Colson may use parental privilege as a defense. Unlike the Hunt and McReynolds case, where the defendants were briefly in the child's family, in this case Ms. Colson has lived with her partner, Ms. McCoy, and their children, Brandy and Michael, for six years. Hunting, 973 NE2d. to 1; McReynolds, 973 NE 2d at 11:54 a.m. Ms. Colson and Ms. McCoy treat their committed relationship like a marriage, this includes, but is not limited to, sharing household responsibilities and parental duties. Therefore, given that Ms. Colson is not an "occasional babysitter" but rather a parental figure, she likely benefits from parental privilege. McReynolds, 973 NE 2d at 1154. However, as in Snow, where England, who was not JH's natural parent, was classified as in loco parentis due to her voluntary parental obligation to JH, here, Ms. Colson , was not the natural parent either. , voluntarily agreed to share the parental obligation to Ms. McCoy's children. Marriage of Snow, 862 NE2D at 666. Therefore, because Ms. Colson can be classified as in loco parentis, she can raise parental privilege as a complete defense. In this case, Ms. Colson grabbed Bradley's arm as she tried to leave, leaving a handprint and bruises. Therefore, Ms. Colson knowingly or intentionally, like the defendant in Hunt and McReynolds, touched a person under the age of fourteen in a rude, insolent, or angry manner. Hunting, 973 NE2d. at 3 o'clock; McReynolds, 973 NE 2d at 11:52 a.m. Therefore, Ms..