In Child Custody Case Judge Allow Catholic Baptism Sets Limits On Sacrament of Confirmation

At  Vatican Insider there is an interesting article on a what religion a Child shall be if the parents disagree custody case situation.

See “Here’s why you can get baptised even if your mother is against it”

Now there is a lot of facts this blurb does not tell us. For instance in American terms is there joint custody, sole custody, and who is the Domiciliary parent.
Still it appears that such an attitude and result  is akin to the  best interest of the child  that we have here in the USA.

However the part of the letter to the child from the Judge struck me as sort of off.

..Concerning confirmation, the judge wrote: “In the light of her Jewish heritage, I would consider it appropriate that she should attain a much fuller degree of understanding and greater maturity before being confirmed and I therefore propose that she should not be confirmed before her 16th birthday without the consent of the mother..

That seems a tad off ot me again. Now again we don't know the facts of the case in much detail . But it seems once you give the Christian dad "authority" over Faith vs Jewish mom then when a person should or should not be confirmed might be a tad out of bounds.

Further even at 10 years old she as a BAPTIZED Catholic has certain rights , and I wonder about the interesting realms of secular vs religious authority issues here.

Again this might have been an agreement between the Father and Mother and that is what he is proposing. But again maybe not. I bring up this issue because I know in certain Dioceses in the UK they have early confirmation ages.

I am trying to see envision this would work in an American Court. If this was brought into Court again by the dad because he wanted her confirmed at 14 what questions would the Judge ask. Is it even proper at that point?