<p>I agree that the best interests of the children are the primary consideration. And while we don’t have all the facts in this case, it hard to fathom how the children’s best interests are served being far away from their mom during her illness and what could be their final years together. As far as who can afford to raise 'em, dad can pay child support. In terms of who is healthy, they can have joint custody. As far as maintaining a relationship with the well parent who eventually may be their only parent, the best interests are that the kids live near both parents.</p>
<p>I am making the assumption that although there is child support money from the father; this mother is also receiving some state (NC) welfare and state Medicaid. I highly doubt Illinois welfare and Medicaid would be available to her immediately upon moving to Chicago. Usually these programs require a certain period of time to meet and prove state residency. Shame on the judge for not considering this before telling the mother to pick up and move to Chicago.</p>
<p>In the NYTimes article that Hunt linked to in post #58…it says:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This rationale irks me. Just because he has the paycheck doesn’t mean he deserves sole custody. There is such a thing as joint custody and there is such a thing as child support! The fact that ex is sick…apparently she is currently caring for her kids just fine. If she gets too sick and if the dad lived closer and they shared custody, that issue could be alleviated. The fact that her future is uncertain doesn’t matter for right now except that the dad should surely be active in the kids’ lives since he needs to maintain a close relationship as he may eventually be their only parent. Another reason they should live near one another. But it is just as important, and I’d say more important, that the kids maintain an active relationship with their mom who won’t be here much longer perhaps and they can never get that back again and could eventually resent being torn from her presence when they had it. A truly loving father would not want his kids torn from the final time they will ever have with their mom. He should not have to give up seeing them either but should find a way so both can share the children.</p>
<p>
That’s what she says, but we don’t know what facts were presented to the judge about that.</p>
<p>^^^That is true. I guess what I meant was that she was in pretty good shape all things considered and able to continue child care. I realize we don’t have all the facts. I don’t think she is confined to a bed. She even flew to NYC for The Today Show. But even if she required some assistance with the kids or her health care, many manage to handle that with children and with the support of friends, etc. I can understand if she were so ill that she could not care at all for kids, that another arrangement would be necessary but even then, I still believe in the best interests of the kids, that the parents should live in commuting distance of one another. And knowing that the mother was ill, (or honestly even if she wasn’t ill!!!), the dad chose to take a job 600 miles away. I feel some people, due to family commitments, confine their job search within a region. We don’t know that this dad could not find a job in their state.</p>
<p>Also, as the dad maintains she is too ill to care for the kids…why even BEFORE the custody case was settled, would he move so far away in the meantime leaving someone who is “unable” to care for his kids with his kids! It is kinda ironic if he was THAT concerned that she could not care for them that he would go so far away during this period of time.</p>
<p>Obviously we are missing all the fact here. But the few that come out just don’t make rational sense!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Alaina</a> Giordano, breast cancer patient, loses custody of children because of illness](<a href=“http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/05/12/2011-05-12_alaina_giordano_breast_cancer_patient_loses_custody_of_children_because_of_illne.html#ixzz1MC1kXF96]Alaina”>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/05/12/2011-05-12_alaina_giordano_breast_cancer_patient_loses_custody_of_children_because_of_illne.html#ixzz1MC1kXF96)</p>
<p>I don’t know why it matters that the mom doesn’t have a job that can financially support the kids. The father has a job and could pay child support. I’m not getting why this is a factor here. Given her illness, it seems understandable if she is not working right now.</p>
<p>I thought the mom gave up her job as a paralegal when they got married, and never worked after that. Did I miss something to the contrary? I think it’s likely that the dad is already paying child support, and probably alimony, too.</p>
<p>It sure would be interesting to read the judge’s actual opinion, rather than only one party’s characterization of it.</p>
<p>OK, I did find an article that has some other information I have not read before or not seen mentioned much on this thread…which brings up other issues in the custody decision…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Mother</a> hopes judge will overturn custody ruling | abc11.com](<a href=“http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8127895]Mother”>http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8127895)</p>
<p>I’m sure there is more to it. But it still seems to me that joint custody or at least both living near one another is in the best interests of the kids at this time, as opposed to moving the kids far from their dying mother. However, this news article does say that she’d be given joint custody if she were to move to Chicago. This leads me to believe on the one hand, she is not “unfit” to have custody after all, but it is more on the dad’s terms (to be in Chicago)…I guess his moving to NC is not on the table.</p>
<p>PS…these things appear to get very ugly…all the inferences drawn about the mom forgetting to send her son’s epinephrine pen when he visited the dad? I mean maybe she just forgot! (and why wouldn’t the dad have one with him just in case, as a basic supply since it is his son?) The judge seems to suggest the mom purposely didn’t send her son’s medication!</p>
<p>soozievt, I have to say that I suspected there would be something like this to better explain the judge’s decision–although I thought we’d never see it. These parents may have been before this judge numerous times, and she just got more fed up with the mother than with the father.</p>
<p>Hunt, I truly realize there is more to it. I just think that no matter who gets custody (ideally joint, in my opinion), that the kids’ interests are served by having ready access to both parents. They need their dad in their lives so he is not a stranger as they will be living with him eventually most likely. But they need their mom in their lives while she is still living and it would be undue hardship on them to be separated by long distance knowing how little time she may have left. It would eat at them terribly, I believe, and also cause even more worry and concern. That is why I feel the dad (and the judge) seem heartless. </p>
<p>So, no matter who gets custody, I think that both parents should live near the kids. I think if the Dad really cared about the kids’ well being, this situation would not have occurred in this way as he would have only allowed himself to search for jobs in a certain radius of their mother during this period of time she is still alive. I don’t know what he did in terms of his job search but I’m finding it hard to believe his only option was to move 600 miles away.</p>
<p>and there you go…didn’t take long…</p>
<p>and my first reaction to ALL of this initially was why can’t the father pay for the mother to go back and forth when she needs to? She needs to be in Durham for treatment…</p>
<p>and how is she supporting herself anyway if she doesn’t have a job?..</p>
<p>This is obviously not an amicable divorce regardless of the medical issues and the children…we are all coming in at the tail end of the mess…</p>
<p>I imagine more will be forthcoming; wouldn’t be surprised at all if the father shows up with his lawyer next week in the media</p>
<p>^^Really any truly medically concerned Dad 600 miles away would have his own Epi-Pen available for his son. I mean, they do have a Chicago pediatrician, right? The mom probably forgot in the rush of packing. I find that very odd that the judge ultra-analyzed that to suggest the mom is having anger problems with the kids’ trip to Chicago. That is over the top. Epi-Pens ideally need refrigeration for stabililty/longevity.</p>
<p>This is a blog comment that is in sync with my previously expressed thoughts on good 'ol boy reasoning. Guess it’s not that uncommon in NC.</p>
<p>“North Carolina is notorious for having the most corrupt officials as lawyers and Judges. It’s almost like a fraternity of the “Good Ol’ Boys” way, to where women get the short end of the stick, because unless you’re thumping a bible, they follow the code of Paul, that women are the rue to all evil. If it were the father who had the cancer, and the mother had taken him to court for custody, the mother would be laughed right out of the court room. For those that are from this state…pray to God you never have to set foot into a court room. Not even for jury duty. And believe me, there is enough coverage to back up my claims…just do your research.”</p>
<p>ttp://abcnews.go.com/Health/BreastCancerCenter/north-carolina-mom-breast-cancer-loses-custody/comments?type=story&id=13546870</p>
<p>Another thing…while the mom understandably doesn’t want to move to Chicago and away from her cancer treatment team…</p>
<p>But let’s say she can’t win an appeal and her ONLY option to be near her kids is to move to Chicago…well, then, if the dad really really cares about his children and what this will mean to them, he would foot the cost of her relocation! He should want the mom in their lives for the kids’ sake even if he can’t stand her or doesn’t give a care about her needs.</p>
<p>Fortunately, I never went through divorce with minor children or any custody settlements. But I have always believed that if I was ever in that situation and if I truly detested my spouse, I would never ever keep the other parent from my children’s lives because of the importance that the kids have a relationship with that parent too. I’d do that for my kids’ sake. And this is without an ill/dying parent!</p>
<p>^^that’s what we were thinking this morning; why doesn’t he just move her to Chicago?</p>
<p>…but I think there is ALOT of “bad” history here that we don’t know about…and I imagine it involved him proving that she was/is unfit (for whatever reason)…</p>
<p>giveherwingsmom - I thought the ruling came from a judge in Chicago. While I’m not questioning your thoughts, how much did the lawyers and judges in NC have to do with this ruling?</p>
<p>I thought the ruling came from a judge in NC.</p>
<p>OK, here you go:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(The BOLD is mine)</p>
<p>Read more: <a href=“http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/05/12/2011-05-12_alaina_giordano_breast_cancer_patient_loses_custody_of_children_because_of_illne.html#ixzz1MCDRLYAW[/url]”>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/05/12/2011-05-12_alaina_giordano_breast_cancer_patient_loses_custody_of_children_because_of_illne.html#ixzz1MCDRLYAW</a></p>
<p>I’m sure that blog poster has a broad view of these cases in all of NC. :rolleyes: not a very reliable source! Yeah , I live in NC so I’m a bit offended by those broad strokes. </p>
<p>We never have the whole story in these cases and judges make mistakes for all kinds of reasons. But it seems to me that neither parent has the best interest of the kids in mind. I agree with those that suggested that maybe the dad will pay for the moms travels.</p>
<p>Yea, just read an update in the Chicago Tribune and noted it is a NC judge. Don’t know where I thought there was a Chicago judge involved.</p>
<p>But I agree with those who have speculated that, if she’s such a risk to the kids due to her health, or whatever, why are they waiting until June 17th to change the custody?</p>
<p>Right…it doesn’t jive. Either she is a risk to them or not. Not only that, IF she moves to Chicago, it says she will get 50-50 joint custody (must be fit as a mom then!?!) and so it seems kinda manipulative to follow the dad’s wishes, and it is not entirely about her fitness as a mom, or certainly not all about what’s best for the kids!</p>
<p>(logistically speaking, June 17 is likely when their school gets out and better for the kids to wait but it just doesn’t correlate with her supposed unfitness to parent them)</p>
<p>This is from several of the articles: “Alaina Giordano, of Durham, criticized the April 25 ruling by Judge Nancy Gordon, which she said gives shared custody”</p>