Show me where I said that? I never did.
THIS couple is still married.
Grounds for divorce, is not a divorce. He is still the husband. Yes, "in name only", but he is still legally and scripturally her husband. That is an indisputable FACT.
Okay enough of this empty argument. Yes there is a presumption that a spouse can stand as guardian, but that presumption can be reversed by the facts such as conflict of interest for example.
THe same courts have on many occasions overlooked the prima facie right of parents to be guardians where they have refused blood transfusions to their children.
So stop repeating over and over that he is her husband.That is not the final criteriun to determine guardianship,but only one that can be overriden,and obviously should have been in this case.