Confused

[Proserpina]

This is just for education purposes, for the sake of anyone who might be reading this thread.

For 15 years I was the CFO for a small corporation that nationally distributed high end door hardware. As such, I had to be familiar with laws regarding such.

In most municipalities, in most states, it is seriously illegal for any door hardware to be installed that allows bedroom doors to be locked from the outside. Why?, because if there is a fire, the persons locked inside the room cannot escape the room independently of help from someone else who might be incapacitated in the fire.

CPS should know this and should come down hard on any parent who has hardware installed that allows them to lock a child in a bedroom (beyond traditional baby gates of course).

Any parent who installs any hardware device that locks their child into a room with no avenue for the child to escape in a fire, is seriously being stupid. Maybe the child wouldn't survive a fire anyway, but to lock your child in so that your child has no avenue of escape if you are incapacitated is idiocy.

Yeah, you have gone back and forth about this with others before.

I'm not going to rehash it.

As I said, I didn't say it was a good idea. I said I could understand CPS' reaction in the OP's case. CPS in many areas seem to see a difference between a five-minute "lock-down" with full supervision, and leaving the kid locked up all night with no chance of getting out.

Maybe the laws have changed since your employment. I dunno. Regardless, CPS in OP's case didn't find any wrongdoing.

Out of interest, was there actually any mention of any hardware being installed?

Or was Dad simply pulling the door shut tight on the other side to stop kiddo from leaving his room?

 

[CJane]

In most municipalities, in most states, it is seriously illegal for any door hardware to be installed that allows bedroom doors to be locked from the outside.

Against statute, or against fire code?

Any parent who installs any hardware device that locks their child into a room with no avenue for the child to escape in a fire, is seriously being stupid. Maybe the child wouldn't survive a fire anyway, but to lock your child in so that your child has no avenue of escape if you are incapacitated is idiocy.

I wouldn't lock my kids in, and in fact the girls' rooms don't even HAVE doors, and Twain's door is never closed.

However, when we were living in apartments post-divorce, and the kids were much smaller, I routinely removed the door knobs on the kids' bedrooms, flipped them around, and put the lock on the outside of the door. Not to lock the kids in, but to prevent small children from accidentally (or to be funny) locking me OUT.

 

[Proserpina]

Against statute, or against fire code?



I wouldn't lock my kids in, and in fact the girls' rooms don't even HAVE doors, and Twain's door is never closed.

However, when we were living in apartments post-divorce, and the kids were much smaller, I routinely removed the door knobs on the kids' bedrooms, flipped them around, and put the lock on the outside of the door. Not to lock the kids in, but to prevent small children from accidentally (or to be funny) locking me OUT.

OMG didn't you HATE that?! Kids. Little sods, the whole bally lot of them

And this is also one reason why grandkids are such a blessing.

Revenge.

 

[Chrln_little]

Yeah, you have gone back and forth about this with others before.

I'm not going to rehash it.

As I said, I didn't say it was a good idea. I said I could understand CPS' reaction in the OP's case. CPS in many areas seem to see a difference between a five-minute "lock-down" with full supervision, and leaving the kid locked up all night with no chance of getting out.

Maybe the laws have changed since your employment. I dunno. Regardless, CPS in OP's case didn't find any wrongdoing.

Out of interest, was there actually any mention of any hardware being installed?

Or was Dad simply pulling the door shut tight on the other side to stop kiddo from leaving his room?

From what I heard from my child's grandmother, my child's father would lock him in to keep him from roaming the house at night. This is why I flipped out. I could not understand how a child could get up and wonder the house at night? He sleeps through the night with me.

The story I heard was that when my son went to bed at night his father would lock the door from the outside. The next morning he would leave for work at 6:30 am and my son's grandmother would come from next door at about 8 am to unlock his door and let him out.

 

[mistoffolees]

From what I heard from my child's grandmother, my child's father would lock him in to keep him from roaming the house at night. This is why I flipped out. I could not understand how a child could get up and wonder the house at night? He sleeps through the night with me.

The story I heard was that when my son went to bed at night his father would lock the door from the outside. The next morning he would leave for work at 6:30 am and my son's grandmother would come from next door at about 8 am to unlock his door and let him out.

That is certainly not acceptable - and not safe.

 

[LdiJ]

Against statute, or against fire code?



I wouldn't lock my kids in, and in fact the girls' rooms don't even HAVE doors, and Twain's door is never closed.

However, when we were living in apartments post-divorce, and the kids were much smaller, I routinely removed the door knobs on the kids' bedrooms, flipped them around, and put the lock on the outside of the door. Not to lock the kids in, but to prevent small children from accidentally (or to be funny) locking me OUT.

Against the municipal fire code. Those kinds of laws are municipal laws rather than state laws.

With some hardware you can simply unscrew the little pins that you push in and out to lock the door and remove them, effectively making the hardware non-locking at all.

 

[Ohiogal]

Against the municipal fire code. Those kinds of laws are municipal laws rather than state laws.

With some hardware you can simply unscrew the little pins that you push in and out to lock the door and remove them, effectively making the hardware non-locking at all.

Not every municipality has the same fire codes.

 

[LdiJ]

Not every municipality has the same fire codes.

Correct, that is why I said in "most" rather than all.

 

[stealth2]

The house I grew up in was purchased from a family with a ton of kids. Both kids' bedrooms had locks on the outside. Was never an issue. Well... except when my bro thought it would be funny to lock me in. He didn't think it was so funny when I threatened to jump out the window (2nd floor). Heheheheheh

 

[Chrln_little]

That is certainly not acceptable - and not safe.

I guess the problem social services was having is "proving" how he used the lock. At this point they say that it is admitted that there was a lock, however proving how it was used is impossible.

 

[Chrln_little]

Update and Question

After an interesting roller coaster I have full custody of my children who are now 4 and 5.

Me and my children's bio father were court ordered to mediation, which we both went to and I paid $200 for, and he had to pay $200. During the first meeting, we came up with a custody agreement stating that I had full physical custody, we shared legal custody and he got weekend visitations at his mothers house. I offered him holidays and every other birthday, like a typical custody agreement would have in it. He refused these offers. The mediator that we had said she would go home, type up the agreement and we would sign it at the next meeting. When we got there, he said he was afraid of me and that his dad (the kids grandfather) would not let him agree to the custody arrangment because me and the mediator were being manipulative. My children's father is 34. Mind you I did not speak to this man at all for two months before mediation, or anytime after mediation. We were released at separate times and were escorted to our cars. (This is the requirements of the facility to keep the parties apart and prevent bickering.) The second person is allowed to leave after the first car exits the parking lot. Which all make sense to me, because divorces can get ugly.

Anyway, because he said he was afraid of me they had to drop the mediation. They cannot mediate a situation where one person is afraid of the other. Myself and the mediator thought it was an avoidance tactic but all in all it is policy.

We were then sent a court date for 3 months down the road. I get a call from my attorney 4 days before the court date was scheduled. It appears for some unconventional reason, they dropped the case. This even confused my attorney, she said it was completely out of left field and she just got the order. She had never seen them drop a case because one party backed out, and especially not this close to the court date.

After that I received a letter stating that since the other party was no longer interested in pursuing the case that I was awarded full custody.

In May of this year, (2011) he reappeared. He said he wanted to start seeing the children. Mind you, he had not seen them for 11 1/2 months. I am not one to deny my children from knowing their father and I had high hopes of him actually being a father to them. The children's grandmother was supposed to be there so I agreed. He took them swimming at the YMCA and made them dinner and brought them home. I thought it was a good test run. He arranged to see them two weeks from that, which would have been his every other weekend, originally offered to him. He never showed up. (thank goodness I did not tell the kids).

He called me and told me that he could only see them one day a month and would rather build up from there. I told him that the children needed a steady person in thier life and if he was not there for them more than 5 hours a month, it might confuse them since they are so young. I tried offering alternative solutions and working around his schedule, he refused every offer I made. So I gave up.

We have not heard from him since that phone call and his the children's grandmother (their dad's mom) says he has no intentions of coming back around until they are teenagers and able to make their own decisions on who they want to live with. I of course see serious confusion in the future for both of my children.

Anyway, I am getting married at the end of this year, and I am expecting another baby in January. My fiance and I have discussed this and he really wants to adopt my two children. To do this, I must first terminate their fathers rights. Do I have grounds to present this in front of court and terminate his rights? Or would their bio father have enough grounds to keep his rights?

 

[stealth2]

You would need to be married for a period of time, first. At least a year. And then - consider the ramifications very seriously - you may want to read more on this topic here and on your state's relevant sites.

 

[Chrln_little]

Thank you very much. I was not planning on doing it right away. I just know how long the legal process takes and how long it takes to get all the documents together that is required.

 

[LdiJ]

Thank you very much. I was not planning on doing it right away. I just know how long the legal process takes and how long it takes to get all the documents together that is required.

A stepparent adoption and a termination of another parent's parental rights is something that REALLY requires an attorney. Otherwise its too easy to get overturned.

Also, if you had any idea of the number of parents we have seen come here, who seriously regretted allowing their spouse to adopt their children, you wouldn't even consider this until you had been married for a LONG time.

 

[st-kitts]

There is a really interesting thread on the forum right now that you should read.

https://forum.freeadvice.com/adoption-34/un-adoption-abusive-spouse-557847.html

Before you say - "oh, no, that is NOTHING like my spouse" remember that every person says that in the beginning. Not to say your spouse will become abusive, or cheat, or become addicted to gambling, or drugs but for a million and one reasons your second marriage is statistically less likely to last than your first. Changing Dads might make your situation much worse with the potential for two dads to come after you. (Because even if you legally terminate Dad's rights, you can't really erase the kids from Dad's memory or actually at 5, erase the memory of Dad from your young child.)

Right now your ex is absent, and for better or worse, this is best from your perspective. You wish he would step up, but he hasn't and you want your kids to have a Dad. Understood. Did you consider that if you file to terminate his rights you may actually kick Dad into a high gear legal battle (with his parents - what fun!)? You might actually make your current situation much worse. You would be surprised how many parents that hadn't heard from the NCP for a long time file for some sort of change (more child support, desire to TPR, move) and end up in a nasty battle. I don't have a thread handy, but if you search a bit you will come up with a treasure trove of examples.