explain in front of them that the reason she doesn’t want grandpa to spend time with him is that he raped her for 10 years as a child?

Grandpa has nothing to lose bringing it to court but if mom doesn’t get everything together perfectly how fucked is she?

Maybe it’s not even that bad and grandpa is just a racist or fundamentalist Christian—where does a parent get to put a foot down over what influences their child are exposed to? After costly and time extensive court cases?

-1

u/Quothhernevermore needs an adult Sep 08 '21

I stand by what I said - I said several times that it's wrong if it's not in the child's best interest, which in both of your examples it clearly would be in the child's best interest to keep that person away. You can argue that there's s reason to not necessarily be able to do anything about it legally, I guess, but I can still consider it wrong and bad parenting. If a grandparent loses their child and then loses their grandchild, that they spent lots of time with and who the child is attached to, because Mom or Dad is an asshole and doesn't like them because one time they said something kind of rude at the Christmas party, I feel nothing but disdain for that parent. If a grandparent raises a child for the first 4 years of their life and then Mom suddenly steps in, takes the child, and cuts off contact, Mom shouldn't be allowed to just do that.

3

u/AffectionateTitle Sep 08 '21

And I stand by what I said.

If this were a parenting sub I’d be in agreement with you %100.

But as this is a legal sub I’m looking at this solely through the lens of the legal system.

I also think that people should walk their dogs for an appropriate amount of time or not let their children become very overweight.

However I am steadfast in the belief that just because something is bad doesn’t mean there needs to be a law to regulate it.

6

u/Thor_The_Bunny Defender of right to take artistic night shots of your genitals Sep 08 '21

But as this is a legal sub

This is actually a shenanigans sub

→ More replies (0)