I've been reading about this case, and all the strangle twists and turns it's taken, and I'm really fascinated by it. The basic gist is that Bode Miller, in 2012, had a few dates with a woman named Sarah McKenna that he met on a matchmaking service. He got her pregnant. She contends that he initially wanted nothing to do with her or the baby. In the meantime, Bode Miller met and married volleyball player Morgan Beck, in a span of a few months. At seven months, Sarah McKenna left California for New York in order to start school at Columbia.

This is where things started to get nasty. Bode Miller filed to establish parental rights, and McKenna was castigated by a judge for "shopping" for a more sympathetic court by going to New York. Custody was awarded to Miller. This enraged women's rights advocates, who believed that this ruling set a dangerous precedent that would allow biological fathers to dictate where pregnant women are allowed to go. It was overturned, and right now they have a short-term custody agreement before a hearing in March.

It's pretty contentious- the mother and the father can't even agree on a name- Bode's son was named Samuel, after Bode's legal name. Miller wants to call Sam "Nate" after his recently deceased brother, to the point where the visa that would have allowed his son to go with him to Russa got held up because of his insistence that "Nathaniel" be added as a middle name on his birth certificate. And of course, Miller's wife decided to post a blog, since deleted, blasting McKenna for her poor mothering skills. (His wife, by the way, suffered a miscarriage in 2013, and decided to call it a blessing in disguise because it meant they could focus on raising just one baby instead of two. Which...kinda raises The Hand That Rocks the Cradle red flags in my mind.)

Here's an article about the case, and what it could mean for women's rights:

Bode Miller Changed His Mind and Hurt Pregnant Women's Rights Everywhere

It does raise a really good ethical question- is a woman obligated to stay in the same state as the child's father while the baby's in utero and before they've worked out custody arrangements?

Another interesting case I've been following is the Jason Patric custody case, which challenges the California state law about sperm donors. His ex-girlfriend and the mother of his child insists that Jason Patric is a sperm donor, Jason insists that he had every intention of parenting the child.

I think both cases are interesting views into how parental custody battles have evolved over the years in regards to paternal rights.