I also wish it had been clearer when Vinnie had been brought on board, and how they even got Astrid involved in the first place.

I did love the "Mornin', Sam." "Mornin', Ralph" exchange, though.

That was my favorite part, too. The overall episode seemed contrived and a bit muddled to me, though.

I'm glad that others reacted the way I did. I sort of just posted this as a comment over in(meara's & P-C's) LJ, but the baby really took me out of the story. Maybe it's a mom thing (since I see Plei and Cash made similar comments) but I kept thinking "how could you hand your baby over to those strangers?" and other more predictable questions about baby care in general.

However, way beyond all the baby issues were the custody issues. I guess it is possible to imagine some scenario where Duncan would not have rights to the baby, but it would be complicated enough that it should have been addressed. Otherwise, it's a simple issue. He's the dad - he has custody. I can see why he might not want Meg's parents to have their hands on the baby, even for a few weeks, but still. Honestly, I don't think the hospital would just turn the baby over to Meg's parents. I think they would want some determination from the court (to avoid being sued if nothing else).

I agree completely. The whole issue of whether Duncan could legally take the baby was absurd (especially considering that they've established that he's 18 and thus legally an adult), as was bringing in Celeste, who has no say in the matter one way or another. Also, they should have shown us Meg's parents at some point. Finally, the whole issue of Wallace's return was taken waaaay too casually. I'm fairly disappointed in Mr. Thomas's script.

An 18 year old high school student could lose his/her child to the grandparents. It does happen. The standard in most states is "best interest of the child."

Meg's parents make a good appearance. They're church goers and have raised other children. They can certainly argue that it's in the baby's best interest to stay with them. They'll fight Duncan every step of the way and argue that the child has "bonded" with them in the interim. We know they're abusive, but Meg's e-mails did not refer to them as the abusers and I expect that the closet in Grace's room no longer has a secret room.

Also, Meg's parents could make hay with Duncan's outbursts, need for medication, his immaturity and his lack of financial support. Duncan is in a particularly bad spot if his parents were unwilling to help him with money (the thing with VM selling Celeste's jewelry indicates that the Kanes were not going to be supportive of Duncan keeping the baby).

The standard in most states is "best interest of the child."

Sure, but the courts would have to step in first. There was no indication that this had happened yet. In fact, VM & Duncan appeared to be fighting a burden of proof issue, when no court in the country is going to say that a multimillionaire dad wouldn't have custody of his child, absent any evidence of child abuse.

There was a "Cupid" shout-out -- Wallace was at Trevor Hale High School in Chicago. Trevor Hale was the lead character's name in "Cupid" which was also set in Chicago.

Oh, was it the name of the high school? I couldn't figure out whether he was one of the players or something.

I don't want to play legal smackdown (because I would probably lose) but I was taught that absent unfitness, parents get custody. At least in NC, the standard when choosing one parent over another is best interests of the child but between a parent and a non-parent, the parent (generally) gets custody. BIC doesn't even come into it.

I don't think the show even dealt with the issue. I get that it's not a show about child custody, but this was the issue that drove the entire episode and therefore, I think it should have been more plausible.

Was it clear, though, when Meg died? If she didn't fill out the birth certificate herself, or give the information to the staff person filling it out, it would have been left up to her parents to provide that information. They may have simply omitted giving Duncan's name as father. In which case he has no legal rights whatsoever, unless and until he can sue for custody, and have DNA testing done. Even then, all testing does is prove he either definitely isn't, or he could be, along with all others of his blood type, the baby's dad.

So, absent any legal proof that Duncan's the dad, custody automatically falls to the deceased mom's parents, if they want it.

An 18 year old high school student could lose his/her child to the grandparents. It does happen. The standard in most states is "best interest of the child."

I know you meant this, but just to clarify, the "best interest of the child" standard must be qualified by a presumption in favor of the natural parent(s). Mothers and fathers are supposed to be equally presumed although historically mothers were given a greater presumption. So even if the grandparents are a better home for the child, the natural father would get the presumption and the burden would be on the grandparents to show the father's home is in some way detrimental to the welfare of the child.

This comes up often in adoption cases where foster parents are fighting it out with natural parents to adopt a child. Natural parents get the presumption even if it's clear that the foster parents have a superior environment, emotionally and economically, and the burden is on the foster parents to show that the leaving the child with its natural parents will be detrimental.

WRT VM, the plotline about custody makes little sense. Would have been better if they were more worried about Meg's parents getting even temporary custody and abusing the baby while the custody hearings were going on, but I find that difficult to swallow.

ETA: Inevitable x-post with our newest attorney. P.S. Stephanie, in my office it's the attorney who took the bar the most recently that gets all the questions outside of our specialty. Go Bar prep!