Alaina Giordano, the North Carolina woman who says she was denied custody of her children because she has breast cancer, has been granted a temporary stay of custody pending a final ruling in the case. Her 11-year-old daughter and 6-year-old son will visit their father in Chicago for three weeks this summer, but then they'll return to North Carolina. "Though this is one step in what will be, I'm sure, a lengthy appeals process, I am gratified to see that justice can still be served and that the best interests of my children have finally been acknowledged," said Giordano.
OK, well I suppose since I'm pretty much hated 'round these parts anyway I'll say it. So what if she has breast cancer? Why would this be any different from a father who has prostate cancer losing custody because he cannot provide a stable home for the children?
I know, I know, "think of the children" is a spurious argument in many cases, but frankly, custody is about the children (or should be.) And in this case, if the woman's illness is an impediment to providing a supportive environment for her children, she should not necessarily be the custodial parent.
I'd say the same thing if the father were dying of prostate cancer and she was the healthy parent.