grandchild

How silly.

That would be on the way to getting custody of both of them... from the court... which is where she wants to go anyway.

Silly? It was YOUR idea, not mine. YOU told her to REPORT her minor aged fourteen year old child "for the first infraction"---overlooking the obvious--that to do so would be reporting HERSELF since she is the legal guardian.

Far be it from me to point out that she DOES have custody of them already.

The only way the grandmother would lose custody of her daughter would be if their home was unsatisfactory. No amount of parenting can stop most teens from doing whatever they want when it comes to boys and staying out beyond curfew. That does not make the mom's home unsatisfactory. She could do the same thing in a system home... so what would the point be in removing her from her mother's care. The issue is whether the child to be is going to be appropriately cared for. If she fails to diaper the child, feed the child, see to the child's wellbeing, then she CAN have custody taken from her... not the grandmother, but the daughter... and that is what the grandmother thinks she wants based on her knowledge of her 14 year old. Now she might just get surprised... the girl might actually become an exemplary mother. But she wants to know what she can do to protect the child. That is why I posted over and above what you had to say. I did not disagree with your posting... I answered her question.

No amount of by the book, in the box, thinking will solve the family issues. You have to understand what is on their mind... and why. Aren't any of your kids teens?... or is it just the boys? I have one of each. They really aren't much different... just in the decibels.

I am getting weary. Try to focus.

YOU told her to "call CPS at the first infraction". What was the POINT of this? IF , god forbid, the mother of the baby commits some act worthy of calling CPS, this means that the result could be that the infant is not SAFE in the grandmothers home (i.e. with the teen mother).

As a successful mom of seven children 18,17, 16, 13, 12, 10 and 6, I am here to tell you as someone who has DONE it, "no amount of parenting can stop teens from doing what they want" may be a reflection of YOUR life--but it is not of mine.

I obeyed my parents, stayed in school, was chaste and above reproach in my relationships with members of the opposite s3x. Some people DO choose to wait until marriage, and choose to not engage in other illicit activities. My sister, my husband, his siblings, all of our children collective(which happen to be 22 children total between all of us) have chosen the same.

So while sleeping around, and engaging in illict activity and dishonoring yourself and your parents may be indicative of YOUR past and your expectations for your children, it certainly is not indicative of mine. To call your experience "real life" isn't thinking outside of the proverbial box. It is simply a display of poor choices you made and the result of which you admit you reaped in your children.

I not only set the standard high for my children, I have held to it as well, with a great deal of pride, self respect and dignity. If you have chosen differently, call it such--a choice. And it is totally irrelevant to the poster, the question, or this teenaged mother.

Bottom line: TELLING her to REPORT to CPS the first time the baby is harmed or neglected (i.e. "infraction") while living in the grandmothers home puts them BOTH at risk of losing the child. Lets say the birth mother harms the child. They go to court, CPS signs a paper giving grandmother guardianship/custody. They all three go home---what is different? NOTHING. The child, being given to the grandmother is STILL at risk in the same situation. That piece of paper changes nothing. The only way to assure the childs safety is to REMOVE him from the situation in which it happened--the GRANDMOTHERS HOME. All this blah blah about boys moving in, the teen running away, yada yada--NO ONE said anything about that. That WASN'T the question.

She wasn't asking us to solve her "family issues". She was asking if LEGALLY she could become guardian--nothing about boyfriends, running away, taking the baby on the lam--nothing.

The answer to the question is she cannot take away any rights the birth mother has to the child until which time the mother of the child gives cause to do so. End of discussion.

Let's just call my question a rhetorical one. It did not require you to answer... nor did it require you to assume that my knowledge of the statistics of teen pregnancies was wrong or only applied to me and my family. Your simplistic aspersions are wrong but your answer finally made it to the point.
You finally wrote:
"The answer to the question is she cannot take away any rights the birth mother has to the child until which time the mother of the child gives cause to do so. End of discussion."

But that is not the end of discussion. MY answer was the end of discussion. She can't get to where she wants to go without turning in her daughter for the first infraction. She can pick and choose the timing and she can see a lawyer to understand the best moves to make to get a writ for custody. Those come way down the pike.

First of all YOU mentioned MY children PERSONALLY. You asked if I had boys--but you didn't want an answer? DON'T ASK if you don't want an answer.

Secondly, I find it continually horrific that you, in other country with NO legal training are advising people in THIS country what to do with their life. God forbid.

I FINALLY WROTE? SCROLL, SKIPPY. I wrote that in my FIRST POSTING!!! You MISSED IT. Obviously, 14 year olds are not equipped emotionally, mentally, etc. to optimally parent a child. However, that does not mean she isn't entitled to do so until it is proven she cannot.

TURNING in a child that is IN HER CARE (the fourteen year old) REFLECTS ON HER since she is the guardian.

IF a dangerous situation is in HER HOUSE and the infant is HARMED, reporting the fourteen year old ( for whom she is responsible) is going to BACK FIRE because--(legally--I know, I know I keep referring to the pesky law) LEGALLY she is RESPONSIBLE. You are telling her to willfully report "infractions" but the reality is she cannot do so WITHOUT reflecting on herself because the person allegedly COMMITTING the "infraction" is HER responsibility. Now, if the mother of the baby did not LIVE under her roof, they could take the child FROM the teen and give it to the grandmother but since the fourteen year old LIVES with her under the same roof, what can CPS do? MAKE the fourteen year old move out so the baby is safe? It's possible. Take the baby to safety and let the grandmother raise the teen? NEITHER of those are her goal. It is a two edged sword and it cuts BOTH ways in this situation.

SO, to call DSS and say, "THE CHILD I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR IS NEGLECTING HER BABY while she is living in my house" does NOT mean they will TAKE the child from the mother and give it to the grandmother. How can they? The grandmother wants to argue she cannot parent and control a fourteen year old, but this environment is optimal for a baby's well being and safety? Good luck with that.

IF she is arguing and reporting to DSS that the fourteen year old is a danger to the baby---and if the fourteen year old LIVES WITH THE GRANDMOTHER, HOW can they ALLOW THE BABY TO STAY where the danger/abuse/neglect happened? In other words ( and I'm running out of ways to say it) THE GRANDMOTHER is responsible for the FOURTEEN YEAR OLD. If the fourteen year old is a DANGER or HARM to the infant WHOSE FAULT IS IT? THE GRANDMOTHER.

IF the baby is HURT or NEGLECTED while LIVING IN THE GRANDMOTHERS HOME social services is NOT going to ALLOW the baby to stay. YOU are telling her to do something ( admit she allowed an infant living in her home to be hurt or neglected by the person SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR) that may result in HER losing BOTH of them.


YOU are telling her to do something the result of which is SHE HERSELF may lose BOTH teen AND baby. You cannot predict what DSS will do. YOU ARE GUESSING.

Easy to do with someone else's life.

This isn't a psychic forum. It's a LEGAL forum.

Lets see what the law says. The law says the fourteen year old is a minor in ANY and EVERY state (they may not be in YOUR country, but they are here). This means that the Grandmother who has custody of the fourteen year old IS responsible for her, including acts of harm, danger or neglect of the infant.

"Don't you have teens? Boys?" does not fulfill the requirement of RHETORIAL QUESTION. I suggest you not question my family specifically if you do not want a reply.

Those that manage to conduct their life with a modicum of respect and dignity also do so to the perpetual chagrin of those who do not.

HER question was DO I HAVE A RIGHT TO THE CHILD? The answer, which I posted in my FIRST reply is NO, unless the teen mother gives cause otherwise, the answer is NO.

All this reporting to DSS for the first infraction is not the law. Reporting the teen to DSS does NOT grant the grandmother custody. It is YOUR opinion based on your own parenting failures and moral ineptitude. Do not confused the two.

You are making assumptions wildly as usual. I have legal training that is longer and deeper in certain areas than your current level in anything but criminal law... and I am a native American.... family here since 1651.

As for whether she is going to have difficulty with the department of children and family services, it is moot. The kinds of things that she would want to bring to their attention are an inattentive parent who perhaps leaves the child for long periods of time, fails to diaper or feed on a timely basis, etc. The other big no-no would be taking the child out to a situation where the child was in danger... drugs, booze, etc. These are the kind of PERSONAL misdeeds that can create a situation where Grandma should turn her in so the child can be protected and have a well cared for life. She can have a lawyer ready to file for custody of the daughter's child when something happens to create a case for change of custody... and perhaps it is somewhat of a push, but what this daughter does for fun could easily be her undoing. If she drinks or smokes pot and comes home high whether the daughter was there with her or not, she is creating a case for a custody change. There are definitely things that could happen that could make it difficult for the daughter to stay at home where her child is... drug use, bad relationships with men, etc. Then the daughter should be in the system and the child needs to be somewhere else until the daughter can and WILL take care of the child.

This is a judgement call that this grandmother is apparently ready to make out of her knowledge of her daughter. Who are you to say that it would be a mistake to attempt to fix what she already fears will be a problem? Sure, Grandma can send her daughter to a parenting class. But it won't stop the daughter from doing things teens tend to do. So she needs to know her rights and how to go about it. She will also need a lawyer to handle it if her daughter turns out to be a poor parent.

She has already made the judgement that it is more than possible... perhaps probable.

You are applying your "experience" with the kind of teen YOU were, the kind of teens you RAISED and the teens YOU know to this young lady, when you know nothing about her.

You cannot avoid the fact that REPORTING THE DAUGHTER ( who is the POSTERS CHARGE ) is a reflection on the person doing the REPORTING.

And, if the grandmother cannot control, discipline, guide and instruct a fourteen year old, who says the court is going to grant her leave to care for a new born infant since she cannot do so with the entity SHE identified as a threat (the fourteen year old) LIVING under the same roof.

WHAT GOOD IS A PIECE OF PAPER "CHANGING CUSTODY" IF ALL THREE ENTITIES STILL RESIDE IN THE SAME HOUSE AND UNDER THE SAME ROOF? THE CHILD IS STILL EXPOSED TO THOSE IMAGINARY NEFARIOUS ELEMENTS YOU MANUFACTURED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ARGUMENT.

If the grandmother is going to report that the fourteen year old is a danger to the infant while living under her roof, and they sign a paper giving her custody and all go home, the three of them, what is different? NOTHING. The child is, according to the grandmother AT RISK.

An attorney NEVER advises their client to do something, the outcome of which is NOT certain or even a good gamble. Remember the black glove? If it doesn't fit, you must acquit? Bad gamble.

1. no one said anything about the child being in danger.
2. you cannot report a child in YOUR custody without having it reflect on YOU and your lack of parenting, control, discipline and guidance.
3. reporting the fourteen year old for harming a child while LIVING IN GRANDMOTHERS HOME means that the home and environment is not safe. So, who do they remove? the teen or the child? Probably BOTH to keep them together.

Telling the grandmother to IDENTIFY her HOME as a place of risk is a BAD idea. If you want to argue she should just say the TEEN MOM, not her home per se is a risk, then the answer is what? REMOVE THE TEEN and leave the child.

How does going to court signing a piece of paper PROTECT a child that is RETURNED to the same environment with the SAME THREE PEOPLE?

Interesting how your experience "varies". If it is a real estate thread, you are a realtor. If it is a adoption thread, you are a "foster parent".

Yet you consistently tell people do to exactly the opposite of what the LAW says.

Experience indeed.

Experience isn't evident in the telling of it.

Experience is evident from the caliber of answer, based on the law, not on your opinion of "how teens are".

No attorney tells their client to make a statement that would incriminate themselves. "Hi, social services? I am the mom of a teen and she has a new baby she is abusing and neglecting. Can you give me custody?" Telling CPS your minor child for whom YOU are responsibile is guilty of child abuse or neglect is a BAD idea coming OR going because you are ADMITTING LIABILITY in reporting yourself.

A better route would be to go to the court and petition for guardianship (NOT CUSTODY) of the infant under the Domestic Relations Law in Family Court ---which isn't a stretch because they both LIVE under her roof. It would be a simple clerical matter without 1. admitting a deficit in parenting on either parties part and 2. would REMOVE the possibility she would lose BOTH mother and infant and 3. would give the grandmother the legal backing she needs should a problem arise LATER ( note: SHOULD, not assuming it WILL).

Out of all the adoptions I placed, probably fifty percent were teen mothers. And I did not find a single one of them to be selfish, indulgent, or exhibit "at risk" behaviors for the child. Most of them were very sober, pensive, and wanting desperately what is best for their child.

You are correct---I have no failures in parenting in my personal life, nor did I have a child out of wedlock. But, mistaking the same for 'experience' is not only in invalid argument , it has no legal basis whatsoever.

Neither do your slurs on my character and on my experience. You are denigrating yourself in this and trying to denigrate me. The law in YOUR state seems to be at odds with the law in MY state.... and your growing up experience seems to be similar to mine... except that I was never one to lie about information just to win an argument. That exception should be quite a mouthful for someone who does it regularly. I hope you learn that lawyers should NOT do it... but then I don't expect you to last that long anyway.

My dear, critical error---assuming it MATTERS to me what you think. Why in the world would the opinion of an Anti American poster on a message board matter to me in the least? Scary you would think otherwise.

No one I have EVER met "grew up" like I did. No one. Don't flatter yourself, hon--we are NOT cut from the same cloth.

But since you mentioned it, tell me the law in your state that is different from mine.

It is your statement--be specific. Which law specifically is different?


Nothing you have said changes the fact that IF the grandmother REPORTS HER OWN CHARGE for some abuse, she is making an incriminating statement that reflects upon what she ALLOWS to HAPPEN in her own house and about what allegedly happened at the hand of a minor who is HER responsibility. AND from a CRIMINAL standpoint--this is a BAD idea.

THAT is my point.

Now, here is YOUR point: "The law in YOUR state seems to be at odds with the law in MY state"


To which law are you referring? Quote it. Copy and paste it.

Twenty to one. There isn't one relevant to this thread.

In ANY state if someone alleges wrongdoing or abuse in their household, they run the risk of losing their children. If a wife calls and says, My husband beats our children, CPS won't come in and "take the kids away and give the MOM sole custody" because --hello? THE DAD STILL LIVES THERE. Mom is going to lose hubby OR the kids in that hypothetical scenario.

This situation is no different. If three people live in a house and one alleges that someone UNDER her charge is abusing a child, CPS isn't going to grant HER legal custody---when, while she had PHYSICAL custody, the child was abused. It isn't rocket science.

For your convenience: "The law in YOUR state seems to be at odds with the law in MY state".

To which law are you referring? You must have had a specific one in mind, given your vast experience. Be specific.