Christian foster parents? (#314, Topic R)

Yesterday's Washington Post prominently displayed, on page A3, a 4-column story, complete with two photographs, on "Court Rules Against Foster Parents." It seems that, a couple from China were living in Memphis TN, where the husband worked as a restaurant manager. Eight years ago, they had a new-born baby, a daughter. Perhaps short of funds, certainly short of living space, the Chinese couple sought foster parenting when she was 3 weeks old. Another church member, who ran an adoption agency, "vouched for the [Caucasian] couple," fellow members in the same church, "as experienced, loving foster parents." So the baby was left to the Caucasian couple's care. When the Chinese couple asked for their daughter's return when she was 2, "the relations turned ugly." Indeed, they "won a court order barring the [Chinese couple] from any contact with [their daughter]." Why that Caucasian couple could win such a court order is beyond me -- and, for cry out loud, where was the adoption-agency owner when her professionalism was most needed? And where was her Christian spirit of love and care? But, more fascinating events were yet to unfold. "A Memphis judge stripped the [Chinese couple] of their parental rights in February 2004, citing 'parental misconduct' and abandonment, suggesting that [the Chinese couple] had pursued the custody case merely to delay their own deportation." The WP story mentioned that the baby's mother "used to hide inside a neighborhood gas station [after the earlier court ruling barring contact] to catch glimpes of [her daughter] being taken for a walk or out for a ride." So much for "parental misconduct" and "abandonment." When the mother shouted that she wanted her daughter back, the "lower court concluded that her behavior amounted to 'emotional instability' that would be detrimental to [the daughter]." So much for judicial impartiality, at least in a lower court in USA's South. Luckily, the Tennessee Supreme Court thought otherwise -- it found no evidence that the daughter was willfully abandoned. "The justices concluded that the couple misunderstood the possible implications of transferring custody and guardianship to the [Caucasian couple], believing it merely enabled the[m] to get [the daughter] health insurance." The Caucasian couple cited "emotional upheaval" to the daughter as grounds for their keeping her, but the high court rejected that as well -- it "does not constitute the substantial harm required to prevent the parents from regaining custody." Bravo. So much for the pretense of using church to take advantage of immigrants who have neither the language proficiency nor the financial resources to fight the establishment. But, in the final analysis, it is parental love in the Confucian tradition that prevailed, and prevails -- it trumps all.