What the court didn't do was take the 14th (or 15th?) Amendment into account--slavery is prohibited. It may have been reasonable for his ex-wife to retire, but she could have taken part-time work at something other than medicine. The benefit the children derive from her greater involvement with them is likely nullified by the understandably hard feelings generated in their father. This was a poor decision, not in the best interests of the children, but clearly in the best perceived interests of the woman. And truly in the long run it won't prove to be in her best interests, either. Remember, Mrs. Dr. didn't have to sit there and watch her $1,000,000 stock portfolio dwindle to nothing either.
I'm going to have to admit that I blew this call. Here's what finally occurred to me.
If the dad lost his job, he'd soon lose the house, the savings and of course his half-time caretaker status. He would not have a physical residence suited to the kids sleeping over, end of story.
Here we have the woman who just up and decided she ought to stay home all day while the kids are in school. Will she lose her home, her ability to house the kids during visitation? No
The absurdidty of this is that a man would lose his half-time status, and this bitch not only doesn't lose it, but the state helps her steal enough money to pay all her expenses in the deal.
Talk about an amazing rip-off...