if you and BM cant play nice, and only one of you can go to an event, then it should be you sitting out. She is the mom. Now since your SS specifically invited you (and not her) that would be the exception, but in general you should step back and let her have first dibs when parental volunteering is appropriate. Either that or suck it up and do it together....but if you cant do that then stay home.

It's MamaBecky....I am not a BM unfortunately.

However did you not read that I said since he invited you and not her that it was an EXCEPTION...however in general of course if BM wants to volunteer she should have first dibs in doing so since you cant get along and do it together.

I have to agree. I and SS hate BM and feel she shouldn't have any rights to her son that she has been a horrid part time mother to BUT unless SS specifically asks that she not be somewhere, I fully expect her as the mother to attend. Further, to that point if she doesn't I'm not the persons who's place it is to metion her poor choice in not attending as clearly we are not friends and these are not my children. I allow DH that honor.

I don't know much about your story. Just because as does not want her there, does not mean it should be that way. I mean, plenty of parents PAS the other parent and that is the kind of result. I am not accusing you of PAS, but ss's wishes don't trump her rights at this age, unless there is proof of actual abuse.
Please don't take it wrong, but as a bm( did not have a sm for my DD) I would not take well to being ostracized at school.

It is really not the teacher's responsibility to play the role of mediator in this situation and honestly I guess the key word would be "volunteer" which means that if BM wants to volunteer at the Ice Cream Social, the local Cancer Walk, the Animal Shelter or what have you, nobody can really tell her "no"

I would also not read the teacher's response as her telling BM not to be at any of those events. I am reading it that she simply mentioned to BM that you would be there as well, so whomever chooses to show up, shows up but to try and make it as unstressful for SS as possible.

edit: I typed this before your post above

I have read a lot of your story and am marginally acquainted with what SS has gone through. I read between the lines that the teacher sees a problem with BM. The teacher sounds straightforward enough that if she thought it was appropriate for BM to be there, she would have facilitated BM being there.

I'm guessing you don't have much to worry about anyway, though, because BM's interest in school activities will be shortlived.

I don't think there should be uniform, across-the-board rights afforded to a parent. I absolutely think these things should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. I disagree that a one-size-fits-all statement such as "it is every parent's right to attend" fits in every single family dynamic.

I'm not familiar with termination of parental rights. However, if this woman has already signed papers to terminate her own rights when her son turns 14, THEN SHE IS NOT A MOTHER.

It doesn't matter if she is still getting every other weekend until that point. She has already made it clear to SS and to everyone else that she is not his mother. I am not judging her character in any way, or the character of anyone else who has chosen to terminate their rights. I'm simply saying that she is not a parent, and no considerations should make for her under the assumption that she is a parent.

As such, she ought to move the hell out of the way for whoever steps up to the plate, which just so happens to be Jsmom. She is trying to do the right thing, and in her situation pretty much everything she does is going to be problematic. So, whatever works out best for SS--especially considering his mother has chosen to terminate her parental rights next year--is what Jsmom ought to be doing.

Which I think is exactly what she is trying to do.

Also, having every other weekend does not necessarily imply custody of any sort. I know several custodial parents who still permit every other weekend visitation with parents who have completely signed over all their rights. It's not unusual at all.

I also think that those people are not actually parents. Creating a situation where you have no legal or real responsibility for your children, and living in a way that you can pick and choose when to deal with them, is not parenting. That's more like being an extended relative who occassionally asks for a visit.

I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes with this, but I think many of the posters in this thread are assigning too much validity to biological contributions while ignoring the choices made by the BM which clearly indicate she does not wish to be this boy's mother.

I am confused. Are her rights being terminated when he turns 14? Or is she just giving up visitation? If she is just giving up her visition she retains legal rights to him and that would include volunteering at the school, having access to all his records. Perhaps she thought since she willnot be visiting him much longer then at least she could be involved at school?

i agree that it is really not the teachers role to navigate complicated family issues adn she can't really tell the bm not to attend-I read it as she talked with her about it not that she told her she couldnt be there.

And I am sooo not trying to be mean, but to me the email sounds as if you are two women who cant get along with one another and are fighting over ss. I also dont think it was right for you to state that ss is uncomfortable around bm right now-maybe he is-but that would be his place to share that if he liked.

Okay, what I don't understand here is how much credence some of the posters are giving to the legal system and designations.

Almost every step parent I know has been royally screwed by the legal system. Most of them have endured grossly unfair and immoral living situations (not to mention legal situations) due to the fact that the legal system is completely ineffective.

So, why do we keep citing "the law" as a way to tell Jsmom she did the wrong thing? "The law" keeps abused children in INSANE households for years. The law screws fathers out of their children and their money so that the kids can be raised by women who want to date sex offenders and drug addicts.

There is nothing inherently moral or ethical about the law or what's legal, and most of the people here know that.

So, morally, what did Jsmom do wrong? If this woman has signed a paper saying she doesn't want to be his mother, and he doesn't want anything to do with her, then why shouldn't she try to protect him from more confusing and upsetting situations concerning a woman who has already chosen the exit the relationship?

I don't get it.

Wow, very passionate opinions on this subject.

This is why I know my role. I am not the mom. They have a mom her name is crazo but they have a mom. I will never be and do not want to be their mom.

Teachers deal with this everyday and most of them have learned the hard way no matter what it's the birth mom and dad that the state views to have the rights to the child.

It is very admirable that you have invested so much into your stepson. He will be better in the long run because of your choice to be a very involved step mom. But remember she is the mom...even a piece crap gets the right to still be called mom.

I hope the events are drama free and you enjoy them with your stepson.

OMG lol Jacie....aggs sign line is one thing, the OP JSmom is the one that wrote to the school...if you're gonna get pissy at least get your posters right...wow

Wow, this degenerated quickly. Jociejay, you have some points, but the way you present them, besides getting you scorn, will not be heard. It happens all the time, one has a point, but how they say it, it shuts down any chance of getting across..
Jsmom, I think you put something out there when you said" and a little evil....". I would just look at that, what made you say that. Maybe you know it was a bit much, even though you feel like it was legitimate.
None of us know all that your family has been through.
If it feels a little uneasy, maybe it wasn't the right thing, but WE ALL HAVE MADE MISTAKES. It's easy to come down on somebody online and sometimes we come down hardest on those that make the same mistakes we have made, because we are still struggling with it, and this seems like a way to purge it, telling someone else it's VERY, VERY BAD, and it somehow redeems us.
It's a new day, I hope things get better.

Here's the thing though, SM is allowed to call or email anyone she damn well pleases. Since THE TEACHER called BM and asked her not to attend, I'm assuming that THE TEACHER realized no one was overstepping any boundaries.

The kid doesn't want her there. Sucks, but it's true, and the SM's trying to help.

JS-I think ss is lucky to have you. The bottom line is-you are the one taking care of him and he wants you there and not his mom. You may not be his birth "MOM" but you are doing everything a mom does. I read the email from the teacher and I took it as to mean she preferred you there. It seems like you love ss more than birth mom.

I think child's well being and wishes trump "MOM" if that is what you would call her.

JS..go with your heart.

JS - I think you did the right thing. It would be different if SS didn't want you there. Who cares if you "stepped on" bullshit rights of the birth mother. I don't buy into the business of legal rights of shitty parents (and I work in the legal profession). If a parent has to resort to their "legal rights" it's a sign that they have lost their place in the child's heart so they can pack sand and slither away as far as I'm concerned.

Everyone wants to feel like they are loved and that's the gift you are giving your SS. The real tragedy is the b.s. you are having to go thru to provide it, IMO.

It is amazing to me that the schools / teachers are so perceptive of the dynamics. The principal called my FDH after an incident we had with BM and, in a very diplomatic way, asked if BM was crazy.

Rock on, girlfriend.

I dont think you over stepped at all. SS asked for YOU to do it. End of story. I commend your efforts of not only "volunteering" per SS request but being involved period. Also i think it was mature, and smart to email the teacher ahead of time. Giving the teacher the heads up of an " uncomfortable" situation that may arise if a, b, and c happens.
The teacher tried to take care of the problem in the best way she could. It is not reasonable to expect teachers or other outsiders to coordinate this and that because so and so dont get along, or dont like each other.
Which means we need to take it to the next level and decide how to make the situation the most comfortable. Not
go? Go and avoid the person? Go before the person comes? (And im talkin in any situation now)
SM did right i think. She didnt go for a different reason, but it made the situation not esscalate.
I think in the future the SS should let the teachers know he doesnt want BM to volunteer for anything.