It would not matter which role this happened to. I would be just as concerned about such a ruling regardless of role. It is just horrible that this could happen to anyone. It is unfortunate that there are those out there that would change their opinion based on role.

That isn't true. It would depend on what parent already does all the things for them. The fathers the one that moved out of state and left his kids!!!!! HELLO!!

Actually being a hypocrite is the fathering being at most a weekend father moving away to Chicago which is far from his children and then filing for full custody. He manipulated the system. Had a mother done this to a father I would be just as livid.

Oh yea, Jack the divorced, we'd be talking about how the mother was coping caring for a dying husband AND the two kids. "Whoever" knew what he/she/it was doing when she/he/it made women the bearer of children. Men do the only thing they're good for and good at:)

Uhhh, people do this (gone during the week). Fishermen, contractors (overseas), businessmen, military... Sometimes its dad, sometimes its mom.

My cousin's wife recently spent 7months in Dubai where she is the lead strategist on a green energy project. He stayed in Dallas, TX where their 11yrs and 7yrs old daughters are in school and where his own business thrives. Since returning she has stated she will never do it again-she missed too much.

But how many people live in upstate NY or outer DC and commute to the cities daily or weekly, virtually home only for the weekend? Have they given up their parental rights?

Many poster's writings seem to lack critical thought...

if the roles were reversed it would have been the same thing ...there are men fit to do the same thing she is doing .

This is just the new Republican way - screw the women at all costs. If the father moved in order to keep a job then hopefully the mother could move closer to him so she could also participate in the children's lives. If the father just moved -no way should he get them. This is outrageous.

This ruling needs to be reviewed. It is best for the children to be with BOTH parents if possible - shared custody.

Amazing that someone can turn this into a partisan, political issue - absolutely amazing.

If the rolls had been reversed the women would still be with the man taking care of him while he is so ill.

Hey w.goin - why are you making this political you jerk. It has nothing to do the republicans or Democrats. Beside you jerk Republicans are also for women's rights. Get your head out of your a$$

Jack, what a STUPID comment! "This" debate is regarding keeping the children in the mother's life while she still has life left in her. Not a debate over what would happen if it were the father. The ex-husband should be doing what he can to help her do just that. The fact that she is battling Stage 4 cancer and having yet another battle with her ex is simply unconscionable. She may be losing her life, but he will be the one the loses in the end.

You really think this made news because it was not designed to effect peoples opinions? Whats absolutely amazing is how stupid most Americans are. Next I'm going to hear that the Iraq War was waged for the Iraqi people's freedom.

"This is just the new Republican way - screw the women at all costs" seriously. Does everything have to become political? Hey I wanna point fingers so I am going to turn everything political!! Don't get me wrong, I am big into politics, but not everything has to be a political debate. Have a heart and drop the politics.

How dare you use this womans suffering to make a political point!!

To the person who stated she should move to chicago: She is battling cancer has cancer doctors in her home town who she has worked with for years. Why should she move 600 miles when this is where the kids had grown up. The father is the one who should move back if he wants more time with the kids.

@APPLEMOMMA As a person who runs a business in the Wilmington NC area, I can tell you there is almost no jobs. I have workers who beg me not to fire them because of how difficult it is now.

@Auntie A If you are into politics and you fail to realize everything in news is designed to sway your opinion on various issues, then please stay out of politics.

Both parents should really try and work together for the happiness of the children. I personally think the children should be allowed to stay with the mother as long as possible, visiting their father as often as possible. At times like these, parents should make an extra effort to work together.

Mom is being VERY selfish. I for one would not want my children to watch me suffer. Dad works and can care for them so why should he not have custody of them? Is it just because she is their Mother?????? Double standards here folks. All of you who say the dad left his kids and moved 600 miles away do you say the same thing to Mothers who do the same??????

The judge was right on this one since these kids WILL have a better quality of life with him and wont be burdened with the memories of mommy dying right before their eyes.

USA IS GREAT: OH and not seeing daddy for how many years...HE is better? Are you alright? Quality of life with him...he ABANDONED THEM FOR A JOB! Children need to feel the pain and eventual loss of their mom...sometimes those can be the BEST memories...the last few months spent together. Better pray its never you.

She's being discriminated against because she has cancer. She is fighting the biggest fight for her life, and some judge allows her children to be taken away? Dad is 600 miles away! How is she going to be able to see her kids? What about thestability that the kids have now? They have their school, friends, etc. This is absurd. I sincerely hope she gets enough publicity that someone stands up for her and helps her fight for her rights as a Mother. If she dies, this dad is going to have some serious counseling bills. I hope he's ready for that.

I dont have to worry about that since I have a job and dont plan on cheating on my husband. In the court of law women are always allowed to drag their kids across country in the name of "gaining better employment opportunities". I guess those situations are different? My kid is grown so I dont have to worry about him being there by my side if I were to get this disease. As for praying I have to ask just how loving your god is,, considering you think it is such a horrible thing this woman is having to deal with and what you believe her children will have to deal with. What "God" allows this to happen?

usa is great :

"The judge was right on this one since these kids WILL have a better quality of life with him and wont be burdened with the memories of mommy dying right before their eyes."

I was there for my Mother as she was dying of cancer and that comment is the MOST ignorant comment I have ever heard!!!!! No it was not easy to watch her die, it was like having my heart ripped out every day! But the thought of not being with my mother in those final days...and because a so-called judge said I couldnt be with her because my other parent has a job! Maybe you should see a doctor, I think your heart is mal-functioning!

You do realize that you confirmed my statement when you said watching her die ripped your heart out everyday. If you were a child when this happened than your mother should of had her heart looked at because SHE Was SELFISH!!!!

usa, I lost my father to cancer when I was a child. I can guarantee you that being by his side through the illness and death helped me with the mourning process. These children need to be with their mother now.

Were your folks divorced when this happened if not then there is no comparison.

usa, you really shouldn't talk about something you know nothing about. I was with my mother when she died of cancer. I was 12 yrs old and would not trade that time for anything. If you are just a troll, get off this vine.

usa is great : I dont have to worry about that since I have a job and dont plan on cheating on my husband.

Wow, good for you!!! So happy that you can predict the future and live in a shatter proof house.

I am an adult. 4 years ago I lost my mother to cancer. Although watching my mother slowly lose her battle was not a pleasant one, I would not have traded the time that I got to spend with her for anything in the world. Once a parent is gone, there is no getting them back and every moment spent with them becomes a cherished moment in our lives as well as theirs. For this judge to have ruled in this manner deprives both the ill parent and the children of precious time that can never be replaced. If the father is unwilling to move back to spend time with the children, I think he should step away and allow the children to stay with their mother until she passes. Even if she becomes unable to care for them, I am sure that there are other relatives and friends in her area that can care for the children until her passing. To do what this man and this judge are doing is reprehensible on so many levels. He is obviously enacting "his" revenge for a failed marriage by trying to deprive the children and mother of valuable time together. By doing this, he is turning three lives upside down, rather than to inconvenience himself for the good of his children's well being and wishes. Had my father attempted to do this to me, I would have hated him for the rest of my life....there would be no forgivness for him...ever....only disdain.

For those here that are trying to bring politics into the discussion...grow the he11 up!!!.....regardless of politics, Almost everyone loves their parents and would want to spend as much time with them as humanly possible.... those that wouldn't...have serious issues.

Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own... Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy.
Robert A. Heinlein

You have a job - for now. In this economy, how secure do you think your job is? And did it ever occur to you that the reason that this woman is unemployed is BECAUSE of the cancer?

As for the cheating - I don't think people usually "plan" on cheating - it's something that happens. And how do you know your husband won't cheat on you? If you watched the video, you would notice that there were accusations of infidelity on BOTH sides.

I'd like to get away from the parental/political whose right or wrong, what happened in the past, etc., and focus on the well being of each family member. The dad made his choice, moved on to what he feels is best for him. That is rightly his choice. However, his actions do have an effect on the entire family, himself included. The ones most negatively affected are the mother, now, and the children, long-term. The mother “now” because the children will not be with their mother, who is destined to die, unfortuately, sooner than later; “long-term”, for the children because they will regret not being with their mother at her time of need and resent their father for it.

I had a family member who was diagnosed with cancer and given 2 to 3 years to live. She went on to live a very productive and happy 12 years. She saw her children get married and hold her first grandchild. Many things contributed to her survival, including the trust and relationship with her doctors. BUT, IN HER OWN WORDS, "The love and support of my family gave me the strength that got me through the most difficult times than anything else."

I believe that the judge's ruling has just hastened Aliana's death sentence. She had the power to come up with a fairer ruling, but failed. What a shame for everyone!

USA : HOW DARE YOU! Maybe I wasnt clear, I was young when this happened not as young as these kids but that doesnt matter! I've don't know the whole story with this family, I do know that if I was a child old enough to understand that the time I have left to be with a parent could be very short I wouldnt want to be ANYWHERE ELSE! And if you consider a mother (or father) SELFISH to want to spend their remaining time on this earth with their children when they know that time is limited, you're a fool!

(the only reason this response is G-rated is because I had a decent, honorable, loving mother who raised her daughter to be respectful of those who cant help there own ignorance!)

usa..are you hinting that the children do not need this time in the event of future mouring because they are victims of divorce? On the contrary, they need it more because of the divorce. Do you think that because of the divorce the mourning process will easier for them?

I feel the judge far overstepped herself, in ordering children to live in another state and taking them away from a home where they are being well-cared for. This is not about the children being with the mother vs. being with their father. Many men are outstanding parents.

If the mother was an invalid, I would have to agree, but the fact is she is not. This is all the time her children and she will have, why take it away? The judge cited another one of the reasons as being the fact that the mother is unemployed, which would give her the ability to spend more time vs. the father who is employed full-time and will have to hire someone else to care for the children, or leave them home alone. That father chose to leave the state, his children should not be forced to!

The judge also suggested the mother could or should move to Illinois to be closer to her children, if she is on medicaid she might not be eligible for any financial help or insurance. Since she is unemployed who will pay her moving expenses?

I hope this judge was elected to her position, so people can vote her out next term! I have the feeling this is a case of knowing the right people, making deals and getting the ruling you want, by the ex-husband and his attorney!

USA - wrong, wrong, wrong. My sister and I were young when my father went through a year of dying. Not only did we want to be with him; we went to the hospital every day when he was in and when he was home I sat in the bedroom with him and we talked forever. I would have missed that time if I hadn't be near him or if my mother would have thought that as children we shouldn't be with our father. I think about the talks we had while he was sick and I wouldn't have missed it for the world.

I keep going back to the Judge. What is wrong with her???? She doesn't deserve to be making rulings on people's lives.

Sorry people, but under the law, the judge made EXACTLY the right call. The "official" position is the welfare of the children, the "unofficial" position, in the law, is the solution that DOESN'T cost the tax payers money. In this case, the father, who is gainfully employed, and can provide a stable home meets BOTH reasons - the children's "welfare" and the taxpayers don't have to foot the bill, which they would if mom got the kids. Now you may not LIKE that, but then, how many of YOU who screaming about how unfair this is would be willing to change the law so that the state will regularly pick up the tab when a family splits up.

And, as for getting a job in the Raleigh/Durham area. HAHAHAHAHAHA, Raleigh saw its economy collapse with the housing market, and Durham is doing slightly better, but I believe is way over built and under salaried, going by the number of foreclosure notices I saw while collecting photos of properties for the local property tax assessors last fall and winter. That's what my job is.

And does Dad count as a parent who needs to spend every moment possible with the kids. Aparently, not in your warped mind. Every child needs to know the love of their FATHER too.

The judge was right!

Rodrep...when u have cancer (esp advanced stage) your doctors are THE most important part of your treatment! You CANNOT change doctors in the middle of treatment!!!! As stated in the interview on the Today show, there is no reason the father cant find work in Durham where the children have lived all their lives! I think the father is being a cold-hearted &*%$#@ and cruel by trying to take the children from this woman! A patients emotional well-being is such an important part of living with cancer..to take her children now is the most unbelievably heartless thing I have ever heard of!!!!

That Judge should be......removed from the bench...sued for emotional pain and suffering!

Rodrep,

If the father felt that it was important for his children to know him and be with him on a daily basis he would have found a job in Durham. He decided to move 600 miles away from his children, the mother nor the children should be punished because of his selfishness.

Apparently the father didn't think so.. he moved 600 miles away.

As a person diagnosed with breast cancer last year, I respectfully disagree. There are some of us who are forced to change doctors in the middle of treatment who have no choice - in particular, myself, because of my military spouse. In my case, it turned out to be a good thing. I was receiving treatment from an elderly doctor not very schooled in some of the new treatment methods, and found that the doctors at our new duty station have more modern ideas and treatment methods, and I find I like their more aggressive methods of treatment very well.

People on this board seem to want to have it both ways - he can't leave his job 600 miles away because he's the only one with a job right now, but they also want to say she can't leave where she is because of her medical condition. It seems to me that both of them need to grow the hell up and do what's best for the children, providing them with the best care needed - something that will allow her the time she needs for her medical treatment, but also give them the love of the father they don't see that often, because the reality is that there's a very good chance he may be the only thing they have left if her course of treatment fails. God bless all of them.....

wow mmc..very good post!

mmcgwire1,

I would agree with you if it were not for the fact that he took this job after the fact. She is in Durham, Duke Medical Center is there and they are an outstanding facility. You don't get a facility much better than Duke. If he were looking out for the best interested of his children he would have looked in Durham/Raleigh area for a job.

As a person diagnosed with breast cancer last year, I respectfully disagree. There are some of us who are forced to change doctors in the middle of treatment who have no choice - in particular, myself, because of my military spouse.

I would respectfully state that your case is NOT the same as Ms. Giordano's. First, you are (or at least were) still married. Because your spouse is in the military, you HAD to move with him. Second, you had financial resources that allowed you to move, which Ms. Giordano does not. If you are with your military spouse, you have a housing allowance, BX privileges, etc. Ms. Giordano would have no way of paying for housing, food, or anything else - since with her level of cancer, she is pretty much unemployable. Third, unless you also have Stage 4 breast cancer, you don't know how difficult it might be for her to change doctors.

It really seems to boil down to an adult man -- a father -- choosing not to put his own needs and wants aside in order to focus on his children. I was in a similar situation with my former husband who chose to move to a distant city. He was very good at talking about how hard it was on him with many very logical and rational sounding excuses as to why even though it was so hard (on him) this was what was "best" (for him).

As a mom (I am just speaking for myself here) it never occured to me to choose furthering my career over my kids. I was the one constant in their lives -- same small town, schools, and friends with a decent if not extravagent life for them -- not so much opportunity for me, with 2 college degrees. And you know what? Ten years and counting later I'd do it all again in a heartbeat. These kids in the article need their mom now more than ever; to spend time, tell stories, make memories. This guy (father? really?) needs to grow up and see what's really important (hint - it isn't him).

She should have custody and if she needs help that would be up to her and her family to assist her or get her any help needed. These are children in school mother can rest and do what she has to while the children are at school I have the same thing with my niece only she isn't going through a devorce she has the same thing and is the same age and everything is the exact same when she was diagnosed and amount of children only my niece's children are younger. She has the same cancer for the same amount of time and spread the same to bones etc. Also, of Italian descent. I hope she gets better and teaches them all a lesson. that is so terrible this doesn't help her to get better the stress and losing her children is not good for her prognosis. Hope she gets better soon. I agree with the writer on the above comment. she needs her children and the ex husband should be understanding and move near her for the children's sake and help her with this even if they are devorced . she is a person and was the wife and mother of his children he should have a heart and assist her any way he can.

Sheila Stern yonkers new york

What a bunch of bull crap women being treated as second class. How can you say that when even today after more then 30 years of Kramer vs Kramer 90% of women still get full custody of the children. This woman is being selfish and is only thinking of the child support she will stop getting do to her losing the custody of the kids. Even though she has cancer this does not make me sympathetic to her greediness and selfishness by not wanting the kids father to have custody of his own children. I am glad the judge ruled in favor of the father so that he could have custody of his children, finally justice has been done in favor of men everywhere.

who cares what you think!

i agree with what someone said before the father chose to move away from his children, his choice nobody elses. that does not show he cares how his children are takin care of. but either way we dont know the whole story just bits and peices that we read. yes no matter where you are the judicial system sucks, there are some dads that deserve custody but there are plenty that could care less.

Jack's right if this was a man no one would go to bat for him maybe we can start to have real joint custody half and half not the wife sitting home on he dead ass and him paying child support. Like she said I feel fine and go once a month for treatment. Get a job and pay him child support just like a court would make a man pay to his dying day.

Charger12 and Jack:

The day the man lets go of his monetarily compensated position(EGO/POWER)...to do what the newleyweds/married couple plans to do (ironically-together)...which is (often) having a family at some point...is the day that men get recognition for being the kind of people that ONLY a stay at home (for the kids) parent can be.

You know-MOST people DO plan to have children...why should the parent that stays at home for them be any "less" significant w/respect to considering what's best for the children in situations like these? If men want to be considered...maybe they should try giving 24/7 (every day) on call w/o monetary consideration (payment in dollars)...in order that they could REALLY have something to complain about; we don't mention the time put into YOUR crap...like laundry, dinner, dishes, errands...allll the way down to changing the damn toilot paper roll because you don't.

Seeing this through (financially)...is the LEAST he could do. He isn't there because he left. His children know that. Don't ask them to "believe" there were no jobs available...his actions say what his words do not. Children don't like being lied to. They don't like feeling helpless/stupid either.

Just because she's NOT the one getting paid (in dollars) does NOT mean she's the least "qualified" nor the least hard working. Who the heck do we EXPECT to raise our children?? Day cares and baby sitters? Someone took one for the team...and it wasn't the dad in this case.

I'm not saying that there are NO stay at home dads...and any stay at home dads reading this-you know what I'm saying. I also think/hope that the majority of people would express the same anger, if it were you in this situation.

...and I mean NO disrespect to any of you single parents either.

I have no job and don't want to make decisions in the best interest of my children...then yes take the kids away. Stop the cycle of victimhood.

Jack...that is a truly intelligent comment....go "enlighten" some others who care what you have to peddle

Jack is just a blog troll to stir people up.

Jack is an idiot.

One BIG difference...the SEAL team member chose his/her situation. Isn't that like suicidal? Definitely more risk involved there than crossing the street to check your mailbox.

I'm saying give the children to the parents 50 50 he pays his bills and takes care of the children she gets 50% takes care of the children and gets a job and pays her bills. My son and his girlfriend had a child both working. Judge says he pays child support he provides insurance .She quits her job sits on her dead ass collects child support lets him see the child when she feels like it. Uses the money to go out with friends and gets drunk at the bars while my son or her mother watches the child. He watches her and cleans her up and sends her back with clean clothes and the others and never sees the clothes again. Goes in front of judge an judge tells her not to do these things next week same thing. Women can do no wrong in the eyes of the law . It was good to see in this case it might be changing

CHARGER12, Perhaps your son should have used more discretion in whom he impregnated. Perhaps if he had counted her worthy of being a wife instead of a plaything he would not be such a sorry victim. He did not marry her; he impregnated her. They are obviously not together now so he should not worry about what she spends money on as long as the children are properly maintainede.

My suggestion to you is to stop crying about your son the victim and encourage him to grow up a bit. His situation is nothing like the case at hand.

I'm a cancer survivor but I don't use it as a crutch to make people feel sorry for me

Charger12, who seems to think the world is only about her and her precious little BOY is also a troll. Please do not make the mistake I made. Please do not feed the troll.

You are so right. It doesn't matter which parent is dying ----That parent SHOULD have as much time as possible with their children.

Neither the Judge nor the ex is really concerned for the children.



Agreed. It is sad that in this day and time parents can't find a way to continue supporting one another for and on behalf of their shared children. My brother's ex took his autistic son and moved 9 hours away, leaving my brother unable to see his son unless she brings him back. It has shattered him in every way imaginable. Oh, did I mention she got everything AND THE CAR? Oh yes, the system is completely unfair. For the record, she was able to negotiate her right to move by filing a bogus Protective Order that was, ultimately, thrown out as "baseless." Oh well, it served its purpose long enough to ensure she could get her move on! The Family Court System and divorce/custody laws TOTALLY SUCK!

As to the article, my hearts goes out to this mother. Her children are, likely, a HUGE component of her will to live and fight this disease. May God bless and keep you, and may there be a better resolution to this issue for the sake of your children.

I am 51 years old and my mother died 16 days ago. She fell and hit her head. She went into a coma. The hospital did the best they could, performing surgery to try to remove the ensuing blood clot. Unfortunately, 6 days after the incident the hospital had to remove my mother from life support.

I arrived at the hospital after a 12 hour straight through drive (thanks to the help from my darling wife) and I spent about one hour with my mother. I convinced the nurse in the critical care unit to allow my children (15, 10 & 8) to speak with "Grandma" one last time. (Thank you so very much Amanda.) I then went back to my motel room. About 75 minutes later I received a telephone call from my Dad telling me to come to the hospital because the end ws near. Roughly 75 minutes later my Mom passed away with so much of her family around her.

It was very important to me and I am so grateful to the Lord that He allowed us to see Mom/Grandma one more time. You see, 4 days earlier was the 41st anniversary of my paternal grandfather's death from cancer. I have always regretted being "shielded" from my favforite grandparent because nobody wanted me to see Grandpa in "that condition." For my children and myself, being able to see Mom at that end time was an incredible help in the mourning/healing process.

I am also a divorced/re-married man. I have felt the heartbreak of losing your children to divorce, although in my case I allowed my children to move with their mother from Arizona to Georgia because I was not the type to keep their mother in-state just because I could and I was not going to try to take the children away from a pretty good mother. (she was not a perfect mother but if I was to look in the mirror I would not see a perfect father either.) I moved from Arizona to South Carolina to be closer to my children and to my parents. I got custody of the one child still in their home when their mother's live-in boyfriend was busted in a raid on the home for crack. Mother was not involved in it but the one remaining child was removed because the drugs were in her home. My wife and I still open our home to my ex so that she can spend time with our daughter and her half-siblings.

I resent the way this man has done this to his wife and to the children. Obviously the time will come when she will pass and he will gain custody of the children anyway. It is my prediction though, that the children will also resent him, will not respect him and will turn against him when they get older. If he takes them from their mother as he seems determined to do, then he will deserve that treatment from his children.

I agree with you. I know first hand of a dying parent to small children. Let them be with her as long as possible. If and when she is gone, they will never be able to hold her hand and talk to her in this life. And that is the worst feeling. Let them have the memories of every moment with her!!!! Shame on that Judge!!!

Good idea! Where's that Gloria Allred chick that is with every miscreant on earth if it's a woman? Must not be a photo op there.

Hopefully by her being on the Today show-someone out there will get on the ball and get this woman an attorney.

No woman deserves such a ruling as this judge has made. She needs to be brought up on ethic charges and then disbarred.

Hopefully the town that this woman lives in is protesting loudly!!!!

I guess watching your mommy die in front of you would not do any mental harm right????????

usa is great, At first i'm reading your comments i thought OH it's just some ignorant smartass guy. Then i read on to see your a woman!!!!!! Boy your husband is such a lucky man WOW LOL

@usa is great - Actually, knowing how your mommy died is probably healthier than having her disappear one day and never seeing her again. I lost my mom at 14 and I treasure every last second I had with her.

The judge made the wrong call and the least the father could have done is stick this out for the sake of his children.

USA is great is a troll! Ignore her. Perhaps she will actually live through what she dishonestly posts and will have a different view of things. Do not feed the troll!

This is True what is he going to when one of his Children get sick! LEAVE!!! move 600 miles away. What a sick and twisted soul he is!!! He is going to pay for this for the rest of his life!!!! You know KARMA!!!!

Apparently her lawyer took her money and then didn't get her what she WANTED. This is a legal matter not an election or opinion poll. Lets take the cancer out of the picture and this decision is no different than any other divorce. Mom does not have a job and is not likely to get one in the near future. Dad has a job and home. From a practical view the dads place seems potentially more stable. Dad did what he felt he needed to do, get a job which meant moving.

Mom has a choice. Get an income of her own or move nearer where the children will be. Why should dad have to pay for her as well as the children? The children are not required to move until June 21 so I believe school will be out by then. She does have the option to travel to visit them.

Trust---you can't take cancer out of the picture

AND apparently you have never had to deal with the logistics of travel and chemo, radiation, etc OR you have no ability to empathize.

Even under the best of circumstances a 600 mile jaunt is tough now and with the added burden of breast cancer ----- you pretend to be logical but your logic is lacking humanity and the realization that life isn't logical.

I take issue with everyone thinking that it is a forgone conclusion that the mother is always the one best suited to take care of the children. There are many fathers out there that are just as good of a care provider as a mother would be. I don't want to divorce my wife but if it were to happen I would fight tooth and nail to keep my children. Not because my wife would be a bad parent but that I love them and feel that I would be able to take just as good of care of them but why should I have to only see them every so often. If I had to take a job in another state then why am I the one who is bad. Why is he bad. We don't know the particulars of the fathers career and why he couldn't find a job there but what is a person supposed to do. Take a a job making minimum wage just to stay in the state when he is probably giving an arm and a leg in child support. At what point does someone make the decision that they need to be with the dad then. She is doing good now yes, but what happens when things start to deteriorate? Do the children just sit in the house and watch her wither away. Everyone says that the mother will know when she can't take care of her children. But will she make the decision to send them away or will she want them there even more that she is getting closer to the end. There are many factors to consider when thinking about what is right for the children. I just hink that it is disgusting that by being male I am automatically considered less nurturing and caring.

So, according to you, the judge made the right decision? Sorry, I don't agree. I'm a soon to be father and IF my wife and I were to separate and (God forbid) divorced and This same situation came about, I would move back to be nearer to her and the kids. Who cares what our differences were she needs to be with her kids and vice versa. I would offer any help I could.

The judge in this case isn't only guilty of poor judgement but is morally bankrupt. I hope a GOOD lawyer will take up her case and fight for what's right in her case.

Former Dumb A$$, you just proved that you are less nurturing and caring by that whole statement.

Lets take the cancer out of the picture and this decision is no different than any other divorce. Mom does not have a job and is not likely to get one in the near future.

Except that you CAN'T take the cancer out of the picture. It's more than likely that the cancer is the REASON she doesn't have a job. There's also the fact that the judge made her ruling BASED ON THE CANCER, not on the fact that the father has a job and a home. And I can't think of any other divorce situation in which taking away children from a parent would mean a PERMANENT limitation to the time spent with the parent.

Take a a job making minimum wage just to stay in the state when he is probably giving an arm and a leg in child support.

Since child support is based on the father's income, this is completely irrelevant.

For what it's worth, I agree that fathers can be wonderful care providers. There are plenty of men out there who have become single dads because their wives died, or because the mother was unfit, or even because the mother chose to give the father custody (as happened in the case of two different friends of mine). That's why I'm a firm believer in shared custody.

memories of seeing their mom waste into nothing. Real nice memories those would have been.

I have to agree with the above. The psycological ramifications of watching your mother waste away is just not worth it. The mortality rate of people with stage 4 cancer is not very high...and even if the cancer does go into remission they have a higher chance of getting that cancer again because it was caught so late. Why would the mother want her kids to witness that? In my opinion, send your children with their father while you go through your kimo with the understanding that your children will come to visit. I may not agree with the judges decision but I can understand the reasonings behind it. My father and I are very close and he getting older. I always tell my sisters that I really dont think I could handle him passing away and I am a grown adult! I can rationalize things and a higher level. Again I say, what's best for the child?

You are a very cold-hearted person and I feel sorry for YOU!!

Cold-hearted in what way? Should the children live with her with no income? Are YOU going to pay for their care and hers?

I'd rather pay for hers than others on the dole----at least we know why she is there------

FYI ---I suggest YOU try getting a job while undergoing cancer treatments---NOT going to happen

Trust-verify-

I hope your comment comes around and applies to you some day. Then you will be in her situation.

As another person commented to you-

You are a cold -hearted bitch-I added the bitch.

trust-verify

You are right, not many people know how one sided the courts still are today against men. This woman is more worried about losing her child support than the children having a closer relationship with the father. I am personally glad that the judge could see through the B.S. when she made the ruling on behalf of the father. To all those men out there like myself who feel cheated by the unjust court system of today, this is a win for all of us.

Dad had the option to stay around his children however; he did not choose too. There is a reason that they have child support available to the children so they can get it if the parent is absent. Mom probably has a team of doctors that she sees on a regular basis and to ask mom to move 600 miles away from the Doctor's who have been treating her is wrong. Yes the children should have a relationship with the father but its my understanding that dad didn't stick around to help with the kids why should he get full custody now? Yes mom is sick but that doesn't mean the kids should just get taken away like that.

Was she a stay at home mom? Was she employed when she was married?

Cuban & Trust,

If the father was So interested in a relationship with his children, he would not have moved or have left the family. What Husband leaves his wife after she finds out she has stage 4 Breast Cancer??? She needed him more then ever. I have a feeling that he got scared that she was dieing and ran as fast as he could as far away as he could. To me this guy does not seem to be able to handle her illness. And why would you say all she wants is child support money?? He left her and they are still married. Not every woman wants to stick it the Ex.

I am divorced and I know my ex does not make a lot of money. He has to pay COURT ordered child support and he is supposed to pay 50/50 of her extracurricular activities. (Softball) But I do not even ask, due that I know he can not afford to pay. Yes, there are some women out there that want to bleed the man dry, but that does not apply to all of us women. And by the way, He gave me custody. I was asking for 50/50 and he gave me soul physical custody. His new girlfriend did not want my daughter around. And yes, he had an affair and left me for her. Yes, I could have been vindictive to get back at him. I was very hurt. But I knew I wanted to do what was best for my daughter. She does not see him much, due that the new girlfriend is so jealous of my daughter. And of me, which I don't understand, I am remarried now.

So please do not judge all women by the standard of your EX-wife and what happened to you both. I am truly sorry, if you where not treated fairly. If the father really wants to share time with the kids both parties need to put aside the drama of the split and do what is best for the children.

With this young woman, she might not have much time to spend with her children. They need to spend as much time with her as possible. We never know when our maker will take us home. We all need to learn to be more caring for one another. The father will have lots of time to spend with the children when she has passed on. Right now it is the children spending as much time with their mother that is important. Maybe, just maybe her cancer will go into remission. Maybe the father can get some counciling & be able to deal with her illness and come home to put the family back together. That would be the best thing for the family.

@lexiwords-1 That is precisely the point. She is unlikely to be able to provide support for her children either now or the long term. I feel for her having cancer. However, the judge was looking at the long term situation for everyone involved and she placed the children's long term stability high on that list. NO she doesn't know when or if mom will die. What she based her decision on was the facts she was aware of.

@BarbaraB hmmmm who's the cold hearted byatch? YOU are the one wishing ill on others not me. I've dealt with my share of life, including losing my mom to cancer. Next thing you will do is tell me you how religious you are and I will ask what church you belong to that approves wishing ill will on others.

Well all I can say is that I fought for the custody for my children, even though my lawyer told me the truth that I had no chance, I fought hard for my kids. She won not because she could be a better parent than me, but only because she was a woman and the law is still one sided. Many men today do not bother fighting for custody not because they do not love their kids, but because they know that the law does not give them a chance or have the money to pursuethe issue. This woman those not have a freindship with her Ex and she just want him to continue to have to pay the child support to spite him. That is why I am glad that this judge can see through all her B.S. and finally allow the father to have the close relationship he deserves to have with his kids. If she really cared at all she could make the effort to see that the kids are not distraught by the move, and assure them that no mater what they will be fine.

I'll say it, since no one else will.

Men are not competent to raise children by themselves. There is a reason that women always win in custody cases, because they are the ones who can properly raise children, AND have a job, and do whatever else is necessary. All men know how to do is impregnate women and leave, and make money and spend it on women who aren't their wives. This man is just another example. They are too irresponsible to be entrusted with something as important as child-rearing.

Not only should this woman have custody, the courts should clear out the husband's bank account (that he would only use on drinking and women anyway) and garnish his wages to pay for her support and child care and medical expenses. She should not have to pay the price for his moral and ethical corruption.

So how does your theory hold water on Dad's who are widowed and have to CARE for their kids when mommy dies or leaves for some other man or ends up in prison?????????????? I guess you think all of those kids should be placed in foster care? Sorry that your last relationship with a man was so bad that you know HATE ALL MEN.

Ok, I fully resent that remark Holy. Due to a disability I am going to be Mr. Mom when my wife and I have our child. So, with that said - by your statement- We shouldn't have kids? Yes Mom will be here but I will be basically raising our child. I agree that the judge made the wrong choice in this situation, BUT to say men aren't competent to raise children has got to be the most asenine statement of the day. I have friends who are dads and raising their kids by themselves and their kids are very respectful and well adjusted. So, please spew that BS somewhere else.

Men are not competent to raise children by themselves.

You are completely full of it. I have a good friend whose wife walked out on their marriage when their daughters were small. She basically gave him custody of the girls because she didn't want to be bothered. He has done a TERRIFIC job of raising his girls and they have grown into wonderful young ladies.

And for once I agree with "usa is great" - what about widowed fathers? What about fathers when the mother is absent or unfit?

I may have lost the custody battle for my children do to the unfairness of the one sided court system, but I did not lose the love of my children. My kids know that I fought for them and that to me and them is more important than the outcome. My oldest know that it was his mother that failed in the marriage and he decided to come live with me. I have always been the one to help my kids with their school work and I still do. My younger kids might still be with her but they know that my love for them is unconditional. So holy moses all I can say to you is like this woman karma will eventually catch up to you. I am glad that this judge finally gave that father the chance he needed to have a closer relationship with his kids.

I cannot agree with the comment "Men are not competent to raise children by themselves" anymore than I can agree that all women are good mothers; it just isn't true. I do think too many times that parents fight for custody for the wrong reasons, ie to reduce or eliminate child support, etc. or just out of spite. The ones who end up paying the price are the children.

I do not think the man in this case is putting his childrens welfare first, if he was he would not rob them of their last days (weeks, or months) with their Mom; who by all accounts is taking good care of the kids. He is also ripping them away from all their friends, their schools and any family that lives nearby. A spouse that deserts their husband/wife after a diagnosis of a terminal illness doesn't rate very high as a human being either, in my opinion.

For what doing her job????? You do realize that Judges ARE NOT allowed to let personal feelings get in the way of their duty as a judge right?

Try living in South Dakota. A judge here goes on his personal feeling not listening to lawyers or anyone else for that matter. She should be very greatful she does not live in South dakota

Judge Nancy Gordon, Durham, NC district court. Why don't you send her a letter or email?

She will be judged one day.

Gayle, WHY is it in the best interest for the children to remain with their mother? It is tragic that she has cancer. Should the children live in poverty until she dies then have to go live with the father with those scars as well? There is a practical solution to this. They have cancer treatment centers in Chicago as well.

Instead of spending money on an attorney and wasting the courts time lets focus, as you said, on her health and what is best long term for THEIR children.

I lost my mother to cancer. It wasn't pretty. Getting the call at 2 in the morning was no fun either.

Who said they are living in poverty? The issue as presented does not give any evidence that the children are currently suffering or not being provided for. The judgement was made strictly because of the diagnosis and the OPINION that is is better for children to spend more time with the "well parent".

It does not state if she was a stay at home mom or if she ever worked.

Yes while its true they do have cancer treatment centers in Chicago to change doctors mid treatment is just not a good idea. I moved to another state after completing breast cancer treatment but retained my doctors because they know everything about my case. I lost my mother to breast cancer and would have been even more devastated if I had not been able to be with her for as long as she was alive. I just don't see trust_verify why you are so adamant that she should lose custody of her children because she doesn't have a job. As far as child support the father would be required to pay that regardless of her job situation. When she dies these children will have scars for the rest of their lives, taking them away from their mother while she is still alive is only going to make the scars deeper.

Mom does NOT have a job. If she isn't working and didn't hit the lottery there is the high probability that dad is paying the bills. Does it mater whether she was a stay at home mom or CEO of some company (unless she had the platinum health care and golden parachute?) She is currently not working and is unlikely to be employed in the near future.

As to OPINION. Everyone on here is offering their opinion. Currently the only opinion that counts however is the judge who made the ruling. Like it or not that is the law for now. I happen to side with the judge and others side with the mom.

Trust...the law??? The law is only made for the criminals. What a joke....gee if daddys is so great, where the hell is he? Maybe ashamed...knows people will hang him.

I do agree with you completely, the law is only made for criminals, isn't this terrible to say, how can you believe in a justice system when somthing like this disgusting is going on.

Trust - I am tired your posts on this board. You offer just as much speculation as any other person and it IS cold hearted. You talk about the best interest of the children but you say nothing about what effect taking them away from the mother would have on them. Nor do you talk about what would happen if they are taken away and she dies and that effect on the children now and the future. You can't replace that lost time with the mother but the father would potentially have a life time to bond with the kids.

You also bable on about her job situation without any facts. If she was not able to work she would most likely qualify for disabilty. Nothing in the artice states he is paying her alimony or support of any kind. So she must have some means to support herself. If she was getting no money in any way I believe the judge would have stated that in her ruling.

You also talk about who would be a better parent and the fitness of fathers in general. First of all most mothers are overall better parents then dads. I know this from experience from my parents and being a father of 4 children. That does not mean I am unfit in anyway. It just means that the mother will always have a different and stronger bond with the kids. This is why in history the mothers stayed at home. Not because they could not support the family, but because they were able to be an overall better caregiver for the children.

Second issue you seem to ignore is the fact the father left when he found out she was sick and moved to another state. He is the one that left. So you think it's easy for someone to travel 1200 hundred miles round trip. Well it must be good to be you moneybags. I would have a hard time doing this and I get reduced price air fair. Also it is the last time I checked not free to move. Moving costs a lot of money.

The bottom line is the father does not yet understand the @!$%# storm he is going to get when this mother dies and if this court ruling stands. Do you or he understands the resentment these kids will have for him if they don't get to spend the last few years with her. I tell you what, if he was my father and did this to me, I would be counting the days before I could legally move out. He would never see me again. That is a statement of fact!

So I have to ask you, are you the father in this story?

@trust - I'm sorry you lost your mom to cancer. As you said getting that call at 2AM was the worst. Can I assume you were an adult when that happened? But this judge was woefully wrong in this case. Mom probably CAN'T get a job. I can't think of ANY company that will hire a person with cancer bc of the number of days that will be missed due to chemo, other treatments not to mention the days that will be missed because of the sickness that's caused by those treatments.

Yes it will be hard on her kids seeing their mom so very ill, but should we hide the truth from them by sending them to dad? Not at this point. If mom becomes too ill to care for them then yes let dad take over, BUT he should also have the decency to bring the kids to see her as often as possible. This illness shouldn't be hidden from them. Unfortunately, this is a part of life and it happens. If the dad has an ounce of decency, he would look to transfer to be closer to his wife while she is enduring this serious illness. Who cares what their differences were, this is about respect for the woman who gave him these 2 beautiful children. Just as the, and I use this term loosely, judge should have shown.

I was just in my 20's and my younger brother was still at home. Life goes on. He took things worse than I did. I was the "man" of the house from age 12 due to circumstances mostly beyond my fathers control.

No one said he would not allow/send the children to see their mother.

I want to know what utopia everyone is living in where employers are so willing to transfer someone simply for emotional/family reasons. Most people who don't live in utopia are just happy to have a job.

From the beginning of this story it has been ALL ABOUT mom not getting her way. Little was said about what was good for their children other than her stating that the children wanted to stay with her. Of course they do. they have lived with her for the past year and all their friends live near by.

I want a lot of things also. Doesn't mean I will get them. It's called life.

Children need loving parentS. Goats have KIDS. The judge is not saying mom can't be in the children's lives nor they in hers. Divorce is a very emotional issue. This wouldn't even be news other than she has cancer. There wouldn't be as much outcry if this were reversed and he was a jobless father and mom had been awarded custody, cancer or no cancer.

I disagree with trust_verify. The children/kids are now terrified of losing their mother to cancer, and taking them away from her now to go 600 miles away will be that much worse for them. What is the reason she does not want to move? Does she have a good support system where she currently lives? My mother also died from cancer and I give thanks every day that I was with her when she passed away. I cherish every second that I was able to spend with her, and knowing a lot of younger children whose mother or father died from a terminal illness has shown me that they value every second, too. Shame on the father, shame on the judge, and shame on the judicial system. And what was the purpose of the remark "goats have kids"?

The kids comment was spoken at face value. People have children, goats have kids. WHY shame on the dad, almost any male can father a child it takes a dad to step up. He has just as much right as the mom to have custody of the children. He is not asking they not see or otherwise have mom in their lives. The collective WE on here don't know the reason he moved 600 miles. Perhaps he moved because that is where he could get a GOOD paying job?

Yes losing a parent is never easy. It was a long year for my brother and I. I am sure it is no easier today on these children. Divorce is not easy for children either. This judge was making a custody decision based on the facts at hand. That they made the comment or used cancer as a factor may have been foolish on her part. The facts however are.... mom has no income and it is unlikely she will in the near future. YES cancer is probably the cause of her being unable to obtain unemployment. If she were otherwise unable to get a job would we be up in arms about it? Probably not. Take the CAUSE of her being unemployed out of the picture and base it on the fact she has no income. DAD has a job and is capable of supporting their children both now and most likely in the future. It's not like he just went away and said "good luck." Does anyone here know ALL of the details as to why they divorced? I feel for her and the entire family. The judge is doing her best to look out for the LONG TERM good of the children. That she has cancer needed to be taken into consideration. Again I ask, if the roles were reversed would there be such an outcry?

to trust-verify, what's with the nit-picking.....goats/kids....unnecessary. Are you just trying to be superior.

DAD has a job and is capable of supporting their children both now and most likely in the future.

Then let him spend his money on taking care of his family. Let the judge garnish his wages and use them to support his wife and children. He has responsibilities. If he does not choose to meet them, that is when the judicial system should step in.

And he has NO right to custody of his children. He has the responsibility to care for them. Because he is not competent to provide the proper environment. No man is, and this one less than most. His job is to provide money, nothing else. The sooner he is out of his childrens' lives, the better.

And if the mother does die, the children should be placed into a proper environment with a family that will care for them properly. And this father should have to pay them.

Holy Moses, I truly hope that you are saying things like this just to make a point about the bias against fathers. If you really MEAN what you are saying, then you are a completely pathetic individual.

Their mother is not providing them with the proper environment either. Take them away now, and put them in a family of strangers. Yep, way better than a single father. I realize that you are a troll Holy Moses Schmucker but sadly there are REAL people who actually agree with your statments.

Getting media exposure for yourself and making the father look (hopefully) as horrible as possible, feeling sorry for yourself and not offering to budge at all on issues like moving, income or anything else really makes a strong case for a parent in a legal custody trial. America is getting more and more selfish and infantile by the minute!

How is this unemployed woman with cancer supposed to move? If she is on state assistance, she will lose her financial aid and medical insurance and may have to wait up to 6 months after moving to be eligible for either in the new state. Will her ex-husband help her out?? I kinda doubt it! He has made it clear he is the only person in this case that counts.

After reading all the nasty, negative comments here, I will make sure to kiss my husband when he comes home and tell him how much I appreciate him. (I will also thank God I was never so unlucky to have become involved with any of you who lack hearts!)

Agree with you Ken. (wait for it.... here it comes... men agreeing with each other) Why is this even national news. It's a divorce and custody case. The parents need to act as GROWNUPS here. Do what is BEST for the children.

You're right----removing them from their mother and DEPRIVING them of her last "good" days is the right thing to do.

After all they can talk on the phone and say their final good byes at her funeral-----nice

@lexiwords - 1 ...your funny and you get a check !!! NICE !!! Kids stay with mom . Period !!!!

mspa.....regarding lexiwords...not funny, but incredibly true....

"Kids" stay with mom, period? That is very one-sided and ignorant. So, no matter the circumstances, "kids" stay with mom? I've known some very incompetent moms. It's not a good idea to make a unilateral statement like that.

Alan, please show how that applies to this mother? Show me how this mother is incompetent. If not, then I do not care about other people you may or may not have known. In this story I saw no evidence of incompetence on the mothers part.

WHERE did the judge state mom and the children can not spend time together????? Has she said dad is unfit or unworthy of raising their children? Has dad said she can't visit? YES there is distance. If mom needs the children as a reason to live then she has all the more reason to get better so she can get them back. YES it is VERY unlikely she will beat stage 4 cancer. That she is undergoing treatment is very much part of why she is not working. THAT was most likely a LARGE part of the judges reasoning for her ruling.

I'm glad it was a woman judge and not a man. One less bullet for those who disagree with her ruling.

Ummmmmm trust, how is she going to just get better?????? Maybe the magic faerie dust you must have in abundance? By default the judge is separating the mother from the kids. You stated in a previous post that we don't have all the facts about why the father up and left the state. Ok, lets apply that same logic to the mothers situation. Do you know for a fact on how much it will cost her to travel back and forth every week, two weeks or once a month to see these kids? Do you know how much hotels, and car rentals or bus fare is? Do you know how much it will be to eat out the whole time while visiting? Or how much it would be to pack up everything and move? If she would be able to find housing in the same type of dwelling for the same cost? Or if she could find a team of doctors that would be able to jump right in and pick up where the other doctors left off? Would she have the same support system as she does now?

You talk about this situation as if there is no money cost to consider. You seem to imply that is she really loves them then she would find a way to make it work. Typical thinking by a lawyer I think. You would be the kind of person that would throw a person off a cliff and say if you really wanted to live then you would sprout wings. Sorry but life has a funny way of not working out the way people thinks it should.

@roert. Read up a few posts. Money has been a part of this argument from the top. Problem is it's all been DAD should foot the entire bill.

Also note I stated it is UNLIKELY she will recover.

Your last sentence hits it on the head. Life. Many years ago I heard a line that generally applies today "Don't take life too seriously. No one gets out of it alive" Yes these are serious issues. Why is it always the dad that is made out to be the bad guy?

Robert...don't forget th BRUTAL winter conditions; shoveling snow so you can get in/out the front door, scraping ice off windshield, driving on icy roads, wind chill factors dropping temperatures far below ZERO---simply breathing (respiration) through a scarf causes icecicles to form...and ALL those doctors visits she will have to make it to...how is THAT better for the kids to see? I mean the UNNECESSARY suffering that the cancer patient will have to go through...WILL be noticed by the children. Winter is a LONG season there...maybe he's hoping she'll get snowed in (like being locked in a freezer)...or that some other "winter" related mishap might happen to her? Even if she doesn't have any mishaps...what will moving to this kind of place do to her health? The children WILL notice...and they WILL blame the parent that gave them no other option...even if it's NOT until adulthood; "dad? why did you MAKE my mother move to such a miserable place-with such harsh winter weather, when you KNEW she was already sick?"

Any reasonable human being wouldn't expect this to be a move for the better (health) for a cancer patient...let alone the person whom they loved enough once...to have married and made a family with. And any person that doesn't consider the well being of others (the other parent of their children hence, their children vicariously) as being an important/relevant factor...is surely NOT the best role model for children.