Can a Stepmother Like Sandra Bullock Be a Better Parent than a Biological Mom Who's a Porn Star?
Rarely when fathers seek full custody of a child are the facts so stacked against the mother as in the case between "Monster Garage" star Jesse James and his ex-wife, porn star Janine Lindemulder. The couple are battling in court for custody of 5-year-old daughter Sunny. Not only is Lindemulder a porn star, which is a career that one can argue has negative moral and lifestyle implications on a child's upbringing, but she is married to a felon and has an alleged drug problem. James on the other hand is married to Sandra Bullock, who has been called "America's sweetheart."
I guess it won't surprise you that few fathers get full custody. The ones who even attempt it usually have an arsenal of evidence. According to the Association of Matrimonial Lawyers, the majority of cases are now joint custody.
Bullock and James have had sole custody of 5-year-old Sunny for the past six months since Lindemulder was in jail -- yes, jail -- for tax evasion.
Now Lindemulder has gone from the courts to the court of public opinion by appearing on ABC's Good Morning America and throwing what I'm calling the divorce equivalent of the "shot heard around the world" in accusing Sandra Bullock of being an interloping stepmother who is trying to "take away my daughter." Give me a break. This shot will backfire and be a rallying cry for stepmothers to finally be freed from the tyranny of the stereotype that they can't be loving, wise, and sincerely devoted parents in a child's life.
"What would give her the right to take away my daughter?" Lindemulder asked, even though she admitted Bullock is a good stepmother to Sunny. "This is my daughter. I'm the best mother I can be."
Hmmm, the best mother she can be is not enough. Especially when she is married to Jeremy Aikman, who as E! reported, has several previous state and federal convictions involving alcohol, guns and the manufacturing of narcotics.
While I counsel many women who are anguished when their kids see their ex's new wife -- who may have broken up the marriage -- little media attention is given to the agony of the father who is often helpless when his kids are with another man.
"We see this all the time where the ex-wife lives with a crazy harmful boyfriend who can't see his own kids because the court has prohibited him because he may have been convicted of drugs or abuse and yet he can live with another father's kid," says Glenn Sacks, the executive director of "Fathers & Families." "I've seen many fathers try to bring this to the courts' attention and the courts don't want to hear it."
Furthermore, Sacks reveals how many concerned stepmothers -- who love their stepchildren -- also call the organization inquiring about their rights to be more involved with their stepchildren. "Some stepmothers," he says, "have been more of a mother than the biological mother but have no standing legally in the system."
As a stepmother and a mother, as well as a divorce coach, this is murky territory that must be navigated with delicacy. Again, the litmus test must be the best interests of the child. This is not an issue of who has more money or status. It is an issue of safety. Judges, lawyers, psychiatrists and the public realize the benefits of both parents in a child's life. But when the issue is safety and a child's welfare, sometimes parents have no choice but to go to the courts as hard of a choice and road that may be.
Sunny will always love her biological mother. That is a primal impulse. Stepmothers have to earn love. And the heart is elastic enough for children to love many people in different ways.
Are there some stepmothers who are callous and disinterested? You bet. But many aren't. Especially the ones who don't have children of their own and who pour so much of their love into these relationships -- and don't often get rewarded.
Sandra Bullock also diffused Lindemulder's emotional bomb that she tried to detonate in a letter to the custody judge.
"I am aware that Janine has claimed many times that my desire to have Sunny was because I could not have children of my own," Bullock writes in a letter obtained by ABC News. "As difficult as that is for me to hear, and write, it couldn't be farther from the truth."
Instead, she claims it was Lindemulder's life choices that led to the decision for her not to have kids of her own. According to the E! report, she and James "realized that due to the instability in Sunny's life, bringing another child into the world at this time would not be in Sunny's best interest."
That shows devotion on Bullock's part -- but maybe not wisdom. Having your own child -- or adopting one -- gives you certain rights that you can't obtain as a stepmother.
I also know that many men in second marriages will get married and don't want any more kids, and that is a Faustian choice wives have to make. In fact, I wrote a piece called, "Honey, I'll Marry You But No Kids" for the New York Times on this subject years ago. It has only become more true as the years have passed.
Is the fact that Lindemulder is a porn star reason for a judge to not grant custody? "Being a porn star does not mean you lose your children," says famed divorce attorney Raoul Felder. "That is a very thin reed on which to hang a change of custody."
But courts will look at other lifestyle decisions that cumulatively paint a picture of family life for a child.
Adds Deborah Mecklinger, a lawyer and divorce coach, "If she was a porn star between the hours of 9-5, it wouldn't matter. On the other hand, there are other pieces here that impact stability, predictability and continuity of care." Let's see: felon husband, alleged drug use, porn star.
Don't you think that Sunny, as well as the other kids -- Chandler and Jesse Jr. -- benefit by being in Sandra Bullock and Jesse James' care?
"I know the term 'stepmother' carries many connotations, one of them being a 'glorified babysitter,'" Bullock wrote. " "My commitment and responsibility to Sunny, and Chandler and Jesse Jr., goes beyond that. We are FULLY prepared to accept the responsibility and make Sunny's transition as healthy as possible if full custody should be awarded to Jesse...We are here, and know we may have a tough road ahead of us but we have built a strong and stable foundation, which makes us ready for anything."
I think as a culture we're ready to acknowledge that many stepmothers are great mothers too -- as tough as that may be for some Moms to accept. And some Moms are no saints and the child may be better off with the father.
Follow Jill Brooke on Twitter: www.twitter.com/divorcemama
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Do agree, if your legal job does not affect your child in anyway...i
Your job shouldn't matter but most anyone in the military will find it does. I am not talking about being at risk of deployment but that judges tend to allow and give it weight as proof you were violent. Somehow just because you served your country, you are suddenly a spousal and child abuser. Just like false allegations you raped your children are given more weight by judges if you are male than even REAL evidence like pictures and witnesses that the children are abused by their birth mothers.
Of course most have no idea how our refusal to prosecute false accusers really effects things. A false allegation destroys your life and you have no real recourse for it. Also as an example the EIGHT investigations done based on my ex-wife making false claims i molested our daughter that all came back as "unfounded" destroyed my daughter's word. When a allegation against the husband of my ex was made by our daughter toally independent of anyone and to a psychologist we couldn't do anything. The investigation found it as "indicated" but all the false claims they refused to prosecute means that he gets to walk after raping our daughter for almost two years.
I get to deal with the mental and emotional problems and the judges toss me in jail unless I force her to go around them.. It is destroying me and my family and our daughter has to send me to jail or be raped again.
I am a custodial father and can tell you how bad the courts are. While for YEARS the mother would refuse to allow me to see the kids, the judges refused to do anything. CPS, they were a joke ignoring the law and REFUSING to accept reports of abuse by me though I brougt them witnesses and pictures. Instead they were too busy investigating me based on false claims by the mother. After she had a child she couldn't name the father of die in her care and our daughter spent years being molested by her mother's now husband, I finally gained custody.
Now the same judge who refused to enforce my rights to see the kids has thrown me in jail for them refusing to see her though they stated they were afraid of being abused by that pair! CPS is still a joke investigating me if they get a scratch playing with the family dog and ignoring my complaints about suspicious bruises and marks so if a mother loses custody it is USUALLY for a very good reason. Not always and some women get the reverse of what men usually get and some give up custody ofr other reasons but that is usually why.
And yes I have court documents showing everything I just stated for those supporting the mother and thinking no CPS reports or etc mean anything or that in custody you are innocent until proven guilty.
www.Hurley
This seems like a great example tha just because your egg manages to find a swimmer does NOT mean you are going to be a great parent. You should have to get a license before you can have a baby... I am joking, but seriously, it is shocking that just because a woman gives birth to a baby that she is given the benfit of the doubt much to the detriment of the child... a little common sense in the courts & social system would be awesome...
WOW...some mighty long posts today.
What's being a porn star got to do with a person being or not being a good parent? Some of these church moms are the world's WORST parents. We need to try to learn not to generalize so much in our lives.
It seems to me that they are putting the cart before the horse. First there is the issue of custody. Then there is the issue of parental rights. One is not automatically exclusive of the other. The father in this case can have custody, and the mother can retain her parental rights. Ms. Bullock's role is moot. She's married to the father. The father, whom as it has already been pointed out, didn't object to his ex-wife being a porn star when he married her, and didn't divorce her because she was a porn star. Tax evasion is not a reason to take away someone's parental rights.
There are many ways to keep the child either with the mother, or in contact with the mother in a safe and nurturing way without taking the mother's rights away. After all, the father has a history of marrying and divorcing women. Who will be this child's next step-mother? Can you guarantee this won't happen?
Are you seriously this delusional? You actually believe the child is better off with a jail-bird porn star? Really? While I am all for people making thir own choices (maybe the mom really enjoys being in porn, who am I am care?) it is quite another thing when you bring a child into this world. At that point, you need to balance your desire with you childs NEEDS, and I am pretty sure that having a mother/caregiver who is present (& not in jail) is a basic requirement for parenthood.
I'm completely baffled by the people arguing to give the child back to her birth mother. As someone who was raised by my father and stepmother due to my mother's failings, the "give the baby back to her mother" crowd are insane. I was lucky that my father found a judge (in Kansas in the 70s, no less) who weighed the kind of life I'd have with each parent and decided in favor of my father. My mother didn't have half of the marks against her that this woman has, but if I'd grown up in her house I'd require years of therapy. Her choices in men were disastrous, she jumped from job to job and apartment to apartment, and she's now admitted that she had no idea what to do with me when I visited (she didn't need to tell me that, I lived through all of the bizarre decisions). Is she a horrible person? No. But would my life have been remarkably and unfavorably different had the judge awarded custody to her over my father. Without a doubt, yes. Whether the PC police want to admit it or not, the choices that people make do say something about them. I think the defenders of the mother are likely viewing the mother through the prism of their own poor choices and a desire to not be judged by them.
Children's Services has not found the natural mother, Ms. Lindemulder, lacking in any way and allegations made by Bullock and her husband of recent drug use is totally unsubstantiated and undocumented as they were only made after Ms. Lindemulder was released from prison after serving 6 months for tax evasion, and wanted her child back. Also, the court has ordered that Ms. Lindemulder not work in the porn industry anymore and she has complied with that order (least we forget Ms. Bullock’s husband was married to Ms. Lindemulder so he didn’t have a problem with her porn past then).
Other than Ms. Lindemulder’s history (10 years ago she was on drugs), yet her child is five years old so she was off drugs for 5 years before her child was even born, can the father say the same?
The proof that Ms. Lindemulder is a good mother is that she has raised a beautiful and well adjusted child. Ms. Lindemulder has not mistreated her child, but Bullock and her husband are attempting to make a case for what "could" happen. Bullock's house could burn down (God forbid) with all of them in it, should they never be allowed to visit with the child?
Jill Brooks article appears to be about solidarity for stepmothers; that attitude is crazy because it’s not about their maternal instincts for someone else’s child. People are so selfish today, no one is perfect. I hope the child is returned to her mother.
You know what? I lived in the bottom half of a house below a young mother with infant twins. They cried constantly and the mother's idea to quiet them down was to play her stereo at top volume while screaming "SHUT UP! SHUT UP!" I called DCFS numerous times, they visited the woman, and in the end they did nothing. So the fact the DCFS hasn't found the mother "lacking" isn't proof of anything.
Whatever happened in your circumstance has NOTHING to do with Ms. Lindermulder as a mother. The proof is in the pudding. No one took Ms. Lindemulder’s child from her, because there was no cause to do so. Obviously going to jail for 6 months for tax evasion disabled Ms. Lindermulder from caring for child whom she raised beautiful heretofore; so the father and Ms. Bullock did the right thing by stepping in for 6 months (I read elsewhere the father hadn’t even seen the child for the first 3 years of her life).
Why should Ms. Lindermulder give up her child to someone who "thinks" they can do better? Porn star or not Ms. Lindermulder has done just fine and evidently raised a beautiful and healthy child with little help from Bullock and her husband before she went to jail. Now they are being opportunistic and throwing Bullock’s money around and even Ms. McLeod (a woman who went to high school with Bullock and apparently is a blogger here) has responded in this very blog in Bullock’s favor; yet Ms. McLeod doesn’t know Ms. Lindermulder or her child and that’s sick.
Who are these people who think its o.k. to trade other people’s children because they have more material wealth and influence? Be sure that money and influence is driving this.
Child services regularly and frequently leave children in homes where they turn up dead, so don't suggest that their finding nothing wrong means a damn thing.
You can argue your support of the bio-mom all you want, but I sure as hell wouldn't let my kid go to a playdate at that house with 2 ex-con (potentially former) druggies. With guns, no less.
People need to stop dumping on this mother. Didn't he marry her? And we all know what a woman has to do to become a full-fledged movie star. Nobody is a saint here.
I agree completely.
I think the primary issue is Mom's boyfriend, not the adult film industry which, contrary to what many people think, is full of working mothers. Add to that the instability of the jail term and you have at least an entertainable case for the father having physical custody.
Otherwise you're just arguing that moms automatically should get preferential treatment.
Was it really nec. to ask?
I initiated my divorce in NJ, in 1987. My lawyer told me that the courts in NJ always put the welfare of a child or children 1st in a divorce. The court gave me & my former wife joint custody of our children. Since I worked full time-I had to pay child support to my ex-wife who wanted to be a stay at home mother. The case information showed that my ex held an MS in a technical profession. The court ordered her to work at her profession. Since she had left her profession for about 8 years she had to up date her credentials. The court strongly encouraged he to update her credentials & go to work in her profession. I had to pay her rehabilitive alimony to cover her tuition & the cost of child care as she studied. I had to decrease my standard of living to pay the re-hab alimony but it was for my kids. It was worth the sacrifice. My ex re-enterd her profession. She has become a leader in her profession.
I've been retired since 1987. I'm comfortable. My ex found that she could still work at her profession. Our kids survived having a working mother. Courts don't always ignore father's rights. A father has responsibilities in addition to rights. Both parents must 1st meet their responsibllites to their kids. The kids always come 1st. The courts give & enforce father's rights but a father must always meet his responsibilities to his kids.
Sounds like a success story. Congrats to you and your ex for plugging away for your kids.
Am I the only one who believes that the private lives of actors' ought not be fodder for the general public? We don't know the reality of the situation so how can we sit in judgement?
I went to high school with Sandy Bullock, and I can assure you, she's a responsible person, who's true to her word, and she's already proved that she's a good mother, no step about it.
I feel for the natural mother, but get a grip, when you become a porn star and you're married to a convicted felon, it's kind of hard for people to imagine you making good choices for your child, when you haven't been able to make them for yourself.
Look at the lives of the two women, Who has a long history of doing the right thing, and being responsible and kind (even before she a huge movie star)?
And who has allowed her own problems to keep her from being the kind of mother her child - and every child- deserves?
It's not about who's a porn star and who's America's sweetheart, it's about who's mature enough to put the needs of the child first.
The ties of birth are strong, but giving birth doesn't mean that you know how to mother.
Good luck Sandy.
While I won't defend the decision to become a porn star, nonetheless, do any of us have the right to judge another person's life and their choices? Are we truly qualified to judge "sinner" or "saint" because of outward appearances, and circumstances we don't know about or understand? Has anyone else "walked a mile in her shoes" to know what made her what she is?
Until proven otherwise, this woman's capacity as a mother should not be judged because we don't like what she does for a living. I don't like it either, but it's her life, not ours...and her child.
Zipolked I agree completely with you.
I don't care about the birth mom having been a porn star in the past, or that Sandra Bullock is famous. But I do think that
1) If the mom is clean and no longer using, that's great. But it is so easy to slip back into that lifestyle, if you are around drugs and have the opportunity. Being married to an ex-felon is not the best way to make a lifestyle change.
2)I don't care if she was a porn star before- but how is she supporting herself now? Can she support herself without child support or is she trying to get a hefty child support settlement from her ex and his wealthy stepwife? Such things do happen all the time.
3)The fact that NONE of this was in the news before, says that while the birth mom was in jail, the father and Bullock went out of their way not to publicize it and keep things private- always best for the child, no matter what. But as soon as the birth mom got out of jail, she goes onto Good Morning America??? Sorry, but if you have the child's best interests at heart, you would NOT go onto a national tv show and start spouting off about it.
The birth mom didn't pay her taxes, and she used to use drugs. SHE needs to prove to the judge that she can and will be the best full time caretaker for her daughter.
I have a problem with the "until it's proven otherwise" part of this argument. I think our child welfare system and family court system is ridiculous for waiting until a child is physically or emotionally scarred to do right by that child. I don't think the courts should go around terminating people's parental rights, but I also think it is completely fair for a father and a stepmother to petition the court to try to prevent serious damage from being done to a child they love. What is so wrong with that?
I'm willing to give Jesse James and Sandra Bullock the benefit of the doubt that they are not trying to maliciously steal a child from her mother. I'm quite certain that if it were about having a child of their own they could easily adopt a dozen of them. It seems obvious to me that they are genuinely concerned for the experiences the girl has when she is in her birth mother's care.
I don't think having a career in porn should automatically negate your parental rights, but I have no problem with the judge considering her career choice along with the other negative aspects of her life (marrying a repeat felon being at the top of my list).
Given that there IS an issue of parental fitness, then it IS the place of the authorities of society to JUDGE where is the best place for the child to be.
No one needs to marry a felon to know that that isn't the best choice for where to raise a child. Well, no one sane...
I've no problem with an individuals choices, but when you're a mother, and your "job" is having all varieties of sex in front of a camera with the intent to distribute, you're just too stupid to breathe if you think it's not going to play a major role in a child custody battle.
Well, according to the story, it usually doesn't play a major role in custody battles today.
I refuse to believe that...
Why is it American's view father's as second class citizens. They are just as much a parent to the child as the mother. Just because a mother gives birth doesn't make her a good parent or an appropriate role model for her children. I have nothing against porn stars, however this woman has a long history of bad judgments. I am a court appointed special advocate for children. I advocate for the children who have no voice in their situations and make recommendations to the court as to what is in the best interst of the children. This mother makes bad choices and would therefore subject her child to the bad choices and the drug abusing, gun possessing felon she is married to and who knows what else. How can that compare to a loving and stable home where what is in the best interest of the child is maintained? Any woman can have a baby - it doesn't make her a mother. I am also a stepmother of 2 sons who I raised with great pride and love, along with my own son. They called me mom and all 3 have given us beautiful grandchildren. All 3 sons are excellent parents with their own children, so I know I did my job well. This little girl needs a loving and 'safe' home to grown up in, and it is apparent that her biological mother cannot promise her that.
People aren't giving the porn star enough credit, apparently.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
