I agree with most of what Justice Kitching says here. We care if a parent has a seizure disorder when we assess what the best interests of a child are in a custody case. There's also been a partial waiver of the privilege here, so some discovery as to this issue can go forward.
At the same time, this type of discovery can easily be abused, so we should be careful. And protective orders and in camera review are good ideas. So as to the important stuff, I'm pretty much on board.
But as for the second sentence in the opinion, I've got to dissent in part. Personally, I don't think that "[o]ne of the principle issues in the case is whether father should be granted joint custody over the couple's 4-year-old son, Jacob." I think that's one of the principal issues.
Grammar aside, though, I think this is a pretty well-balanced opinion. Especially for something so short.
