In the Michael Kantaras custody case it describes legal technicalities, moral beliefs, and changing societal attitudes at work. What are the complexities and what was the main reaction to this case? What is the most relevant in determining adequate custodial arrangments? If most people were a judge in this case, what would be important to emphasize? What is most people's "gut" reactions to the details of this case, and what potentially factored into the judges decision? Should the jury be involved in the individuals jurors decision making?