Grandparents Rights

[Allison]

Thank you for this, but I don't appreciate it at all. My DH is plenty capable as a police officer. You don't know anything about him or what he does on a daily basis.

A grandparents right is a civil issue, something that would be handled in court. As a police officer, he would handle the CRIMINAL aspects of this CIVIL issue.

Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

I didn't get that comment either. As you said, this is a civil issue not criminal.

 

[Stitchfans]

It is a shame that grandparents don't have some rights. Cause in the case of my DD and her thank goodness soon to be ex husband's case if they had children I could just see him deliberately keeping my grandchildren away from me just out of evilness if something had ever happened to my DD.

It would kill me if I had grandchildren that I couldn't be with and see once in a while.

 

[DisneyFed]

Ooooo, tricky tricky Family Law (I think I may have zoned out some during Law School for this)....but anyway, let's see if I can further muddy the water...

In 2000, in Troxel v Granville the Supreme Court struck down a VERY BROAD Washington State Law that essentially allowed judges to set visitation time for grandparents...without the boring details, essentially the paternal grandparents sought visitation rights when their son died. Mom did not oppose, but the judge granted 3 days a week and every other weekend to the grandparents, which would have severely strained mom who lived hours away.....The Supreme Court ruled that this State law and others like "unconstitutionally infringes on parent's fundamental rights to rear their children" (Justice Sandra Day O'conner). This particular law essentiall granted ANYONE (not just grandparents) to petition for visitation rights. The Supreme Court, rightfully so, struck down the ideal that visitation rights could be granted if the court found it would be "beneficial for the child".


HOWEVER, this ruling merely struck the broad application of visitation rights granted BY THE FAMILY COURTS...it DOES NOT prohibit grandparents seeking REASONABLE visitation rights under applicable and "not so broad" state Family or Civil Statutes. The Supreme Court usually provides a series of "tests" for lawmakers and courts to determine if laws meet Constitutional Thresholds (in this case to make sure they are permitted under the 14th Amendment--Due Process)

In all but a few cases, depending on the individual facts of the case, Most courts generally will grant reasonable visitation rights to maternal and paternal grandparents. I won't go into every individual state, because it really will depend on a specific case as presented, and I don't practice Family Law (got my degree to advance my Law Enforcement career).

There are several cases in State Courts that have provided visitation rights to grandparents (usually to the parents of a deceased spouse), and which are perfectly in compliance with the 14th Amendment...

To wrap it up---there are no "blanket rights" but a bevy of rights do exist...

Confusing?? Welcome to the world of Family Law mixed with Constitutional Law....imagine your local police officer trying to make a similar decision on the side of the road with a vehicle pulled over--at 3 in the morning, on a double shift, with no sleep b/c he has a baby at home, on his 15th day at work in row, withouth the benefit of a lawyer to "bounce this off of"--God bless them

(I have 18 years in myself, 10 as a local cop, 8 as a Federal Agent, it is very, very difficult)

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

This thread scared the hell out of me for the first few posts

 

[AKL_Megs]

Ooooo, tricky tricky Family Law (I think I may have zoned out some during Law School for this)....but anyway, let's see if I can further muddy the water...

In 2000, in Troxel v Granville the Supreme Court struck down a VERY BROAD Washington State Law that essentially allowed judges to set visitation time for grandparents...without the boring details, essentially the paternal grandparents sought visitation rights when their son died. Mom did not oppose, but the judge granted 3 days a week and every other weekend to the grandparents, which would have severely strained mom who lived hours away.....The Supreme Court ruled that this State law and others like "unconstitutionally infringes on parent's fundamental rights to rear their children" (Justice Sandra Day O'conner). This particular law essentiall granted ANYONE (not just grandparents) to petition for visitation rights. The Supreme Court, rightfully so, struck down the ideal that visitation rights could be granted if the court found it would be "beneficial for the child".


HOWEVER, this ruling merely struck the broad application of visitation rights granted BY THE FAMILY COURTS...it DOES NOT prohibit grandparents seeking REASONABLE visitation rights under applicable and "not so broad" state Family or Civil Statutes. The Supreme Court usually provides a series of "tests" for lawmakers and courts to determine if laws meet Constitutional Thresholds (in this case to make sure they are permitted under the 14th Amendment--Due Process)

In all but a few cases, depending on the individual facts of the case, Most courts generally will grant reasonable visitation rights to maternal and paternal grandparents. I won't go into every individual state, because it really will depend on a specific case as presented, and I don't practice Family Law (got my degree to advance my Law Enforcement career).

There are several cases in State Courts that have provided visitation rights to grandparents (usually to the parents of a deceased spouse), and which are perfectly in compliance with the 14th Amendment...

To wrap it up---there are no "blanket rights" but a bevy of rights do exist...

Confusing?? Welcome to the world of Family Law mixed with Constitutional Law....

Wow, just wow. Thanks for that info! CRAZY!!!

imagine your local police officer trying to make a similar decision on the side of the road with a vehicle pulled over--at 3 in the morning, on a double shift, with no sleep b/c he has a baby at home, on his 15th day at work in row, withouth the benefit of a lawyer to "bounce this off of"--God bless them

And thank you for this, too! (And it is SO, SO true.)

 

[DisneyFed]

Wow, just wow. Thanks for that info! CRAZY!!!

And thank you for this, too! (And it is SO, SO true.)

I've been there...I am a Gold Member of the National Law Enforcement Memorial Foundation, with two family members on the wall. I don't wear a uniform anymore, I carry Uncle Sam's Badge, but my blood is still blue.

Thank your husband, he truly has the hardest job in all of law enforcement

 

[sbell111]

No - I don't have any case law to back it up with - just the experiences of 4 sets of grandparents who are "4 for 4".. Three obtained visitation rights (without a custodial parent being deemed unfit to make decisions regarding visitation) and one received full custody..
I would think that "4 for 4" is a good indicator of how grandparents rights are currently perceived by the law - and by judges - but I could be wrong.. As I said, I am basing my statements on what I know to have happened - not a hypothetical situation..

I would assume that state laws apply - which may vary from state to state.. All 4 cases that I know of were in NY - although I currently know 2 other grandmother's who are petitioning for visitation outside of NY right now.. (Sad stories..)

Obviously the grandparents that were granted full custody here (NY) were able to obtain that status due to the unfitness of a parent..

Just out of curiousity, were the judgements to award the three visitation rights made prior to June 2000?

 

[livie1205]

Thank you for this, but I don't appreciate it at all. My DH is plenty capable as a police officer. You don't know anything about him or what he does on a daily basis.

A grandparents right is a civil issue, something that would be handled in court. As a police officer, he would handle the CRIMINAL aspects of this CIVIL issue.

Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

you are right! My dh is a cop also and they do not deal with civil issues unless they are sent to enforce a order...if you call the cops because a ex will not return a child or anything like that they will tell you to call your atty and take it to court.They can not get in the middle and that is something that are not trained to know.It was very rude to say that about your dh.

 

[PaddingtonBear]

It is a shame that grandparents don't have some rights. Cause in the case of my DD and her thank goodness soon to be ex husband's case if they had children I could just see him deliberately keeping my grandchildren away from me just out of evilness if something had ever happened to my DD.

It would kill me if I had grandchildren that I couldn't be with and see once in a while.

I see it both ways... on one hand I have a family member who is only allowed access to her grandson one hour a week supervised visits in the mother's home. Why? Becuase the child's mom is hell bent on punishing her ex for having had an affair and becuase they live in a conservative Southren state, she got full custody and the father's visitation time is at her whim. My family his just heart broken over this. In that sense I agree, its sad the law doesn't protect the interest of the child in this situation.

However, as a parent, I believe that our children is 100% mine and DH's jurisdiction. I am the best judge of who my children will spend time with. Fortunatley we are blessed with excellent grandparents. But what if we weren't? What if we had parents that had alcaholic or abusive pasts? Grandparents that refused to cease smoking in house with the kids? Grandparents that had been verabally or emotionally abusive? I think as a parent is my responsibility to limit exposure to toxic people, even when its a grandparent.

There's no right answer here, but I would hope that in most cases where the parents are fit, they are the best judge of who thier child will visit with.

 

[Nancyg56]

Where I think grandparents manage to successfully sue for visitation is normally when a parent dies. If the surviving parent then tries to sever all ties with the "in law" family and keeps the grandparents away it can lead to a court case. In that type of situation it can be argued that the children are harmed by effectivly losing grandparents as well as the lost parent and grandparents can win visitation rights.

I don't know what the laws are now but in my state the grandparents had no rights when they lost their child. My IL's were terrified that I would not let them see the kids after my first husband died and told me that they had rights and would go to court. Well they did not, their legal right to visit was lost when their son died. Now morally their rights were still inplace.


Divorce was different but that was a hard one to win.

 

[Binnie]

NO given grandparents rights... Period....

Back off Granny!!!!

PS: As a police officer, the OP's husband should take it upon himself to KNOW the laws in his State/jurisdiction.

A grandparent has NO right a grandchild.
A parent has no right to control/force their own child, once the son or daughter is 18 years of age... period...

If I even thought that my warped MIL would begin to 'sue' for rights... I would take my son and move to where she would not easily even be able to find me to try to have papers served.

I think this comment has been interpreted differently than it was intended...

To my mind, grandparents have no RIGHT to a grandchild. Parents have a responsibility to care for a child, but grandparents carry no such legal responsibility, and therefore should not be amongst those that have rights vis-a-vis children. More importantly, the very idea that children should be parented by committee is truly disturbing--if 2 people made them, it makes sense that no more than 2 people would parent them.

Further, if a parent has concluded for whatever reason that a relationship is not appropriate, then that is all that should matter, unless the parental rights are somehow compromised.

My in-laws are our of their minds. The very idea that they could petition the court to gave contact with my children (in spite of how badly they screwed up my DH and BIL) is appalling, at best. I, too, would go far, far away rather than allow those nutzo's in my DD's life.

As for Wishing on a star's comment about the police officer needing to know the applicable laws in his area... I understand where it might be coming from: If my MIL and I were screaming at eachother about my DD, and a police officer came to break it up, I would want to make sure that s/he was aware that grandparents don't have standing, as something really nasty could happen if the officer tried to enforce a law that didn't exist, and as another poster pointed out, it's not like they have a lawyer to bounce everything off of on the roadside.

 

[belle&sebastiansmom]

However, as a parent, I believe that our children is 100% mine and DH's jurisdiction. I am the best judge of who my children will spend time with. Fortunatley we are blessed with excellent grandparents. But what if we weren't? What if we had parents that had alcaholic or abusive pasts? Grandparents that refused to cease smoking in house with the kids? Grandparents that had been verabally or emotionally abusive? I think as a parent is my responsibility to limit exposure to toxic people, even when its a grandparent.

Do you know my MIL? I use the term mother in law very loosely because we decided that the best thing for our family was to sever all contact with her. She saw our dd once when she was 1 month old. That was nearly 6 years ago. My daughter has wonder family and friends in her life. We had to weed out the toxins.

 

[DisneyFed]

And this is the rub....and where most of the conflict arises---when one set of grandparents is TRULY BAD for grandchildren...

 

[gottaluvPluto]

And this is the rub....and where most of the conflict arises---when one set of grandparents is TRULY BAD for grandchildren...

This thread currently has me worried for my kids if my DH died. His mom was and is an abusive person and I know she would try to sue for custody. How am I suppose to protect my kids from their grandmother and the court system? Maybe I should have my DH write a letter on how horrible his mother is and how he believes his kids should be raised. Now I have something else to do because of the government coming in and telling people how to raise their children.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

This thread currently has me worried for my kids if my DH died. His mom was and is an abusive person and I know she would try to sue for custody. How am I suppose to protect my kids from their grandmother and the court system? Maybe I should have my DH write a letter on how horrible his mother is and how he believes his kids should be raised. Now I have something else to do because of the government coming in and telling people how to raise their children.

All you have to do is be a good mother...

 

[Family Fun Mom]

I know a woman who sued for visitation rights of her grandkids and won.

 

[PaddingtonBear]

This thread currently has me worried for my kids if my DH died. His mom was and is an abusive person and I know she would try to sue for custody. How am I suppose to protect my kids from their grandmother and the court system? Maybe I should have my DH write a letter on how horrible his mother is and how he believes his kids should be raised. Now I have something else to do because of the government coming in and telling people how to raise their children.

The government is tellin gyou how to raise your kids???? I haven't gotten that memo yet.

Why would a grandmother get custody when there is a fit parent? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Lisa_M]

I have a family member who was granted visitation rights with her grandson after her son died. His mom remarried quickly and decided that she no longer wanted anything to do with her former MIL. There was no falling out, she just didn't feel her son needed that part of his family anymore (I guess that was her way of dealing with the grief). The courts decided differently. After a couple of years, everything was ok and still is.

ETA: this was in NY and there was no lawsuit for custody, just visitation.

 

[Wishing on a star]

I think this comment has been interpreted differently than it was intended...

To my mind, grandparents have no RIGHT to a grandchild. Parents have a responsibility to care for a child, but grandparents carry no such legal responsibility, and therefore should not be amongst those that have rights vis-a-vis children. More importantly, the very idea that children should be parented by committee is truly disturbing--if 2 people made them, it makes sense that no more than 2 people would parent them.

Further, if a parent has concluded for whatever reason that a relationship is not appropriate, then that is all that should matter, unless the parental rights are somehow compromised.

My in-laws are our of their minds. The very idea that they could petition the court to gave contact with my children (in spite of how badly they screwed up my DH and BIL) is appalling, at best. I, too, would go far, far away rather than allow those nutzo's in my DD's life.

As for Wishing on a star's comment about the police officer needing to know the applicable laws in his area... I understand where it might be coming from: If my MIL and I were screaming at eachother about my DD, and a police officer came to break it up, I would want to make sure that s/he was aware that grandparents don't have standing, as something really nasty could happen if the officer tried to enforce a law that didn't exist, and as another poster pointed out, it's not like they have a lawyer to bounce everything off of on the roadside.

Thank you Binnie....

You truly understand my post.

The very idea that ANYONE, a grandparent, a court, ANYONE has rights to my kid(s) without my having been deemed incompetant to parent is just downright SCARY!!!!!!

PS: My husband is commissioned... he is not a law enforcement officer, but he does have to attend all annual training in order to maintain his commission (which is necessary for some facets of his employment) I can tell you that a LOT of what is covered is civil....

It only makes sense that a law enforcement officer have at least some understandings of the laws that they are commissioned to enforce.

Anyhow, I can take the flames...
Used to them by now around here...

 

[Wishing on a star]

The government is tellin gyou how to raise your kids???? I haven't gotten that memo yet.

Why would a grandmother get custody when there is a fit parent? That doesn't make sense.

Ummm, YES, the government telling a parent that this person or that person have rights and that I must present my child(ren) to them for x number of hours, on this and such a schedule IS, without ANY doubt, government/court interference, telling the parent 'how' I must go about my life, raising my kids. No question whatsoever.