Divorced Mom Not Allowed to Have Lesbian Partner in Home
Categories: Gay Parenting, Weird But True
A divorced Tennessee mom of two was recently told by the court that her lesbian partner of nine years can no longer "sleep over" when her kids are in the home. The reason? A "paramour restriction" imposed by a judge, despite the fact that a psychological evaluation found the woman to be a positive influence on her partner's children.Meanwhile, the woman's ex-husband shares his home with his wife of five years, who gets to "sleep over" whenever she wants.
Why the double standard? According to the ACLU, the judge thought he was mandated by law to put the restriction in place, ignoring the fact that the family had been a cohesive unit for most of the kids' lives. The ruling, which is being appealed, has forced the couple to live in a duplex so that they can abide by the law while still being able to see each other.
It's cases like this one that highlight the way that same-sex couples are put in impossible positions. Despite their long-term commitment to each other, these women can't marry. And it's exactly that lack of a legal marriage license makes them vulnerable under the law ... this particular law, especially.
Angel Chandler says she's willing to do whatever it takes to keep custody of her children, but it hardly seems fair that what it does take is tearing her family apart. What do you think?
Recent Posts
- G.I. Joe, My Little Pony Invading TV With New Children's Network (2/09/2010)
- Movies May Influence Children's Food Choices, Study Shows (2/09/2010)
- Report Cites 220 Cases of D.C. Teachers Abusing Students (2/09/2010)
- Chicago Candidate Drops Out of Race With Tearful Child On Display (2/09/2010)
- Juicy, But Not Juice (2/09/2010)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Maritza 12-29-2008 @ 1:44PM
I think its not fair that the judge did this to the kids and the couple. the judge is making the situation a problem when its not supposed to be. its not fair, its such a double standard!
Reply
Sugarlovejuice 12-29-2008 @ 1:42PM
I REALLY DONT THINK THATS RIGHT FOR THE JUDGE TO MAKE THAT DECISION,HE WOULDNT WANT SOMEONE TELLING HIM WHO HE COULD HAVE OVER.I DONT THINK THATS ANY OF HIS CONCERN AT ALL.MAYBE HE WANTS YOU FOR HIMSELF OR MAYBE HIS WIFE OR GAY LOVER PISSED HIM OFF THAT DAY.BUT I HOPE IT ALL WORK OUR FOR HER AND HER LOVER.
Reply
ame s 12-29-2008 @ 3:02PM
Wait a minute. At least in my state, each and every divorce decree (or whatever it's called) states that neither parent is allowed to have a "paramour" (lover of either gender they are not married to) in the home overnight when the children are present. I doubt the judge in this case made such a "ruling" in just this case.
Comparing the fact that the ex-husband's new wife is allowed to sleep over in the home is dumb. The woman is his new spouse, not a lover he is not married to.
Reply
Melissa 12-29-2008 @ 5:27PM
I agree with you ame....he is married to this new woman....if the mom and her girlfriend were married it wouldn't be a problem....i am a single mom, and i have made the decision not to have a guy when my daughter is around (which is all the time lol)....if we want to do something he needs to have his own place so we can hang out there!
ame s 12-29-2008 @ 7:27PM
I was widowed in 2003, when my daughters were 3 and 5. There was no decree issued, but I still didn't ever choose to have a man stay over at my house when my daughters were present. In 2005,when I met my current husband, he did stay overnight when my daughters slept over at my parents' house.
I do not see this as a gay/lesbian issue, but as an issue that deals with what is best for the child/children.
I do not think that a parent should allow a lover to sleep at their home if the children are home also, regardless of their sexual preference. I'm not a prude, but I believe that Mom and/or Dad should be married to a person before they allow said person to stay overnight in the home if the kids are home. On weekends when the kids are with the other parent, hell, have at it, but don't confuse the child/children. I've seen too many divorced parents bring home multiple boyfriends/girlfriends and the hope on the child's/children's face that this person is here to stay.
A divorced parent's sexual life is private and has no business getting anywhere near a child's life.
Kat in Florida 12-30-2008 @ 8:46AM
This is not a "lover" people. It is the woman's spouse but because of the stupidity of people, they are not allowed to marry. The situation is EXACTLY the same as the husband. Both have long-term relationships that the children have come to expect and accept. This sounds like a father who is trying to use everything possible to wrest these children from their mother.
laprns 12-30-2008 @ 8:52AM
I think the problem is the fact that the law is archaic. Such laws were enacted before 3 out of 5 marriages ended in divorce as well as when most children were born within the confines of marriage.
JustAnothervoice 12-30-2008 @ 10:37AM
IF they were allowed to marry, I would say fine, the paramour clause should be applied, but they don't have that option!
brenda 1-02-2009 @ 12:27AM
The mother and her partner do not have the option to marry. This is not an equal situation at all. As a lesbian, I am again reminded how we are treated as second class citizens. I, we, are human beings who want what every human being wants, a person to love, make a family and be with for the rest of our lives. This is just another example of how unequal treatment of it's citizens works and how some of the citizens of America allow that to happen.
Pamela 12-30-2008 @ 3:42PM
EARTH TO COMMENTERS. The women was dating her partner for 9 years, this isn't some fling. You are all supporting the ex-husband because he and his new wife are married. Have you forgotten the gay rights issues our country is currently facing? The mother and her partner of 9 freakin' years are unable to marry because of anti-gay marriage laws. If anything, they have a strong partnership of 9 years...that in my opinion is stronger then the ex-husbands new marriage. This judge and story is ridiculous. Let people live! The women was found to be a positive influence on the children...you all say you want what is best for the children afterall.
SKL 12-29-2008 @ 4:32PM
Personally I don't think the kids need to see unmarried adults in a sexual relationship in their home.
However, I wonder how this issue came up. My kids and I live in a house with two unrelated women. They have their own bedrooms and they are "aunties" to my kids and have meaningful relationships with them. How is that different from the present story, other than what goes on hopefully without the children's knowledge? Perhaps the dad complained? Or is the lesbian couple raising a stink because they want to be "out and proud"?
It ought to be enough for other adults in the home to have separate bedrooms and not "carry on" around the kids. It's not like the kids will be shielded forever from their mom's relationship, but at least they don't need to be aware of it at an early age.
Reply
openmind 12-29-2008 @ 8:17PM
How can this woman ever get on with her life if same sex marriage is against the law???? I am confused. If it is not legal than she will never be able to get on with her life with her partner. To me a family is what you make of it, no matter if it is 2 moms or 2 dads raising children, as long as the children are raised with love.
We do not seem to mind when we have foster families raising as many as 11 or up to 15 children per house hold. I have seen horrible conditions in which foster children have been brought up in, so that the parents can get the monthly pay chack. ( NOT ALL FOSTER PARENTS DO THIS, BUT SOME HAVE FIGURED OUT A WAY TO WORK THE SYSTEM)
No one says a word about the way the state runs their system. All I hear is it is better then where they came from. But God forbide you have a child brought up by 2 loving same sex parents.
What harm would this cause??????? The children would learn to be accepting of others....... And be loved by more than most children????
SKL 12-29-2008 @ 9:13PM
Actually, Openmind, this would not be happening of this lesbian had not been married to the girls' father previously. So it's not like they are making it illegal for gays to get together, or even for gays with kids to get together. I imagine this is a narrow issue.
However, gay or straight, I don't have a sex life around my kids. It's not right for a single parent.
Don 12-30-2008 @ 7:49AM
Can you just come out with it and say that you don't think that Gay or Lesbians should be allowed to marry? What is "unusual"(that's your word) about a homosexual couple living together? The article states that the live partner is a positive influence on the children.
"this would not be happening of this lesbian had not been married to the girls' father previously". I'm sorry why is this all the mother's fault?
You seem to have great disdain for homosexuals perhaps you should consider a more open mind, that the world is changing and people are now open about their sexuality, my parents(FYI man & women) were by showing affection for one another and it didn't bother me. Sure when I was old enough to understand what it meant it grossed me out to no end.
The fact remains their has been no conclusive reason given as to why two women or men cannot share a bed together, create a life together, other than god doesn't like it.
I know several couples that live together that raise a children, why because they see no reason for marriage until they are sure of it. Yet they continue to create a life together for the benefit of their children, knowing that if the relationship does fail there is no high cost of divorce.
Sincerely a guy with wife and child who sees no good reason to deny anyone the right to pursue happiness.
Sophiagrrl 1-14-2009 @ 5:09AM
Can I just point out the obvious? These women canNOT get married in most places. And if they do get married, say, in Canada, the marriage may not be recognized in Tennessee. Are the previous commenters presuming they have the option (connoting a support of gay marriage) but blaming them for not doing so?
When marriage is equally available to all, then this might be a sound decision. But so long as some can get married and some cannot, this puts an unfair burden on those who cannot marry and are stuck as 'paramours'.
Reply
PhilCO 12-29-2008 @ 8:33PM
With the exception of the first poster... are you people idiots? The women have been together for NINE years, in a heck of a lot longer relationship than a lot of straight couples I know. I don't know about the above commenters, but I personally don't know of anybody who has hung around in a casual sexual relationship for almost a decade. The woman's partner, according to the psychological evaluations that ANYONE in this situation would have to go through, was seen to be a positive influence on the kids. As for the poster who stated it wasn't a gay/lesbian issue - for you and I'm sure for the others, it is exactly that. For anyone to demean the women's relationship as simply 'lovers' means that you are taking the committment these women have made to each other over the last nine years and reducing it to only sexual terms. It's the bigot's most convenient way of expressing their prejudice without sounding like a total jerk - pitiful attempts to ignore not only the relationship of these women, but also the relationship both of them obviously share with the kids.
Reply
Phil 12-29-2008 @ 8:34PM
My apologies to poster #6 - your post wasn't up when I typed mine....
Reply
Clara 12-30-2008 @ 8:04AM
If they married in a state where same sex marriage is legal, wouldn't TN have to honor that?
Reply
PhilCO 12-29-2008 @ 8:42PM
Unfortunately no, Clara. The Defense of Marriage act allows states like TN to ignore the rights that would be given to them in other states. Otherwise your comment would've been right on since the 'full faith and credit' clauses in every state could've honored any marriages performed in another state.
Reply
Phil 12-29-2008 @ 8:46PM
Unfortunately no, Clara. The 'defense of marriage' act allows states to ignore the rights that same sex couples have been given in other states. Otherwise, a state's 'full faith and credit' clause could've allowed the marriage to be honored in a state like TN.
Reply