The initial ruling treated a fetus as a child, for purposes of a custody battle, and by so doing threatened to limit the rights of a pregnant woman to move and travel. A brief was filed in support of McKenna by a coalition of advocacy groups that contended the judge’s order “created a government mechanism that would permit both states and putative fathers-to-be to exert unjustified control over the location and life plans of pregnant women in a manner not reciprocated concerning the expectant fathers.”
A New York appeals court overturned the initial judicial order between McKenna, 27, and Miller, 36, and the case was returned to New York, but not before the child was put in Miller’s custody for a period. After more court proceedings, the baby was back with McKenna. ESPN reports that after the Olympics, Miller and McKenna will share custody through a short-term agreement.
However, the case isn’t over with a series of legal challenges pending, but for now, the “pregnant-woman-moving question” seems to be answered. Emotionally, the debate goes on: “Should a pregnant woman’s desire to relocate trump an expectant father’s desire to live near his child?”
The sad result is the child in the center: “How do you decide how often a child should be in New York with his mother or in California with his father?”
At Stange Law Firm, PC, we represent both fathers and mothers in upholding the law of doing what is in the best interest of the child. If you are facing a family law issue, you may call to schedule a confidential half-hour consultation with one of our divorce lawyers at 855-805-0595 or visit us online.
Source: A Woman’s Right to Move, Emily Bazelon, Slate, Feb. 17, 2014
Bode Miller’s Custody Case: What It Means for Pregnant Women Everywhere, Alice Gomstyn, The Daily Babble, February 17, 2014