pregnant 17 year old

Actually, (and seriously), he should check into alt.support.step-parents.

It's a really good group with a lot of people who can give a realistic
assessment and advice on this.

Banty, that might be a good suggestion for others, but you obviously
don't know our man Chris here.

A group like alt.support.step-parents would be where someone would go
if they didn't know what to do, if they weren't sure what was going on,
and if they were looking for the knowledge and experience of others to
help guide their actions.

Chris, on the other hand, already knows everything about his situation
and all his actions have been perfect. He doesn't need an internet
group to help him, he needs an internet group to hear him expound on
how perfect and knowledgeable he has been in every way, and how screwed
up everyone else is compared to him.

In article . com, alath says...

Actually, (and seriously), he should check into alt.support.step-parents.

It's a really good group with a lot of people who can give a realistic
assessment and advice on this.

Banty, that might be a good suggestion for others, but you obviously
don't know our man Chris here.

A group like alt.support.step-parents would be where someone would go
if they didn't know what to do, if they weren't sure what was going on,
and if they were looking for the knowledge and experience of others to
help guide their actions.


Oh, people go there playing "ain't it awful" all the time and get tough love in
return.

Chris, on the other hand, already knows everything about his situation
and all his actions have been perfect. He doesn't need an internet
group to help him, he needs an internet group to hear him expound on
how perfect and knowledgeable he has been in every way, and how screwed
up everyone else is compared to him.


That's not so unusual. Haven't you noticed. Until (and unless) folks get a
realistic grip on their situation, it's all about the terrible ex, the awful
steps, the hideous inlaws. Folks going in hope that they'll be validated and
patted on their backs, be told just how to juicily tell off the ex, what
heretofore unknown legal twist can let them jettison all responsibilities except
what they want to cozy up in their new love nest with. And get instead, some
real-talking about how to deal with the situations they've bought into and
created.

Chris's desire to boot out the step kid(s) and nestle up with just he and the
new wife isn't unique, unfortunately.

Banty

In article 1fj4f.2045$UF4.1312@fed1read02, Chris says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Ericka Kammerer says...

Chris wrote:
"Circe" wrote in message


Unless and
until you BOTH deal with the problems her daughter is having in a
healthy
and bipartisan (sorry, listening to political news reports this morning
and
can't think of a better word) way, the daughter could disappear
tomorrow
but
the problems would just manifest in another way.


Not the problems that her daughter is creating, because they would be
gone.

If you believe that, you are seriously delusional.
Your daughter could walk out the door tomorrow and never
return or contact either of you, and the repercussions of
her issues and your (plural) response to situations
involving her will continue, if not escalate. In fact,
you'd better hope she doesn't do that before you reach
some sort of meeting of the minds with your wife, or
you may lose the opportunity to do so forever.

Right.

Chris - do you honestly beleive that you could kick your step-daughter out
the
day she turns 18, and all you'll need to do is to "console (your) crying
wife"
for a while, then all will be hunky-dory after that?

You were responding to someone else's post. Anyway, the answer to your
question is no.

Then what *is* your plan, including how you and your wife come to terms with
what happens?

Banty

"Circe" wrote in message
news:udu4f.2087$UF4.1711@fed1read02...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:hTb4f.1927$UF4.128@fed1read02...
"Circe" wrote in message
news:tAQ3f.1708$UF4.456@fed1read02...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:J3H3f.1663$UF4.1053@fed1read02...
"Circe" wrote in message
news:8pz3f.1605$UF4.683@fed1read02...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:ysy3f.1583$UF4.14@fed1read02...
"Circe" wrote in message
news:Vdv3f.1442$UF4.1020@fed1read02...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:Bxl3f.1413$UF4.274@fed1read02...
She is wrong. Her covenant is NOT with her daughter, it is with
ME!

You don't believe that bringing a child into the world is a de
facto
covenant on the part of the parent to support, care for, and
rasie
that
child?

No, I don't. The child made no commitment.

From Wikipedia:

"Covenant, in its most general sense, is a word for a solemn
contract
or
similar undertaking."

A parent enters into a very solemn contract to support and raise any
child
to which he/she gives life. Whether the child makes any commitment
is
irrelevant.

That all depends on what the word "contract" means to you.

The other party in the "contract" in this case isn't the CHILD; it's
the
state. By birthing the child and not ceding his/her parental rights to
another party through adoption has made a de facto agreement with the
state
(not the child) to support and raise that child. The fact that the
CHILD
isn't the other party in the agreement doesn't make it any less a
contractual agreement. (Contracts don't have to be written on paper and
signed, either. Just in case you were going to make that argument.)

The law agrees with me. Try to find any legal resource that
states parents have NO legal obligations to their minor children.
You
won't.

Did you find any legal resources that stated parents did not have legal
obligations to their minor children? Didn't think so...

I found no law stating that you do not have to give me your house.

Now you're just being silly.

Of course; counterexamples are always silly.


And, in point of fact, there are several perfectly good laws that state
just
this. Start with the Constitution's prohibition upon depriving another
person of his life, property, or liberty without due process of law. Go
from
there. Of course, if you can get a judge to state that I must give you my
house after due process of law, then I'd have to give it to you.

Still no law.


What's your point?

My point is that a parent has binding legal responsibilities to her child,
and if she fails to fulfill them, she can wind up paying a fine or even
going to jail. Just because the child didn't stand before a justice of the
peace and make some promise in return doesn't make the responsibilities of
the parent any less real or binding.

The fact of the matter remains
that your wife's choice to make a covenant with YOU did not in any
way
abrogate or override the promise she made

What promise?

The promise she made to support and raise her minor child.

Then you misunderstand the concept of "marriage".

You're saying that having married YOU, your wife was no longer responsible
to raise her minor child.

No I'm not.

I think it's YOU who misunderstands the concept of
"marriage", not me.

You're right. My wife is actually married to her daughter.


and the legal responsibilities she
accepted when she gave birth to her daughter and chose not to cede
her
parental rights to adoptive parents. (Your stepdaughter's biological
father has the same obligations, of course, but apparently he's like
you:
he
doesn't think he should have to follow through on them. Maybe your
wife
managed to marry the same guy twice?)

Last I checked, her daughter had different DNA than me. Guess I'm not
the
same guy.

Are you really obtuse, or just being argumentative? I MEANT that I
think
both you and her ex-husband are apparently guys who don't think much of
parental obligations to children. I MEANT that it seems to me that your
wife
chose two different men who apparently share a similar character flaw.

I knew exactly what you meant. You were grouping the father and me
together.
Problem with that is we are two different individuals in two totally
different positions. Or does that not matter to you?

I see, you're just being argumentative. But then, that's been pretty clear
all along...

Nice red herring.

--
Be well, Barbara

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article 1fj4f.2045$UF4.1312@fed1read02, Chris says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Ericka Kammerer
says...

Chris wrote:
"Circe" wrote in message


Unless and
until you BOTH deal with the problems her daughter is having in a
healthy
and bipartisan (sorry, listening to political news reports this
morning
and
can't think of a better word) way, the daughter could disappear
tomorrow
but
the problems would just manifest in another way.


Not the problems that her daughter is creating, because they would
be
gone.

If you believe that, you are seriously delusional.
Your daughter could walk out the door tomorrow and never
return or contact either of you, and the repercussions of
her issues and your (plural) response to situations
involving her will continue, if not escalate. In fact,
you'd better hope she doesn't do that before you reach
some sort of meeting of the minds with your wife, or
you may lose the opportunity to do so forever.

Right.

Chris - do you honestly beleive that you could kick your step-daughter
out
the
day she turns 18, and all you'll need to do is to "console (your)
crying
wife"
for a while, then all will be hunky-dory after that?

You were responding to someone else's post. Anyway, the answer to your
question is no.

Then what *is* your plan, including how you and your wife come to terms
with
what happens?

My plan is to protect my marriage and home. It is irrelevant WHO is levying
the assault. As for the stepdaughter, her living in this home is conditional
just as it is conditional for me. My wife will decide whether or not she
will fight me on this.


Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article . com, alath
says...

Actually, (and seriously), he should check into
alt.support.step-parents.

It's a really good group with a lot of people who can give a realistic
assessment and advice on this.

Banty, that might be a good suggestion for others, but you obviously
don't know our man Chris here.

A group like alt.support.step-parents would be where someone would go
if they didn't know what to do, if they weren't sure what was going on,
and if they were looking for the knowledge and experience of others to
help guide their actions.


Oh, people go there playing "ain't it awful" all the time and get tough
love in
return.

Chris, on the other hand, already knows everything about his situation
and all his actions have been perfect. He doesn't need an internet
group to help him, he needs an internet group to hear him expound on
how perfect and knowledgeable he has been in every way, and how screwed
up everyone else is compared to him.


That's not so unusual. Haven't you noticed. Until (and unless) folks get
a
realistic grip on their situation, it's all about the terrible ex, the
awful
steps, the hideous inlaws. Folks going in hope that they'll be validated
and
patted on their backs, be told just how to juicily tell off the ex, what
heretofore unknown legal twist can let them jettison all responsibilities
except
what they want to cozy up in their new love nest with. And get instead,
some
real-talking about how to deal with the situations they've bought into and
created.

Chris's desire to boot out the step kid(s)

NOT my desire.

and nestle up with just he and the
new wife isn't unique, unfortunately.

Just curious: how effective can an advisor be when they aren't even willing
to pay attention to what's said?


Banty

"alath" wrote in message
ups.com...
Actually, (and seriously), he should check into alt.support.step-parents.

It's a really good group with a lot of people who can give a realistic
assessment and advice on this.

Banty, that might be a good suggestion for others, but you obviously
don't know our man Chris here.

A group like alt.support.step-parents would be where someone would go
if they didn't know what to do, if they weren't sure what was going on,
and if they were looking for the knowledge and experience of others to
help guide their actions.

Chris, on the other hand, already knows everything about his situation

I certainly know a whole lot more about my situation than YOU do!

and all his actions have been perfect. He doesn't need an internet
group to help him, he needs an internet group to hear him expound on
how perfect and knowledgeable he has been in every way, and how screwed
up everyone else is compared to him.

Chris wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...

But you're doing plenty of communicating.
You don't necessarily have to talk for your wife
to get the message.


But yet my communication with her is "seriously flawed".

Yes, because communication is more than
issuing orders and whining when they're not followed.

Okay, you do now. Why is it that you aren't
contacting any today?

Because doing so would waste valuable time otherwise alloted to the
handling
of my responsibilities, AND I would be spinning my wheels.

Ah, yes, the classic story of the ineffective
person: "Well, it wouldn't have worked if I'd done
it anyway."

I see, reputations have no meaning. Would it be more accurate for me to say
that it would "probably"......?

You can put in any qualifiers you like. You
and your wife haven't done your job until you have
turned over every stone and followed every lead that
holds out some promise. You've ignored realistic
options for years and years and continue to do so.
*MOST* teens in your daughter's situation aren't
going to trot off obediently to some kind of program
that will help them. That doesn't stop other parents
from getting effective help (without landing in jail).
So, all your whining about how your daughter says she
isn't interested and it's not legal for you do do
anything about it falls pretty flat with me.

The story aint' over. Even so, what's more important than doing what works
is doing what's proper.

Care to tell me what would have been improper
about getting your daughter into a residential program
designed to deal with her issues BEFORE there was a
baby to deal with? It was important then. It's even
more appointment now, and you keep on frittering time
away. Eventually, you will have frittered all your
time away and you really won't have much left in the
way of options that actually give your daughter a
fighting chance. But apparently that doesn't bother
you.

Well, if you choose to see it that way, so
be it. But even in that case, if you give anything
more than lip service to your much ballyhooed
"covenant,' you'd be on the hook to work together
with your wife to find an effective solution to
your problems. (In addition, if the marriage
convenant meant anything to you, you would see
your wife's obligations to her daughter as your
own, and you would take them as seriously and
as lovingly as she should.)


I have no obligations to her let alone the same as my wife's.

So much for that "one flesh" argument then,
eh?

You might end up
with one anyway, but you're chances are much worse
with your current approach. But if you'd rather
cloak yourself in righteousness, go right ahead.

Beats cloaking myself in wickedness.

False dichotomy, and you know it.


Your above statement indicates to me that you believe morality hinges on
one's perspective based on the moment.

No, but yours indicates a serious reading
comprehension issue, which might explain your inability
to have searched out effective solutions in the past...

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Circe" wrote in message
news:z%t4f.2085$UF4.1256@fed1read02...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:r3j4f.2043$UF4.182@fed1read02...
"Circe" wrote in message
news:TT94f.1909$UF4.322@fed1read02...
wrote in message
ups.com...
Chris wrote:
I think any solution to your marital problems rests upon your
ability
to
stop thinking of both your wife and her daughter as chattel rather
than
as
equals.

Guess again. Her daughter is NOT my equal.

I can't believe you and I are the only ones who believe this.

"Equal" is a word with many meanings. Chris' stepdaughter IS, however,
a
human being, and as such, she is his "equal".

Can you say "C O N T E X T"?

You were responding to *my* post. You don't get to choose the context. In
the context of my response, I clearly meant "equal human being" (as in
opposed to chattel).

The common understanding of your statement is that one human being is
superior to the other human being (such as a slave), not that one isn't a
human being.

--
Be well, Barbara

I certainly know a whole lot more about my situation than YOU do!

Of course! You already know more about everything than anyone else
does. You're a freaking genius. Everything you do is perfect. That's
why you have been so dazzlingly successful as a husband and
step-parent. I'm sure that "marriage hanging by a thread" and "on thin
ice" stuff is all due to other people's faults, because, by definition,
you have done everything right.

Obviously, your reason for posting here in the first place was to
enlighten us all with your brilliant approach to family relationships.
All the other 20 or 30 people who have posted here challenging your
positions are obviously idiots who can't possibly manage their
marriages or relationships with kids and/or stepchildren. That's why
our families are all so messed up, and yours is so ideal. Gosh, Chris,
please tell us more so we can all aspire to be like you.