Alaina Giordano Should Not Lose Her Kids Because She Has Breast Cancer

[Sweater Cows!]

"Alaina Giordano, a loving and devoted mother, lost custody of her children at the beginning of May, 2011 due to the fact that she has cancer.

The North Carolina Judge stated that she was uncomfortable not knowing how long Alaina had to live.  So she must give up FULL CUSTODY to their father.  He moved to another state months ago and was never more than a weekend dad at best.  The children do not want to go live with him, uproot their lives and most of all leave their mother.  They are Sofia, age 11 and Bud, age 5.

Please help us to get this story out so Alaina has a chance to overturn this ruling and keep her children.

Please hear our voice!

She should only be fighting cancer, not to have to keep her children.

Thank You." from friends of Alaina website.

The judge who made this decision is a woman and has no children of her own.

  I am having trouble getting the links to work so you can search FB for the title of this thread

Here is the website with the latest updates. Read the pdf's of the court filings. Kane snyder(the soon to be ex ) is a monster.   www.friendsofalaina.com

Here is a link (if it works) http://www.friendsofalaina.com/index.php/court-filings   . They can also be found at www.friendsofalaina.com  under the heading 'court filings'.

[XLFD]

Lando, I think your links have one too many "http://", you may wish to edit them off.  They currently don't 'link'.

On review of the story, this is a tough one.  The divorced parents are in a custody battle with one living in Chicago, the other, Alaina, in Durham, NC.  Custody is supposed to be shared, but the distance and costs of transporting the kids makes things even more difficult.  Still, I think the judge erred and should have based her decision with Alaina's cancer diagnosis as a neutral factor for custodial concerns.

 

[Sweater Cows!]

Links are fixed.

What I find top notch about Alaina is that she is quoted as saying just what X says above. The custody should be based with the cancer issue as being neutral.

Regarding the marital issues Alaina says     

“These are issues which were not raised at the trial because our primary goal is, and always has been, to show that I am a capable, caring and supportive mother,” Giordano said in commenting on the filing. “In a normal trial, we believed that was all we needed to show. There was, therefore, no need to air our ‘dirty laundry."

 

http://www.friendsofalaina.com/index.php/latest-news  is a link to the aricle that the above quote is from.

[XLFD]

I think it is reasonable to set this as neutral, however, I could see a judge (particularly a female, or one who knows someone close to them with, or who died from, cancer) also ruling entirely the reverse way.  Consider, if I was a kid of these parents, and thought the same of both parents, I would personally want to be with the one who is stricken with a disease that may shorten their life.  Using the logic that you may only have limited time with them, whereas the other will be there afterwards. 

[Willy]

In my opinion the parent that moves away loses any rights to custody. Visits in the summer to the moved parent, if the child wants, would be acceptable. Poor judgemnt by the judge.

[Eve Alone]

For goodness sake.  What a FUBAR judge.  Cancer isn't catching. 

 

Two kids, six years apart, different sexes, long distance between, screams for giving one to each parent in a custody battle like this.  Unless one parent is a total spacktard.  Like the judge.  Next case.