Welcome to PatsFans.com

New Cancer Side-Effect

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Mrs.PatsFanInVa, May 11, 2011.

  1. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +767 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    Losing custody of your children.

    A woman diagnosed with terminal breast cancer has been denied custody of her children.

    A judge in North Carolina denied Alaina Giordano primary custody of her children, Bud, 5, and Sofia, 11, because she is unemployed, "the course of her disease is unknown" and "children who have a parent with cancer need more contact with the non-ill parent," "Good Morning America" reports.

    Judge Nancy Gordon ruled the children of the Durham, N.C.-based mom must relocate to Chicago to live with their father, Kane Snyder, by June 17.

    Giordano, "GMA" reports, has stage 4 breast cancer, receives monthly treatment and medical records show her cancer is not progressing, although it has metastasized to her bones.

    "I'm fully functional and my kids are thriving here in Durham," she tells the news show.

    Snyder and Giordano -- who went through a bitter custody battle -- will share custody of the children, but "GMA" reports that if Giordano stays in Durham to receive treatment at Duke Cancer Institute, "her custody will be limited to holiday and weekend visitation, the airfare for which, she says she cannot afford."

    Mom With Stage 4 Breast Cancer Denied Custody of Kids in Bitter Battle - ParentDish

    Thoughts?
     
  2. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,991
    Likes Received:
    161
    Ratings:
    +486 / 8 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    Did the father seek this?

    I think that is messed up.
     
  3. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,586
    Likes Received:
    173
    Ratings:
    +418 / 8 / -4

    I thought it was going to say the state took them.

    Maybe I missed it in scanning the article, but do we know why the father didn't have custody in the first place? Because unless there was a good reason, he already "lost" his children.

    I think it easily could make sense that a custody ruling in favor of the mother might turn to the favor of the father in light of a situation like this, and wnhile it may not seem fair, it likely didn't seem fair that the father lost custody, either.
     
  4. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +767 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    The article just says that there's been a long and bitter custody battle - so I presume he did otherwise why a "battle?"

    I don't see why he can't let them stay with her until she dies. Obviously he'll get them in the end, anyhow. Why take them away from her before she dies?

    If she's unemployed and terminal she's surely not going to be able to move to Chicago to be near them - which means she's liable never to see them again.

    If he was truly concerned about the kids and not just his custody of the kids you'd think he'd either find a way to move to NC so they could live with him but spend time with her or he'd pony up the money to relocate her and someone to care for her to Chicago.

    I have no idea what that judge was thinking - nor the shrink who said that kids don't need to live around cancer. Kids need to live around their mother - and if their mother happens to have cancer than that's part of it. They've got the rest of their lives to have "contact with" the healthy parent - but only a short time to spend with the ill one.

    I highly doubt he's going to be the kind of dad who is willing to pay airfare for the kids to visit her frequently, either.

    Ugh. This ruined my day.
     
  5. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,991
    Likes Received:
    161
    Ratings:
    +486 / 8 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    :yeahthat:
     
  6. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,586
    Likes Received:
    173
    Ratings:
    +418 / 8 / -4

    Why are you guys putting all of this on the father without knowing anytnhing more about the situation?
     
  7. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,991
    Likes Received:
    161
    Ratings:
    +486 / 8 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I can't think of anything that would explain why it would be better for children who are about to lose their mother to be taken away. The reasoning provided in the ruling seems dubious at best. The idea that the father could move to N.C. is just personal opinion of what I think would be the most honorable thing to do.
     
  8. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +767 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    Because without knowing more it certainly seems to be unfair.

    We know that the mom is most likely not an unfit mother or she wouldn't have had custody of the kids in the first place. We know that the judge granted the father custody now because A) Mom is unemployed. B) has cancer and C) feels that kids need a non-ill parent more than an ill one. All of which seem rather biased and unfair to me.

    We know that the mom lives in NC and that's where her doctor's and her treatment centers are located. We know that she does not have the money (and most likely does not have the energy or the time, either) to travel back and forth to Chicago. We know that the father is healthy - and since he was able to afford a protracted and expensive court battle, he most likely has more money than the mom does, thus making it much more possible for him to travel back and forth on weekends than it is for her to do so.

    Thus, from what we know, the burden of allowing the children equal access to both parents falls squarely on him.
     
  9. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,586
    Likes Received:
    173
    Ratings:
    +418 / 8 / -4

    I think you're both making assumptions that aren't justified.

    We don't know anything about the original decision that awarded her custody, where they were living at the time, who made what choices, etc.

    Maybe the father could move to NC. maybe he has a job that wouldn't permit him to do so.

    Maybe the mother could move to Chicago and be treated there.

    Mrs, you talk about a protracted court battle as evidence that he must have money -- but she went through the same court battle, didn't she? maybe that court battle largely drained him of his financial resources.

    This ruling may be bs, but I don't know how any of us can make that judgment without knowing much more about the circumstances. Women generally get the benefit of the doubt in custody cases, but people don't seem too concerned about that being unfair. given that preference women get, maybe there really is a good reason here that the judge ruled as he did.

    (mrs, you also wrote "Kids need to live around their mother"... what about living around their father?)

    (or it may be bs, I acknowledge -- just saying we don't know)
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2011
  10. Gainzo

    Gainzo In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    43
    Ratings:
    +103 / 2 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    Well said. We don't know anything about the Father or the prolonged legal battle. It is a sad situation for the parents and, most importantly, the kids.

    I can't blame the justice system in this case without knowing all the facts.
     
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,129
    Likes Received:
    318
    Ratings:
    +808 / 26 / -33

    This will have negative effects on the children's mental health, they are taken from their mother involuntarily, forced to live with their father and then mom dies.. mom cannot afford to fly them back and forth.

    They will probably blame and hate the father when the mother dies, and overall suffer serious harm.

    Wonder if this judge was elected for a specific social agenda??

    Judge Cites Mom's Breast Cancer in Denying Custody of Children | KLPW Radio



    Judge Gordon's Website..

    Judge Nancy E. Gordon - HOME PAGE
     
  12. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +767 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    This is the part which is concerning:

    However, the determination that it may be in Sofia and Bud's best interest to have limited contact with their mother merely because she is ill has some cancer and legal experts concerned.

    If that's all the judge is going by - and from her ruling that this and the fact that the mom is unemployed seems to be so - that's just plain wrong.
     
  13. emoney_33

    emoney_33 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Messages:
    5,193
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    The fact that the judge even considers this, to me, warrants the prompt removal of said judge. This thing is absolutely absurd.
     
  14. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,129
    Likes Received:
    318
    Ratings:
    +808 / 26 / -33

    It is a terrible decision, that has no good for anyone except the father... who is probably a bird brain..
     
  15. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +767 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    According to the mother's blog (and yes, I know this is just what she is saying, but seeing as how it's a public blog and she's in the public eye, she'd pretty much bound to be truthful or risk a lawsuit for defamation) the father brought the custody suit against her after he moved from NC to Chicago.

    If he was the one who brought the suit and she is unemployed and without funds she could easily get a public defender or a court appointed attorney or a pro-bono attorney to take her case without charging her a dime.

    There are multiple lawyers and law firms whose lawyers do work for free or greatly reduced prices for battered women or ill women.

    http://www.blogher.com/frame.php?ur...04/no-one-knows-when-another-person-will.html
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2011
  16. Gainzo

    Gainzo In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    43
    Ratings:
    +103 / 2 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    I love your passion but I'm not going to condemn the Dad until I see all the facts. Unfortunately I doubt I will ever see those.
     
  17. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,129
    Likes Received:
    318
    Ratings:
    +808 / 26 / -33

    Did she represent herself??? there is no mention of an attorney for her.. if she did, she had a fool for a lawyer.

    If she has no current income, she probably had minimal representation..

    Public defenders are not available in domestic cases and have never heard of a judge appointing one.. it just is not done.

    However, as she may become a "cause celebre".. an attorney may step forth, or at lease I hope so...

    Once the kids are out of state, it is tough to get them back.. the father may want the case heard in Illinois Court.. there are a whole bunch of legal shenanigans available for the unscrupulous..
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2011
  18. Gainzo

    Gainzo In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    43
    Ratings:
    +103 / 2 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    If this case gains some steam in the national media I have no doubt that Gloria Allred will be all over it.
     
  19. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,586
    Likes Received:
    173
    Ratings:
    +418 / 8 / -4

    First off, I agree with what you said above -- that if the judge made "the determination that it may be in Sofia and Bud's best interest to have limited contact with their mother merely because she is ill," that is ridiculous.

    As for the rest, though, no, I don't put a lot of stock into a person's blog when they are one of the 2 parties in a suit. And defamation? The woman is facing terminal cancer and losing her children. Would the risk of a slander suit really be much of a threat?

    Plus, there's often a lot of grey in personal relationships. She may have a view of things that is very different from his, and they both have some validity... and some holes.

    But we still don't know what happened in the original custody hearings. We also don't know why he moved. What if he moved to have a job -- the job that enables him to pay whatever alimony and child support that he presumably is paying? Would it really be preferable for them to have 2 unemployed parents? Is the message to fathers, hey, don't work if you want to be near your kids?

    Finally, I'm not sure why it matters if he brought the suit, as I'm sure he did. isn't that what you do if you're a parent and want custody?
     
  20. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,586
    Likes Received:
    173
    Ratings:
    +418 / 8 / -4

    Did you see the clip on the Daily Show of her and the suit against Roger McDowell? Ridiculous.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>