I actually see both sides of this argument. She works in one of the deadliest places right now and I would also be scared for my child if I was the father. On the other side, I can't imagine not seeing my child for months, through no fault of my own. I wonder what hospitals are doing to assist workers not transfer the virus out of work?

They aren't doing anything for health care workers! Not even testing the health care works even if they've been directly exposed in the hospitals my sister and BIL work in.

Yes it sucks not to see your kids.  Would suck even more if they caught it from their parents.  Social distancing needs to be enforced for now.

The virus won't last forever, but death from the virus does.

This woman is stupid and making a stupid complaint.

Sorry, but your kid HAS the option to be with someone who DOES NOT put her at risk. There have been many healthcare folks who have sent their kids to live with other family, have quarantined themselves when they are at home by living in extra bedrooms or other floors and not having physical contact with their spouses and kids, are living in RVs or campers on their property, or utilizing deeply discounted hotel rates for HCPs to stay away from home entirely.

But this child is 4. She HAS to have physical contact with her. NONE of our HCPs have adequate PPE (as in, PPE they SHOULD have to deal with this, not what they're using because it's what's available) unless they are in a rural state that hasn't been hit hard yet. I feel bad that this woman has lost TEMPORARY custody of her child, but her wanting to keep it isn't based on what's good for her child. It's based on what's good for her fee-fees.

This angers me so greatly because this woman IS an ER doctor. Outside an infectious disease specialist and respiratory therapist (and anyone assisting these folks), this woman is #1 on the frontlines. The viral loads these folks are exposed to is astronomically high. There is a theory (though no proof yet) that part of the reason why HCPs are more prone to serious disease even with fewer/no underlying health conditions is due to the amount of virus they are exposed to. Even if that gets debunked...

WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO EXPOSE YOUR CHILD?!

I'll give some credence to the idea that her ex might try alienating the girl, but if a court in Florida is giving Dad sole custody, I'm inclined to believe that Dad is a decent parent. But I'll eat my worda if I'm wrong.

& wants to reopen schools because the young kids don't seem to "get it". That state?  This isn't abt protecting a child's life because the government of that state has demonstrated a singular lack of regard for human life.  
we don't know all the circumstances; we don't know if the ER doctor had mitigation's in place to minimize contact in her home.  Not sure I agree with the courts decision.

4 year olds are not really affected, so I can't see it being for the kid's safety,  The kid is more likely to die of influenza.  I'm willing to bet Dad is over 40 with diabetes/hypertension or lives with his elderly parents.  So the kid going back and forth would be the problem.  That's a tough decision.

However, I do think this is a slippery slope, they can't just take children out of the homes of healthcare workers, simply because they are healthcare workers.

I agree with Petronella. It's not losing custody, it's being reasonable. I believe that responsible parent would elect to temporarily not see their child. Irresponsible unreasonable parents would insist that their entitlements and rights are more important than safety, they are just causing problems and end up in court. I am glad that this judge is sane and reasonable.  No one died from not seeing their kid for a bit, but people sure die of covid19 every day 

There are just as many stories of married ER doctors who are voluntarily isolating from their children or sending them away at this time. She might have made the same decision if she were married - to send the child off with her father out of harms way. She just feels as though her ex has won, so this again, is about the mother, not the child.

I think this is just awful.  This judge should be off the bench. 

This BM is on the front line so I would assume she knows how to stay safe.  She probably has less of a chance of catching this mess than the idiot that goes to the grocery store with no facemask and no gloves and gets too close to everyone.  

What is going to happen when they start taking all of the first responders kids away.  This is just absurd and overstepping.  If I was BM I would quit and keep my family together and let the government take care of me and my kids.  

I really would not but this just burns my butt.  however, I think the government if full of total idiot that are power hungry and we are just letting them lead us all like little lambs.  

I agree with the doctor that she is being discriminated because she is divorced. There are many healthcare workers who share dwellings with their children and spouses after they come home from work. I'm sure she understands how to protect her child from infection. In fact, she may understand better than the father who is not a healthcare worker. Who knows what he's really doing to protect his child. This sets an awful precedent of removing children from a healthcare workers home simply because they are divorced.  If this ruling were to be applied unilaterally then ALL healthcare workers should have their children removed from their homes, married or not.  

Follow-up to this, too:

The BM is high risk for contracting COVID-19. Knowing what precautions to take and being able to take them are two entirely different things right now.

Dad is in a crappy spot. He either continues with week on/week off, knowing his daughter is being exposed (and I'm not blaming the BM for that; it comes with the job), and being a child, is the most likely to be an asymptomatic carrier. So now he and his house are at risk every time DD comes over. So visitation has to stop to prevent spread.

So does Dad stop visitation and leave it up to BM to do it all, knowing she is an ER doc and probably realizing his kid will be in childcare with yet other people (even if it's family) while BM works? Or does he fight to keep his daughter in one spot so that she doesn't become Typhoid Mary?

And the court has to weigh that, too. It's not just the health and safety of the child; it's the health and safety of the parents, too. If both parents get sick, who is going to tale care of the kid? Especially if the kid is the one spreading the virus?

It's a crap decision that has to be made, and if these were teenagers who were more self-sufficient, I might think differently. But this is a toddler. This is a kid that HAS to be physically minded. And I'm flabbergasted that BM, having watched healthy people become ill I'd assume, would want to put her child at risk.

I feel like the court overstepped here. Unless someone is like the head of a drug cartel, we can't reduce someone's custody because of their jobs. It's not right. However, I also feel like BM should have made the decision voluntarily and avoided court in the first place. I personally know a lot of healthcare workers who are isolating from their families - some even living in separate houses - right now. 

Can someone read my post and help please.