I have to seriously disagree about the stepfather "saving the single mother in distress." Personally I never had any discipline problems with my own children and didn't require (or want) any help when I got married for the second time. What I have seen, not only in my experience, but hearing from other women in second marriages, is that the stepfather feels some need to exert control over the stepchildren and interferes with her discipline of the children, thereby damaging their relationship.

It seems that there should be "rules of the house" that are agreed upon by both adults and they should also agree on consequences for disobeying those rules, but I think the parent should be the primary one for disciplining their own children. The stepparent should act like a responsible adult, but they are not his children. I would also agree that the same should happen when the roles are reversed and it's a stepmother.

Thanks for weighing in, Liz C. By "Step dads are often lauded as heros," I mean that society tends to see them that way, not that the remarried moms do (Aside from the movie currently in theaters, how many fairy tales involve evil stepdads?). I completely agree with your last paragraph! -- LMA

If the mom in question has been lax about discipline and now wants to tighten things up (maybe with some encouragement from her boyfriend), it is still up to her to discuss the rules and the consequences for breaking them.

I think a reasonable guideline is that the boyfriend can enforce the kinds of things that any close friend or family member could do while babysitting. Some examples: anything safety related (touching stove, riding bike without helmet, hitting sibling). The only punishment permitted would be a time-out. No yelling or touching.

If it's older children, they don't need to be disciplined immediately. They can wait for mom to address the situation.

In my opinion, the boyfriend does not otherwise discipline, correct, shout at, or give orders to her kids. Probably true even if they get married and he becomes the step dad.

Personally, I don't think that SOs should be spending so much time with the kids, particularly without the bio-parent, that they NEED to discipline them on their own. If and when the mom/dad marries the SO, then the SO should be disciplining the children in a way that is consistent with the parent.

It's so important for the biological parent and the step-parent to be on the same page with discipline. However, it is not realistic to expect the biological parent to handle all discipline and the step-parent to do none of it. Obviously, everything needs to be handled in as sensitive a manner as possible.

To me, it depends on the custody situation, how long the couple has been together, and the ages of the children. If the children live in the house and are younger, by all means, a step-parent has every right to discipline them. I think it would be unfair to handcuff the other person by expecting them to wait and defer to the bio-parent all the time. If the kids are older and are only there on a every-other-weekend schedule, then the stepparent has less authority.

It has been my experience as a stepmom that as long as the two adults are on the same page, its not a problem. The problem arises when there are two very different expectations about what the rules are going to be and what the consequences are if the rules are broken. Sometimes the stepparent doesn't even want to handle discipline.

However, if someone is living under your roof, even if its only a handful of days a month, then I believe you have every right to enforce rules in your own home.

I agree wholeheartedly with Stepmomof1. I never felt like there was an issue with someone else disciplining my kids, whether it was my boyfriend or someone else (as long as we are on the same page as far as what to do when the kids are out of line),

I think this is exactly why discipline methods in the home need to be something that anyone (parent, sig other, babysitter, whoever) can easily enforce.

If you're not comfortable with someone else using your discipline techniques, I think that you should be rethinking your techniques.

This is not to say that there's one approach that works for everyone, but the way that you raise a child is that there is one consistent voice from all the adult in their life whether it's that you're using the Caveman technique from Happiest Toddler, 1/2/3 magic, the naughty step, 3 warning and a time out, whatever.

My 1 year old daughter needs to know that if she bites, she will get the same reaction from me, my husband, her grandparents, and any other adult caregiver she may encounter.

The biological custody parent has to decide what the boundaries are. Other adults in the extended family and household can keep one eye open for kids that always find ways to get past rules.

Younger children need to be restrained when they cross boundaries--including running around with sharp objects, running out of the yard, climbing up kitchen counters, etc.

I have no problem with any sensible person who restrains a child in imminent danger, and who then carries the child over to the parent for a discussion of the problem.

This seems to carry a much stronger message than shouting NO. The quiet discussion reinforces the sense of transgression.

I wasn't allowed to discipline my now ex-girlfriend's kids. I was rendered powerless. The kids would push the limits when I was put in there charge, but I was given to license to discipline on any level. If I said anything, they would complain to their mother and their mother would come down on me. "Stop complaining about my kids. They're good kids." Well, yes they are, but they still misbehave like kids do. Adults are adults, and kids are kids. I'm not talking about spanking here, but adults should be able to correct inappropriate behavior and the parents should encourage respect.