Grandchild has lived with us for 7 years

Our DGD7 has lived with us since birth. Our DD was 17 when she was born. She moved to another city 35 miles away to attend college and work. She spent time with DGD on her days off. DGD sees father and other grandparents every other weekend. Father still lives with parents. He has not given her much attention until recently. Last January DD got engaged and married in February. He is a Marine stationed in Hawaii. He was sent to Afghanistan and was wounded in August. DGD was here with us. DD lived with us while trying to establish custody. Lawyer #1 said to try to settle out of court. Told her to move back with us so she was living with child. Lawyer #2 sent 2 letters to father asking him to meet for mediation. That's when son in law was wounded, and the meeting never took place. All it did was alert father as to what was going on. DD went to Hawaii when husband was sent there and then wanted me send her to Hawaii with other daughter who was vacationing there. Then son in law had a death in the family and they came home for funeral. It was obvious to us that they weren't ready to add a child to their family yet. They had barely lived together and he was still recovering. We decided to give it more time. Then, two days before I was to leave, she changed her mind and wanted me to send her with no preparation and no opportunity to say goodbye to anybody. I refused and now the father has filed for temporary custody. We are having to drive 72 miles a day to get her and return her so that I can continue homeschooling her. DD is blaming me and family has taken sides and I am mud. Word has it today that I am being subpoened (sp?) by father's side. Do I need a lawyer?
Do we have any rights seeing we have raised the child? We cannot afford a lawyer, we have been providing support for this child all this time. Father has given us $50 a month sporadically and bought her diapers when she was a baby. Mother has given us half of what she got from her tax refund most years. Court date is this coming Monday we heard. We have received no papers from either side, so just get info second hand.

Grandparents rights differ from state to state and I do not know where you live. Also, grandparents right do not mean custody.

The fact you have had the child and cared for the child consistently may give weight to your custody challenge, BUT It is important to realize going into this that with children, possession is not 9/10ths of the law. In other words, the fact you had her for a period of time does not lessen either biological parents rights to the child until and unless a court takes away their custody of the child. While you had physical custody (she was living WITH you in your house) you did not have LEGAL custody which meant that at that time, you had no right to refuse her order to give her the child. The fact she has a stable life with you and has had the same for so long will be appreciable in your favor when you go to court. But, as it stands, either biological parents rights take precedence legally---although those rights are tempered with (hopefully) common sense and above all, what is best for the child.

The child is lucky to have you in her life. Hang in there.

As a grandma who has been through what you are just starting there are a bunch of things you need to do ASAP!!!!

1- Get child protection and social services involved. Voice your concerns to them - they have roughly 72 hours to file for a court hearing to grant you temp custody. but can act right away if they choose - then you have to do the whole foster care thing. It's not hard just a pain.

If they don't want to be involved or you don't want to involve them you have to! ASAP - Before the hearing if possible!
1 - File papers with the court if you want to be considered for custody of the child.

2- Ask the courts to appoint a GAL, Guardian ad litem, you can file papers at you court house to do this the same time you file the papers as a person of interest in the welfare of the child.

This is a HUGE undertaking - I'm not going to sugar coat it. You will have to fight against the mom and dad. the courts don't separate them. You are a 3rd party to everything. If this is the 1st hearing - you need to be there but I really doubt anyone will hear you. If the father is filing he would be filing against the mom. You are the 3rd party therefore the reason you were not notified. If you were told by someone other then the court you were to appear It's probably because the time restraints to file were missed. In other words, the court did not accept the request to have you appear because you weren't notified 14 days prior (or what ever your state limits are) or you were not served properly.

I can go into details on the process but it may be slightly different for your state. Mine was in Minnesota. I did the emergency foster care, foster care, 25 to 30 hearings, a 4 day trail before I was granted sole physical and legal custody of my 3 year old grand daughter. The whole process is utterly heartbreaking. My complete focus was the best interest of the child and that needs to be yours also. You have to separate your emotions and commit for the long hall no matter how hard it gets. No matter how hard you try It will turn you world upside down.

I hope this helps you, and if I can help you further one grandma to another you can email me whatever questions you may have to cdelmercado@gmail.com

A Grandma

If your not looking to get custody - You can also file papers for visitation if the child has lived with you longer than 2 years. You will have to prove it is in the best interest and that there is a bond between you and the child that is detriment to the child's well being. Ask the court for a GAL on this issue too.

A grandma

I am not certain how you can say with any degree of certainty that there is a two year statute that allows her to file for visitation---we don't know the jurisdiction in which she resides----how do you know there is a law that allows her to do this? While it may be possible in some jurisdictions, it is not necessarily possible in hers. Some states have liberal visitation for grandparents. Other states recognize grandparents rights primarily when the biological parent (child of the grandparent) is deceased. To tell the poster with any degree of certainty that this is something she can do is premature.

Also you state "You will have to prove it is in the best interest and that there is a bond between you and the child that is detriment to the child's well being"

Perhaps you mean she has to prove that visitation with her is NOT a detriment to the child's well being?

It seems as though the posters concern is custody. I do not see where the poster says the child is being abused or neglected----which is the only time I would advise calling the GOVERNMENT into private lives and situations. Notice neither of the lawyers involved in this apparently advocated calling in the government to make determinations about their clients suitability as guardian. And, there is always a possibility when these other agencies get involved, that they will rule the POSTER isn't suitable either----the more people involved, the more difficult it is. The purpose of DSS is not to be a weapon in arguing/separating/divorcing parents. The purpose of DSS is to intervene when a child is being abused or neglected.

If the child was being abused or neglected, then DSS can toss their influence behind the poster. But, with calling in the calvary, she is asking for a lot of red tape and unnecessary interference---the same with the GAL. If the posters position is that SHE is the most suitable for having custody, she needs to convince a judge of this (which means getting a good lawyer) Complicate things with GAL and DSS and the poster will have to prove to MORE people she is the most suitable for custody--calling in all these other agencies without proof of neglect or abuse is in juxtaposition to the posters best interest.

Bottom line: I cannot see any benefit in calling in the government agencies at this point. The purpose of DSS is to intervene when a child is being abused or neglected. Calling them in when simple custody matters are being considered really is unnecessary. Notice at no time did legal counsel advise her to call in MORE people to complicate the issue.

Grace - you are completely correct about "detriment" My mistake, I was thinking 1 thing and typed incorrectly!

What I meant was that She would need to prove it would be detriment to the child if the relationship did not continue between the two.

As for the 2 year quote - I stated that I only know MINNESOTA processes in the first message didn't think I needed to state it again. I figured It was information that she could check into - on the hand if her state say 1 year or 5 years - what does that matter - she stated that the child has been with her for 7 years. I will try in the future not to state time lines, as every state is DIFFERENT.

As to Gov agencies - She did not Post a 30 page history for us to review. The things I suggested were just that. She can apply the information as it suits her. She had stated Abandonment issues. Only reason I thought of C.P. or S.S. And I again stated - Her Choice to involve or not.

As for the GAL. I stand by that one. A GAL is not for just abused or neglected Children. They are there for the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD.

That is precisely what you stated BUT in your second posting you made an equivocal statement informing the poster that IF she had the child for two years, she could get visitation. And it DOES matter. In MY state, there is no guarantee of visitation, whether one, five or seven years. So those arbitrary numbers are simply not accurate.


Actually, what you said was, in the clearest of terms, "As a grandma who has been through what you are just starting there are a bunch of things you need to do ASAP!!!! Get child protection and social services involved." Not sure I would call that a suggestion she could "check into if it suits her". Sounds pretty definitive to me.

Furthermore, the child has not been abandoned. Abandonment is , in the simplest terms the failure of a parent to care for a child OR leave the child with someone else to care for the child, with no intent of returning. In this case, the daughter is working and the father, a serviceman, was injured and he has FILED for CUSTODY. It would be a stretch to consider this, from a legal standpoint, abandonment of a child. Now, if the mother disappeared with no contact, no extenuating circumstances, etc. and it was apparent she had no intention of returning, or if she abandoned the child on the street without shelter, food, or clothing, it would be different entirely. Abandonment is a criminal cause of action. From what the poster said, no one in this situation has committed the crime of abandonment. And you did not suggest it--you TOLD her to go to CPS. The point of MY posting was that she needs to give that course of action some careful thought---and since apparently her legal counsel has not deemed it neccessary, I felt it prudent to warn her of possible ramifications of doing what you told her to do "ASAP".
Interesting sentiment given your angst in your other postings over the GAL in YOUR situation. The GAL has a LEGAL responsibility to err on the side of caution. And, the GAL is PART of the court/government system. Before going to law school I was a GAL----and I was the only person in the entire class who even had a undergraduate degree. My point is NOT that the GAL does not provide a valuable service---the point is they DO. My point also is not that the GAL are not caring, dedicated people. They are. What they are not, for the most part, are degreed professionals with the education, experience and knowledge to make that determination. I know--I have been a GAL as well as a social worker for an adoption agency. I am not telling her NOT to get the GAL involved---I am simply stating that the MORE people you have to convince you are the "better choice", from a strictly statistical point of view, the more difficult it is going to be.

As always, I invite you to not simply take my word for it. Read about one state who is recognizing the problems with the GAL system---namely that the qualifications of the GAL to make these important decisions are not necessarily guaranteed. Guardians ad litem: What They Must Know and How They Must Work But Don't