Adopting a step child

[Indigo Mom]

Here's the thing...

As parents, we have certain rights and responsibilities.  Our rights are parenting time, and all the other "goodies" that come with having children.  Our responsibilities are to support the children.

The father of her children lost his "rights" when he passed on.  But, even in death, he's not "relieved" of his obligation to support them.  That's fine...children usually "do" get social security when they lose a parent.  That's "their" right.  

She has a husband who wants to be the father to these children...in every sense of the word...which means all the rights and responsibilities that come with it.  That's awesome....these children are getting a 2nd chance at having a living father who loves them.

The problem is...she wants their deceased dad to have all the responsibilities, the husband to have all the rights.  You know that's just plain wrong, and also called "having your cake and eating it, too".

If the biological father were living, and she somehow managed to get his rights terminated so a step parent adoption would happen...the biological father would be "relieved" of both rights and responsibilities because the courts would determine the step father to be the legal father....and give him the r & r's.  Biodad would be left alone.  But in death...he's not?  In death, he's also not "forgiven" for all his mistakes..she's still slamming him!  I mean really!!!!  The guy is gone but she won't give up the anger????

You may think she was asking a simple question about social security...but I read between the lines.  She's willing to "choose" money over an adoption.  Who gives a rip whether it's a "substantial" amount...I give a rip about the right thing to do...and that would be to "allow" her husband to be what he wants to be...their father.  Can you imagine yourself telling your hub that he can't adopt your kids because of money?  I most certainly can not.  

This woman is a pit viper.  She got responses she didn't like and went off apeshit sideways...very telling, if you ask me.  Usually people "clear things up" when they get responses they don't "agree with".  Nope, she went all venomous on us, which means we're right (imo) in what we said.  

If you'll notice, I did apologize for going off....she didn't even bother responding...she continued with her venomous attacks.  I think we called it right.....and now that she's "bragging" she'll still get the money after an adoption?  She's gonna get fat eating all that cake.  

[Kitty C.]

DS's dad is also gone, and since he worked for many more years and was so close to retirement, DS's survivor benefits are larger than other kids he knows who have lost a parent.  Be that as it may, I can't see where the deceased parent still has an obligation to the child after death.  The parent pays into the SS system all their working life JUST SO THAT their child would be protected financially upon their death.  My son's father does not have any financial responsibility to his son anymore, but SS does, because it is up to SS to see to it that the benefits the worker paid into all those years goes to the survivors it was intended to.

I don't know what the laws of my state are in regards to adoption and loss of benefits, but I DO know that if I would be in that situation, I know for a fact that DS's dad would want that money to continue to come in for DS, if for nothing other than his college education.  DS's dad and I were always vitally concerned with how we were going to help pay for college and even DS's SM told me that if there was a silver lining to his death, it's that we now have something coming is specifically for that.  DS's dad was at least a realist, in that regardless of where I went or whom I was with (unless I married a sugar daddy, NOT!), college would always be a difficult goal.

I will grant you that, from the outside looking in, it DOES look shallow and cheap, but if you barely make it from paycheck to paycheck and you FINALLY have a way to at least partially help with college expenses, I think the parent who is gone would be applauding your actions if seriously considered the circumstances.  I also know that, if the roles were reversed (and I could call back from the grave), I too would demand that they keep those survivor benefits, regardless of adoption status.  What a legacy to leave my child, that thru me he would finally have the opportunity to go to college with MUCH more financial help than any of us had counted on!

I respect many of you who have posted on this thread, but I truly believe in this instance, we're gonna have to agree to disagree........

[LizaLou1]

I'm going out on a limb here, so prepare yourself.  Forget everything you know or think you know about the mom.  

If the man's children don't get the SS benefits who does? The government of course.

Was not the original purpose and intent of SS Insurance  (SSI) for the worker himself and/or his family?  I suggest that a father, even in death, would want his children to have his benefits even if they were adopted.

Is it a character flaw for one to get what they paid for, i.e. SSI  or is that "milking the system"?

Would we expect the installment payments from a deceased father's life insurance policy to cease because his children were adopted?

And lastly,

When will the soicalization of Amercia stop being covert?

I have no answers only questions.

LizaLou

[sweetnsad]

Well, it seems everyone has gotten their two cents in about this one....I don't even know what to say, but the original poster DID strike something within me and I would like to respond whether she reads this or not.  

To me, money is money....the more you have, the more you want...I'm not well off by any means, we live paycheck to paycheck, but let me tell you, if I had the choice between getting SS from my late husband or having my children brought up by a loving man, I would choose the latter.  To me, that is what's most precious.  Children deserve to have people in their lives that love them very much.  

Also, to hear this woman comment on how her late husband didn't do much for their children when he was alive just leaves me confused.  Why would she want to have her kids continue to collect this money?  It sounds to me like a whole lot of anger and this is her justification.  Make him pay even when he's not here.  That doesn't seem fair and it doesn't honour his memory, no matter how much of a lousy father he may have been.  I mean, he's gone now....let him be...

There is a thing called "student loans", lines of credit, personal loans....a lot of children have to do it because their parents simply don't have the financial means...my children included.  It doesn't make you a bad parent.  

I just don't see how this can be good.  I know my soon to be husband would never allow me to collect SS off my late husband...he would want to provide for them himself...I don't know...it just seems like a "not good" situation...I don't know how you can take anything postive out of it.  

[thairagain]

Very well put, Liza.

I agree w/ you 100%.

thair

[MixedBag]

and know someone who is doing something very similar to what this poster is asking.  

The TAX PAYERS are being asked to foot the bill when money vs. adoption and social security benefits are all lumped into one subject.