The Part Stepparents Play
The role of the stepparent is often one of the most complex within the family dynamic. Whether it’s because of the expectations placed upon them by the children and the biological parent or because of their need to share a home with someone whose child is not biologically theirs, the step-parent often faces both hurdles and challenges that create situations not typically faced within a biological parent/child relationship. A biological parent’s role is typically one of authority and caretaker. They can establish a set of rules and guidelines without the worry of being questioned; in many ways, their authority is absolute. In a step-parent relationship, the parenting role is usually one shared between the biological parent and their spouse. Instructions given to children and rules established need to be mutual in order to maintain a cohesive household, which isn’t always an easy thing to do when you are parenting a child you did not give birth to. Another difference between the biological and step-parent role is that the stepparent may also have their own children. Because of this, they may not fully understand the depth of emotion and connection a biological parent has with their child . This can lead to unusual dynamics as the stepparent may try to exert authority over the child, expecting the same level of respect as the biological parent enjoys, and it can create resentment between the two. Further to this, most step-parent relationships are established either from the outset of the relationship or after the divorce, which almost always means the step-parent is putting on the role of parent in a ready-made household, where their place and authority is questionable at best. They do not have the same leverage or history as the biological parent. Because of this, the step-parent role requires a certain amount of caution. Step-parents must be mindful of how their actions and words will affect the child. While you may want the child to think of you as their parent, they have very likely yet to form the bond that you’d prefer. You need to encourage that bond to develop naturally over time instead of forcing them. Set a good example and be their friend, but hold off on the parent role until such time that the child is comfortable with the idea. This can be a long process, and one that never fully develops. It’s important to understand that the bond between step-parent and child is never guaranteed.
Stepparent Legal Rights
The legal rights of stepparents vary widely depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances. In jurisdictions without statutory authority, specific legal rulings have created various tests for stepparents to establish rights and responsibilities on behalf of their spouse’s children. These adjudications may also have limitations in certain states, such as an absolute prohibition against stepparents in Texas having primary custody of stepchildren.
Such instances continue to prove problematic in many jurisdictions, where the stepparent may have gone through extensive bonding opportunities with the child, creating an essential relationship worthy of legal protection. These specific decisions could be offset by either changing the law to allow entry of a court order or by legislative means such as recognizing that the state’s need for a judicial test is not as critical as it once was.
Even with cases in which legal precedent has been created by the state’s higher courts, issues of adoption can become complex, exacerbated by all parties having rights to the child. If the child develops attachment or stability through the stepparent, and that individual can show financial investment, non-financial investment, and input on the child’s development, legal precedent may favor the stepparent to have some rights as well.
In determining legal rights, courts often consider whether the stepparent has been able to establish a meaningful relationship with the children, and if so, they may have the option to pursue custodial or decision making changes.
Boundaries Commonly Breached
When stepparents overstep their bounds, they may interfere with relationships between parents and children or between stepparents and children. One of the most common situations where this can occur is when a step-parent begins to reprimand a stepchild or discipline the child without the permission of the biological parent or in direct defiance of the biological parent’s explicit disapproval. If it is a minor infraction, the child might not tell the biological parent, or the step-parent may take discretion in disciplining the child. However, if a step-parent goes too far, this can result in a loss of parenting time, or even a modification or enforcement of custody.
An example of this is when a physical discipline results in a bruise or mark. If the biological parent notices this and is angry about it, they may prohibit that step-parent from seeing the child. However, parents have an obligation not to "parent" the other party’s time. If the step-parent only did this once, and there was a black and white response to it outside of the child having a bruise, the Court is not likely to change the custody/parenting time arrangement. However, if the step-parent had an ongoing issue of excessive discipline, how parents respond to this will impact the Courts evaluation of the situation and the outcome.
Another example is situations that may be inappropriate, such as giving alcohol or drugs to the child. Even in a small amount, the parent may use this information to pursue the offender in criminal court or pursue a change of custody. If there are other red flags – including past drug/alcohol abuse, criminal history or history of domestic violence, the investment of a step-parent may allow the biological parent to change the custody agreement.
Certain situations may seem innocuous but can also result in problems. For example, when a Court enters a parenting time schedule, it is intended to provide a child with stability and predictability. Most provisions of an agreement are not there unless the Court has seen a problem in the past. Therefore, if an agreement states that the parent must notify the other party when they are taking the child out-of-state for the weekend, it is because this is a perennial problem that gets raised to the Court. If a parent has a problem responding to notifications about travel, the other party may raise the issue with the Court. In addition, there may be a provision in an agreement that states that the parties must notify each other about any change of address. A situation could arise where a new partner, new spouse or new boyfriend moves in, and the notice is never given and the child’s residential status becomes an issue. If the party who is moving doesn’t disclose the move, the notice may not have been provided in violation of this provision and the new spouse can come into the home as parties live under the same roof. However, if the spouse moves out of state, the Court may ask where the child predominantly resides and if they are in another state and the child is in this state more than 183 days, the custody may need to be changed.
Courts are concerned that parenting plans are followed and that any changes not be made without Court intervention. Certain situations warrant an emergency situation, such as drug use, potential abduction of the child or other dangerous circumstances. When a parent starts to act contrary to how they are supposed to act in a co-parenting situation, the other party should seek the Court’s intervention.
Effecitve Communication and Boundaries
Much of the conflict in a stepparent or blended family comes from a lack of clear understanding of what the boundaries are. When the lines become blurred between discipline and privilege, overstep of boundaries and when a child’s appropriate needs aren’t being met— confusion and conflict is likely to follow.
A clinical psychiatrist might help to explain the importance of the three systems: the biological family (or pre-existing family system), the family of the new couple (or couple system) and the new family (or blended family system.) Some families can move from one system to another successfully. Others struggle in one system for a long time and eventually outgrow the limitations of that system only to enter a new system which has its own set of limitations. As a married couple having children together, "hopefully" you will be a blended family as your own children are raised in the love of both biological parents caring for them.
Communication is critical in setting and maintaining the boundaries between these systems. The stepparents and the biological parents need to have a family meeting where all three systems are discussed in-depth so everyone understands the role of each parent and what is or is not acceptable behavior for each parent.
The biological parents should discuss with the children how a stepparent can help them with homework, get them ready for school, drive them to soccer practice , but will not interfere if the child does not want their help at that moment. This is a respectful message to instill in the child for dealing with any new step parent. A stepparent should "be there for the child", but respect that the child may want time with their biological parents. The biological parent should encourage the children to view the stepparent as a friend, not necessarily as a replacement.
Discipline for children in the blended families also needs to be discussed clearly. Who has the authority to discipline the children? If a stepparent is not biologically related to the child, do they have the respect and authority to discipline? The birth parent should never question the relationship of the step parent with the child. Indeed, the step parent has the authority to discipline the children in the same manner as the biological parent. Both the biological and step parents should discipline in the same manner. If the children do not appreciate the discipline, perhaps the children need a discussion with each parent about the relationship with the other parent and their spouse. Are the children jealous of a blended family relationship? Do they want their biological parent only? Are they seeking revenge against the biological parent for divorcing their other parent? Are they jealous of the time spent with the other biological parent and step parent? These issues need to be addressed openly.
Legal Mediation and Support
As with many legal matters, timing can make a significant difference, and boundary issues are no different. Most often, parents who are cohabitating, or otherwise in some sort of family type relationship — not married, or married but not living together, even if just temporarily — have boundary issues, at least at the beginning, so to speak. For example, how do you and your new partner’s children, interact with one another? What roles are there for you with your new partner’s children? How do you navigate holidays, financial matters, and what seems to be the never ending list of "rules" which are often confused, and intermixed with other family "rules"? How do you, if at all, participate in disciplining each other’s children? The list can go on and on, and certainly will, at some point within the various types of relationships. The question then becomes, when is this a matter that needs to be addressed by taking one or more of the following actions: consulting with a family law attorney experienced in the field of cohabitation, dissolution, mediation, custody/visitation/support, or counseling; engaging the services of a mediator; or going to Court to remedy the situation, whether by obtaining an emergency Order and/or engaging in litigation?
Often times, the latter (going to Court) is not the best or most reasonable solution. After all, the courts are already inundated with various types of disputes, whether they be family or civil in nature. However, it cannot be overlooked that there are times when going to Court is the only possible and/or reasonable solution, particularly when there is an ongoing dispute about custody of children, or where the children’s interests are being jeopardized or placed at risk in some manner. But, if that is not the case, and the issues are those of a more "nuanced nature," many times a better option to remedy the situation is by mediation, working with a trained professional. Mediators, whether attorneys, mental health professionals who have some type of experience in navigating family disputes, or other trained professionals, who are certified mediators, are trained to help parties, often times in a completely neutral setting and without the need to go to Court, work through their issues, and come to a resolution that generally works for both parties, and their respective children.
The benefits of mediation can be numerous, as it allows for the parties to resolve their issues in full confidentiality, as opposed to Court, where your disagreements become part of the public record. Also, when a resolution occurs, it is generally amicable, which serves to alleviate added stress on the parties, and their children. It also allows the parties to maintain more control over the resolution of their issues, whereas, in litigation, a judge or other authority sometimes controls the outcome. As for the costs associated with mediation, they can vary. First, an experienced attorney mediator may charge more per hour than a standard hourly billing rate; however, the total costs may end up being lower, as the costs to litigate and go to court can be exponentially higher. That said, a mediator may charge a flat fee, as opposed to charging by the hour, or has a billing minimum of two or three hours, which, compared to the time it can take to get through litigation, might be worth the cost.
If the issues have already been resolved or approached at the level of litigation, and at least the proceedings have been initiated at Court, it is often beneficial to continue through the Court system, at least until the issue resolves on its own. This means that the matter is either resolved by a judge, another decision-maker (often through a decision in a related case), or becomes moot for one reason or another.
Cases, Precedents and Scenarios
As with many aspects of family law, the line between what is permissible and impermissible is often drawn in the sand – allowing for shifting boundaries based on the age of the child, relationship with the biological parent, context, and level of step-parent authority.
Case study: "Catherine" had taken her boyfriend "Steve" to meet her daughter "Emily" and son "Shawn" before introducing them as potential step-parents, a relationship that was still very new to Emily and Shawn. Although they had recently become acquainted, Emily and Shawn enjoyed taking turns riding on Steve’s shoulders at Central Park. While "shouting out, ‘cheese!’ for pictures," one of the park’s professional photographers took a candid shot of the whole family. Fast forward a year, Emily and Shawn are now 13 and 11 years old, respectively. As part of this year’s summer fun at camp, Steve had to sign the permission slip and did so by initialing his signature as "Steve S. Girlfriend." Hugh and Kelly, camp counselors, received the permission slip and recoiled at the thought of Steve being anything other than Catherine’s first husband/boyfriend. They promptly called the police and reported a case of identity theft with the camp director in tow. Generously, the New York’s Assistant District Attorney (ADA) summoned Steve to the office and informed him about the apparent misunderstanding with the press. The ADA deferred to Family Court on the age of Emily and Shawn as they are both minors and Family Court would be equipped with the resources necessary to address the parental rights issues. The ADA further advised that Catherine would not be able to get an order of protection against Steve as there was insufficient evidence that he intended to commit "assault" against her or the children.
Case study: Husband and wife, Dan and Kim, concluded that it was in the best interests of their son, Gus, "to have a place to go to as a safe haven with a loving step-parent". The parties split up the time equally so that each parent would have exactly 183 days of custody and Dan received the remaining 2 days for his weekend time. True to their intentions , each home had the same set of household rules and in every instance that the subject arose in their son’s presence, Dan and Kim were "on the same page" on the matter. They conveyed to Gus that his "two homes" were a luxury and that it made him "super special" to have two bedrooms, two sets of toys, and to spend time with both his mom and dad. The parties even went as far as to exchange household items such as clothes and toys in order to make each home an equal environment for Gus. On Wednesdays, he would eat dinner with one party, whose house he would sleepover at for the night, and vice versa for the following week. Each party would wait for the other to pick up Gus from daycare at the end of each day, except for Thursdays when Kim would distribute pizza to those who would not have Gus for dinner, including other parents and children who had expressed interest in the pizza night. Each parent paid for half of the cost of the pizza and the drinks and made sure to send home cupcakes, cookies, or other baked goods for Gus to share with his classmates when it was his turn to have a dessert day. Nonetheless, the parties recognized that after a while Gus began to break down on the practice of "pizza" night. At the end of the previous school year, his teacher approached Dan to mention Gus’ behavior after pizza night had "become too much". The children would begin to argue over who "got the best piece of pizza" and "who got to go first" and the bickering resulted in hurt feelings and inadvertently shaming some of the children for not having the pizza. After some counseling, with the guidance of their attorney, the parties concluded that "pizza" night was no longer in Gus’ best interests. They, Dan and Kim, now pair pizza night with Fridays after his father picks Gus up from school for a weekend conversation with pizza, ice cream, and a movie. They have read books on the peaceful parent-co-parenting approach and continue to implement the household rules and even provide for joint custody of the family puppy, Jovial.