My guess is that he is distracting from the core moral and issues. As it is, the law does NOT give the spouse guardianship. If it did, then (convicted) abusive husbands would have control over their incapacitated wive's medical care.
I think that causing a (legally incorrect) focus on guardianship is deliberate misdirection. Just like focusing on PVS was, two weeks ago.
The law did just that, in this case.
And don't forget - in some cases, rapists who father children as a result are now getting their 'right' in having access to that child or saying how it will be raised.
The courts are run by the inmates, now.
What do you think it is misdirection from?