You are here

you are legally required to disipline as a step parent by law otherwise you do not meet the legal qualifications of one

you-can't-argue-with-crazy's picture

So in a Canadian Step Parent group I'm in on Facebook this was asked - "If you could give one piece of advice to a stepmom what would it be?" 

Someone commented "Prioritize your health and your marriage. If the kids behave in a rude and disrespectful way and you could not do anything about it, take a step back and disengage. Never force yourself upon them and do not beat yourself about it. Let their dad and mom handle the discipline, unless otherwise necessary. Focus your time and energy on people that want it from you."

And got this response lol 

"you are legally required to disipline as a step parent by law otherwise you do not meet the legal qualifications of one ... just a heads up. It's also an established form of abuse to force your partner to be isolated in his parenting....also I saw this the day you posted. I did not share my difference of opinion because while mine is actual fact, you are still entitled to your own in home boundaries... but since you felt the need to incorrectly try to correct mine, I reported it to admins and thought I'd let you know you technically break family law if you follow this- particularly in a joint custody situation. I'm assuming you guys just get visitations?"

Anyone ever heard such nonsense? There is defenitely no law in the province I live in Canada about this lol I know parents who don't discipline their kids.


ndc's picture

I have no familiarity with Canadian law,  but that's just goofy.  I'd be stunned if that was in fact the law anywhere. 

lieutenant_dad's picture

I'd ask for the law name and number. A quick Google search showed me that stepparents have NO legal rights to stepkids, and their legal responsibilities begin and end where they do for any other adult. You have the PRIVILEGE and AUTHORITY to discipline, but not the RESPONSIBILITY.

Please tell me other people called this person on their BS.

Ispofacto's picture

I'd tag it #makingUpRandomBullsh!tFTW


you-can't-argue-with-crazy's picture

done! lol

you-can't-argue-with-crazy's picture

BC here too, ya not a thing! lol what a bullshitter. She's mad cause someone didn't agree with her so spouted off some crazy bullshiteeeeeee!!!!

Survivingstephell's picture

As if a HCBM would allow that to happen.  What a line of BS.  What is it with sharing falsehoods like this? Alternative facts much?   I'd be reporting this troll for sharing lies.  

shamds's picture

Her kid definitely palm them off to exhubby to care for despite collecting her cs payment and if exhubby says no that he needs to work to collect an income she will have no shame ordering he have his new and current wife/partner raise and care for the kid for free.

you-can't-argue-with-crazy's picture

She also responded to the other person in their back and forth - "but it IS a fact that it is psychologically abusive to put your partner in this position. It IS fact that, this voids your legal step parenting responsibilities and rights .... this would be great advice to a girlfriend of someone with children. Not to step parents as it goes against their legal requirements." 

The position she'ss talking about is as a Step Mother taking a backseat and letting the Father do the discipline/parenting of their own child LOLOLOL 

lieutenant_dad's picture

So if it voids the responsibilities and rights, does that mean you get to just be your partner's spouse? Because if kids are being disrespectful and don't want you involved, then that seems like exactly where you want to be, right???

And forcing parents to parent is psychological abuse? How??? Wouldn't them not parenting their own kid mean they ALSO void their rights and responsibilities? And if that's the case, the kids aren't their problem anymore (which also means they aren't the SP's problem anymore).

My head hurts trying to understand.

ETA: Is this person confusing STEP parent with ADOPTIVE parent? Because we aren't the same.

you-can't-argue-with-crazy's picture

Right! And no, there is no confusion it's a Step Mom group and the post was asking for advice you'd give another step parent. She also says "thought I'd let you know you technically break family law if you follow this- particularly in a joint custody situation. I'm assuming you guys just get visitations" so she's def not getting step mom and adoptive mom confused.


shamds's picture

When feral skids bring all their drama and crap and repeatedly crap all over stepparent out of spite and pettiness?? The shunning, verbal abuse and even threats its me or her? Thats not psychological abuse to put their bio parent in that position?

so when i have skids actively guilting daddy for marrying me, being disrespectful to me, creating problems and actively trying to destroy our marriage with young kids, if i tell my husband i will not stay married and live in this high conflict abusive environment and be subjected or exposed to their behaviour so my spouse maintaining a relationship with them needs to happen away from me outside the home is psychologically abusive and selfish yet what skid does gets a free pass? 

what a stupid troll to say that. I have made my husband since 4 yrs ago keep his daughters away from me and our 2 young kids because they were sabotaging our relationship and marriage. The signs were all up and hubby ignored and said i was overthinking it till a few months later when eldest sd who was 23-24 calls daddy out of the blue fake tears and all guilting him for marrying me and having 2 young kids with me who were 1 & 2.5 whilst they had cut off all contact with their dad for 5.5 yrs. they claimed hubby replaced them with me and our 2 young kids.

nope, he just moved on as didn't want to be held hostage to their manipulation and abuse. They thought they could play biomums game and dangle their non existent relationship like a yoyo and daddy would drop everything.

its never occured to them why daddy loves spending more time with us, because we have a genuine committed relationship and respect for one another, we make time for one another and are pleasant, we are not dependent on xyz + atm. Our love & time is not dependent on daddys money like it is to sd's. 

it is selfish for skids to put their bio parent in an uncalled for situation of choosing between their spouse/partner who makes them happy and is committed to them or pick skid out of spite

justmakingthebest's picture

Legally abusive to have a child's parent BE the parent?

What kind of nonsense is that??

MissK03's picture

These types are the ones that give us the bad names. Dad sits back while SM does all the work and LIKES it. 

Olivia2020's picture

Maybe the Canadian version of a Karen (insolent loud woman that complains if everyone doesn't bow down to her unmanicured feet) had one too many gummies for breakfast, ha! 

shamds's picture

Submissive blazee stepmums who allow skids to disrespect and shit all over them repeatedly and as the adult you must happily accept that and parent their kid like the real mummy and daddy instead of making the bio parents parent their offspring

shamds's picture

She is referring to as by law there are only 2 parents legally responsible for the minor kids and thats their bio parents listed or a legal guardian. You are none as a stepmum with no legal responsibilities legally enforced by the courts or any law

a stepparent by legal definition is someone married to your bio parent who isn't your bio parent. It is legally the bio parents responsibility to parent and raise their kids or the legal guardian, it does not bypass to a stepparent because they can't be stuffed, can't parent well and don't want to be the bad guy setting boundaries and clear responsibilities and basic expectations.

that troll just typed up alot of nonsense.


according to following link:

""stepparent" means a person who is a spouse of the child's parent and lived with the child's parent and the child during the child's life"

Also according to canadian justice department the following link:

"If a child is neglected, child protection authorities could intervene and remove the child from his or her parents."

note it refers to their parents (ie; bio parents)

Also following link regarding child maltreatment in canada:


Child Maltreatment

Child maltreatment refers to the harm, or risk of harm, that a child or youth may experience while in the care of a person they trust or depend on, including a parent, sibling, other relative, teacher, caregiver or guardian. Harm may occur through direct actions by the person (acts of commission) or through the person's neglect to provide a component of care necessary for healthy child growth and development (acts of omission)."

note how it refers to parent and guardia as in legally their bio parent and legal guardian who by law are responsible for the care of that child. A minor child isn't dependent upon a stepparent when they have 2 living bio parents unless court ordered that stepparent has legal custody. In your case you have no legal custody.

Neglect in the link is defined as "Failure by a parent or caregiver to provide the physical or psychological necessities of life to a child"

just referring to an australian government link below:

"However, from the child maltreatment data it was apparent that stepparents or defacto parents were over-represented as maltreaters, especially in cases of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. In neglect cases, where the vast majority of abusers were natural parents, step and defacto parents were under-represented."

It's considered abuse say if the bio dad and stepmum refuse to feed the minor child, refuse to ensure they go to bed or have them attend school and lock them in their room 24/7. However a stepparent disengaging from parenting responsibilities for a child not legally theirs when they have 2 bio parents is not abuse or maltreatment especially for a child old enough and independent enough to do alot of things. 

we aren't talking like a newborn baby left in care of stepmum as bio mum did a runner and not in picture and bio dad fulltime works and stepmum put into role as a primary carer of newborn and refuses to feed newborn and do diaper changes etc and if doesn't want to be in that role, does not force bio dad to deal with that (situations like this are rare and not the daily example the troll is trying to paint you as an abuser).

If she wants to be a doormat have right at it but most of us with a functioning brain know if there are 2 bio parents who refuse to stepup and do their bloody jobs, it doesn't become stepparents responsibility to step in or have that responsibility automatically deferred to stepparent.

its like the gold digging bio mums who see kid as a free paycheck but refuse to care for or parent their own kids and tell the ex husband to take kid and when he says no it's your custody time and i need to work to be able to pay cs and she says well its your wife/partners job to do it for free like a doormat, no it really isn't not legally not ever

Winterglow's picture

" otherwise you do not meet the legal qualifications of one "

OMG, that is hilarious! Legal qualifications of being a step parent?! Does that mean that there's some sort of contract that you sign at the same time you get married to be a legal step? What happens to that contract if you get divorced? Do you have to get a judge to nullify it? 

There sure are some strange people out there ...

Badger1986's picture

Honestly even if I did adopt my step child, I told my wife that I would still relinquish my rights through the courts, if she passed away. He could go live with his grandma and I don't feel bad about it! 

thinkthrice's picture

Sounds like a SM's MIL from Hell's posting!  "How DARE you force my son to parent his own children!  Besides they are practically perfect in every way. "

I would respond "MIL is that you?"

DPW's picture

Ontario here. I've never heard of any specific law regarding this; however.... a word of caution...

In my first step relationship way back in the day, I had SS5 and SO at the time did not have benefits with his work and was on my benefits plan. SS5 had a lot of medical and dental expenses and SO had to pay 80% of as BM had no insurance either. It would have cost $0 to add SS5 to my plan. I was smart enough to ask my lawyer who was working on something else for me about it and she said that she recommended against it because the court could perceive me as accepting responsibility for SS5 as I am now insuring him through me and that should something happen to SO (job loss, death), BM could ask a judge that supports continue as if SO and I were still providing them, whether temporarily or until SS5 would age out, whatever those supports may be. Note that I was making 4x BM's income and same was SO at that time with us just starting our high earnings potential and hers being capped at low wage due to education, etc. She was also psycho and I did not trust her to not pull some stunt with me.

Scared me enough to not add SS5 to my benefits plan. No links, no assumed risks, no assumed responsibility, no commitments. 

shamds's picture

Responsible in that situation. In malaysia for muslims, if say the dad passes away, the mother of the kids whether she was still married to the bloke or divorced, can go to courts and claim shariah law to have them provide for her. 

because islamically, the dad is financially responsible for providing basics home, food, shelter, clothing (the basic essentials) for the wife and kids.

however some women take this to mean they never have to contribute financially and get a job, some choose to be housewives and demand frivolous things. Couldn't care less if hubby has to work 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet.

so if he dies and there are no savings assets etc, instead of capable biomum getting a job, she could go to courts and demand the ex husbands family provide for her which means the kids grandfather and uncles need to provide. Its insane.

i've even seen a case where a kid in university who could get a student loan refused to and instead chose to take her elderly dad to court to pay her an allowance so she wouldn't have to get a job. The girl was 22.