[this8384]

Alabama: 14:

"(a) Consent ... shall be required of the following:

(1) The adoptee, if 14 years of age or older, except where the court finds that the adoptee does not have the mental capacity to give consent;
..."

Section 26-10A-7 Persons whose consents or relinquishment are required. :: 2009 Alabama Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia



With respect to this example, consent isn't required until the age of 10: Alaska Statutes: AS 25.23.040. Persons Required to Consent to Adoption..

But as far as preference is concerned:

"AS 25.23.125. Preference of Minor to Be Adopted; Guardian Ad Litem; Protective Orders.

(a) If the person to be adopted is a minor under the age of 10 and the person is of sufficient age and intelligence to state desires concerning the adoption, the court shall consider the person's desires.
..."

Consent required if the child is 12 or older in Arizona.

Need I go on?

Yes, please. While you've given some nice examples of preteens and teenagers, you have yet to show where the consent of a seven-year-old child is, as you stated, "required" for the adoption to be done.

To the OP: yes, you can get an answer. You don't want the biological father held accountable, want the stepfather to pay child support but not have any legal rights to the child, and allow a third man to adopt said child. What you're asking is impossible and ridiculous.

[AK lawyer]

Just forget i asked the question seeing as i can not get an answer. thanks for your help ak

I am sorry, I thought we answered your questions:

... Any advice on any of this?? ...

As I said, I advise you to voluntarily allow your son to visit with your ex.

... hes threatening to take me to court and says im being selfish?

Was this a question? The answer is that anybody can sue anybody for anything. Is he likely to get anywhere? No.

[this8384]

Was this a question? The answer is that anybody can sue anybody for anything. Is he likely to get anywhere? No.

Try reading again. They're already in litigation and the judge has stated he doesn't think it's in the children's best interests to be separated due to the stepfather being the biological parent to only one of the children.

[sweets2350]

Lol nothing about the law says he has legal rights to my child I wanted to know what right I had as a mother to keep him from getting joint conservator ship over my son. Im not upset about your answer they are your opinions. Not the law. Like I said forget the question was asked I'm going to have the thread removed.

[AK lawyer]

Yes, please. While you've given some nice examples of preteens and teenagers, you have yet to show where the consent of a seven-year-old child is, as you stated, "required" for the adoption to be done. ...

Re-read what I wrote. I didn't say that a seven-year old's consent is required (although it may be somewhere). I said childrens' ages over a certain age are required, and whether a child is to be adopted is a child's business.

[sweets2350]

No my lawyer stated it to be in the best interest of the chil to keep them together. I am allowing visitation I just don't want him to have legal right to my son..

[this8384]

Lol nothing about the law says he has legal rights to my child i wanted to know what right i had as a mother to keep him from getting joint conservator ship over my son. Im not upset about your answer they are your opinions. Not the law. Like i said forget the question was asked i'm going to have the thread removed.

They're not opinion at all. He's been in the child's life for the past six years and is the only father the child has known. That is very much grounds for the judge to grant him rights.

But apparently, you "know" the law already and enjoy asking questions that you already think you have the answers to.

Enjoy screwing up your kids.

[this8384]

Re-read what I wrote. I didn't say that a seven-year old's consent is required (although it may be somewhere). I said childrens' ages over a certain age are required, and whether a child is to be adopted is a child's business.

Right - so you didn't read the original question(surprise), which stated the child is seven years old and went spouting off about laws which have no application here.

[sweets2350]

Again thanks for your opinion

[this8384]

You wrote this:

he wants access to all medical records school records be notified in an emergency the right to tell me when he can and can't have a car when he can or can't join the armed forces when he can get married..Basicly joint conservator ship over my son
The real father wants nothing to do with my son and that's fine hes not on the certificate i'v located him and he wants nothing to do with him and i want nothing to do with him either. I am in Texas. And no i have a good attorney i just got tired of fighting with his "girlfriend" over a car a grill a t.v. video games and all that. my attorney is the one fighting to not give him rights. I agree with the judge in not separating the kids and i don't want to take that away i just want to know if anyone has dealt with this.
Do they have an x that's not the biological father trying to get paternal rights?
Hes gonna have fun if he tries to prove me unfit.. ive had a great job for the last 6 years im drug free and only drink when its not my weekend to be with the kids.

So who said it? The judge or your lawyer? Or you? Or nobody?

[AK lawyer]

Try reading again. They're already in litigation and the judge has stated he doesn't think it's in the children's best interests to be separated due to the stepfather being the biological parent to only one of the children.

I don't think any of us particularly disagee with that. But I don't see that the OP said anywhere that (whatever the judge thinks the childrens' best interests may be) the judge believes the step-father has legally enforceable rights. That's the difference.

[this8384]

I don't think any of us particularly disagee with that. But I don't see that the OP said anywhere that (whatever the judge thinks the childrens' best interests may be) the judge believes the step-father has legally enforceable rights. That's the difference.

At this point, he doesn't - he's trying to obtain them. If he had no grounds, the judge would have dismissed it already and it would be a dead issue.

The entire problem is that this woman wants to have her cake and eat it too - she's complaining that her husband doesn't financially support the child, yet wants her fiancé to adopt the child.

This entire thing is a mess and I feel the worst for the children caught in the middle.

[sweets2350]

We haven't gone to court yet i was trying to keep from going there hes already threatened me with a messy divorce i feel bad for my kids too having to put up with him.. i have not asked him for support of my son.. and wasn't planning on it but if he wants to keep visitation that is fine i just don't want him to have the same right to my son as he does my daughter. And if i had known he was going to be like this i would have never married him in the first place. I am not being selfish and do not feel that im asking more than i deserve again i think you are mis interpreting what i am typing. This is the attorneys talking to the judge saying what is in the best interest of the children. I agree with visitation but do not agree with legal rights to the child.

[this8384]

WE HAVENT GONE TO COURT YET I WAS TRYING TO KEEP FROM GOING THERE HES ALREADY THREATENED ME WITH A MESSY DIVORCE I FEEL BAD FOR MY KIDS TOO HAVING TO PUT UP WITH HIM .. I HAVE NOT ASKED HIM FOR SUPPORT OF MY SON .. AND WASNT PLANNING ON IT BUT IF HE WANTS TO KEEP VISITATION THAT IS FINE I JUST DONT WANT HIM TO HAVE THE SAME RIGHT TO MY SON AS HE DOES MY DAUGHTER. AND IF I HAD KNOWN HE WAS GOING TO BE LIKE THIS I WOULD HAVE NEVER MARRIED HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE. I AM NOT BEING SELFISH AND DO NOT FEEL THAT IM ASKING MORE THAN I DESERVE AGAIN I THINK YOU ARE MIS INTERPRETING WHAT I AM TYPING. THIS IS THE ATTORNEYS TALKING TO THE JUDGE SAYING WHAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILDREN. i AGREE WITH VISITATION BUT DO NOT AGREE WITH LEGAL RIGHTS TO THE CHILD.

If you haven't been to court, then why did you say you "agree with the judge"? How are you "in the middle of a divorce" without going to court?

This is just getting pathetic.

P.S. Your CAPS lock is on.

[AK lawyer]

... If he had no grounds, the judge would have dismissed it already and it would be a dead issue.
...

The judge probaby wishes he could. But there are grounds for a divorce, just not for awarding visitation with the child to the step-father.

... How are you "in the middle of a divorce" without going to court? ...

The case probably has been filed but there hasn't been a trial yet. That's what I'm guessing she means.

[this8384]

The case probably has been filed but there hasn't been a trial yet. That's what I'm guessing she means.

Then why is she alleging that the judge made statements which she supposedly agrees with?

Personally, I think it's time to close. The question has been answered... I think. I'm still not 100% positive what the question was in the first place.

[ScottGem]

Just went through this entire thread. Sweets, your question was answered in your first response. The stepfather has no legal rights to your son. I don't see a court granting him legal custody. It is, however, possible that the court will grant him visitation.

When you post a question on a site like this, you open yourself up valid comments based on what you posted. Your initial post didn't include all the pertinent facts which came out as you were asked questions. But along with this facts came other points that deserved comment. You have been rude in responding to those valid comments.

Now I have one other comment. You are wrong in not going after the bio father for support. You can use the money for college.