What do u think of this?

sinwagon

New Member
§ 13-102. Prohibited acts; penalties.

(a) Duty to support destitute parent.- If a destitute parent is in this State and has an adult child who has or is able to earn sufficient means, the adult child may not neglect or refuse to provide the destitute parent with food, shelter, care, and clothing.

(b) Duty to support destitute adult child.- If a destitute adult child is in this State and has a parent who has or is able to earn sufficient means, the parent may not neglect or refuse to provide the destitute adult child with food, shelter, care, and clothing.

(c) Penalties.- A person who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 year, or both.



§ 13-103. Complaint by destitute parent or destitute adult child.

(a) In general.- A complaint under this section shall be made under oath in writing to a State's Attorney.

(b) Destitute parent.- An individual may make a complaint that states that:

(1) the individual is a destitute parent;

(2) an adult child of the destitute parent has or is able to earn means sufficient to provide the destitute parent with necessary food, shelter, care, and clothing; and

(3) the adult child has neglected or refused to provide the destitute parent with necessary food, shelter, care, and clothing.

Then it basically lists the procedures for filing the complaint, testimony etc. then it says this:

§ 13-107. Order to pay support

(a) Authority of court.- With the written consent of the accused individual before charging or trial, or on conviction of the individual under this subtitle, the court shall order the individual:

(1) to pay support:

(i) to the individual's destitute parent or destitute adult child; or

(ii) if the destitute parent or destitute adult child is a public charge to the agency that is authorized by law to receive these payments; and

(2) to give a bond with securities to this State, conditioned on compliance with the court's order and any modification of the order.

(b) Determination of amount.- In determining the amount of support, the court shall consider the financial circumstances of the individual.

(c) Duration.- The individual shall pay the support until the destitute parent or destitute adult child has other means of adequate support or dies.

(d) Modification.- The court may modify the order.


The way this was explained to me by an attorney was that if a parent becomes unable to take care of themselves, under this law, regardless of how crappy the parent was to the kid (although I am sure that would have bearing on the decisions) the adult child has a responsibility to care for that person or could face jail time, fines and possibly be ordered to pay support to the parent for their care.

I could not believe it when I was told about it and went and looked it up. I asked them, how in the world is it ok for a parent to walk away from a child with no consequences but...if the adult child then decides to walk away from that parent and not support them, they face consequences. This law also states indigent adult children, and the parent has to by law care for them. I just posted the parts regarding the Adult child having to care for the parent. It seems absurd to me, I would love to hear what you all think.

Just when we think we know what the laws are, you go and find something screwy like this.
 

ylexot

Super Genius
BS Gal said:
Thank God. JPC's child can now start supporting him.
:yeahthat:

It's like reverse child support. Now we'll have deadbeat kids...:lmao:

In general, I'd say they are trying to legislate family values...it won't work. I'd also say that this should not say destitute. It should say (if it must exist at all) that the adult parent/child is unable to earn sufficient means. Destitute does not mean that they are unable.
 

sinwagon

New Member
I don't know when this went into effect but it is a part of the Maryland Statute. It was also one of the reasons that even if my son turns 18,(my ss) I have to notify his mother before I can adopt him. Says she would have to give up her constitutional rights as a parent. I thought her constitutional rights as a parent ended once he was 18? They said no, because she has a constitutional right to seek care and support from him should she become destitute until the day she dies.

Which means I have to put extreme safeguards in effect to protect his inheritance. I stand to inherit a great deal from my parents and I need to protect it because I will be damned if that low life will get my families hard earned money!
 

BS Gal

Voted Nicest in 08
sinwagon said:
I don't know when this went into effect but it is a part of the Maryland Statute. It was also one of the reasons that even if my son turns 18,(my ss) I have to notify his mother before I can adopt him. Says she would have to give up her constitutional rights as a parent. I thought her constitutional rights as a parent ended once he was 18? They said no, because she has a constitutional right to seek care and support from him should she become destitute until the day she dies.

Which means I have to put extreme safeguards in effect to protect his inheritance. I stand to inherit a great deal from my parents and I need to protect it because I will be damned if that low life will get my families hard earned money!
You need to see a lawyer. I wanted to adopt my adult step son and my lawyer told me I could not.
 

sinwagon

New Member
BS Gal said:
You need to see a lawyer. I wanted to adopt my adult step son and my lawyer told me I could not.

I have spoken to 3 lawyers. Two say its a slam dunk, one says due to that law I cannot. One of the lawyers that says it is a slam dunk also said he had a case a few months ago in Calvert where it was the same situation, the only difference was it was more difficult because the child could not speak on in open court only in chambers. My son is 17 and will be able to speak and state to the egg donor that he wants this done.

I am worried about trusting lawyers. I wish it was more clearly defined so that I could understand it all myself. I have a pretty good understanding of the law after dealing with it for so long and studying in the law libraries and such but.....I never in my life heard of this crack pot thing.

Its strange to me that they think you are infringing upon the constitutional rights of the biological parent but forcing an adult child to care for that parent is not unconstitutional. If that parent caused you misery your entire life then wouldn't that be going to against his right to the persuit of happiness?

I don't know if I could face her again and court to lose. We better be secure prior to going or I will not do it.
 
Top