Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Couple loses 8-year-old to Chinese birth parents
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | July 20, 2007

Posted on 07/20/2007 7:27:49 PM PDT by USA Girl

A grieving Memphis couple has given up on its seven-year custody battle over a foster daughter after the Tennessee Supreme Court ordered the girl must be returned to her biological parents in China.

Larry Parrish, a lawyer for Jerry and Louise Baker, said in a statement the couple would not make themselves available to the media. But he said the family has concluded any further attempts to keep the 8-year-old girl they've called Anna Mae in their home would be futile.

"It has been soberly concluded by the Bakers that Anna has been forced by a defective system to suffer the wrongs the system has dealt her and that further delaying the execution of what she must now suffer cannot be expected to help," Parrish said Tuesday.

"Analogies to illustrate how the Bakers are can be drawn from your own imagination," he continued. "They are grieving with a grief that is as deep as any that any person could possibly conceive.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: adoption; childers; children; judicialabuse; judiciary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-155 next last
To: USA Girl

This is not any different from the Clinton/Bush sellout of little Elian Gonzalez either.


41 posted on 07/20/2007 8:22:58 PM PDT by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wolfinator

Wolfinator, my apologies. I went back and read the entire article. They did visit her for a year before the Bakers suspended that arrangement. That makes the territory much more murky.

Again, my apologies.


42 posted on 07/20/2007 8:23:09 PM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: definitelynotaliberal

Apologies, my foot.

There is an 8 year old child who has only lived with one family here.

Ask her who she’d rather live with!


43 posted on 07/20/2007 8:25:28 PM PDT by USA Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: USA Girl

Hey, I did say that that piece of information makes the territory murky. What I mean by territory is the synapse between my brain (which cedes to the court that overturned the lower court’s decision) and my heart. Thinking only of the child, I want her to be with the siblings and parents with whom she grew up. But if the biological parents have struggled all along to have her back, for several years, after visiting regularly the first year, ......... I don’t know. Both words and rationalization fail me.


44 posted on 07/20/2007 8:29:27 PM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: wolfinator; tfecw
Actually, the state supreme court overturned 3 other courts according to The posted article.

And none of the articles seem to agree on facts.

Tennessee Supreme Court Rules in Anna Mae He Custody Battle

On February 21, 2002, Jack He was acquitted of the sexual battery charges. Later that same year the He's would visit their daughter for the first time in three years.

Tenn. couple to keep custody of girl

When their situation didn't improve after 90 days, the Hes signed custody over to the Bakers.

Within a year, they were fighting in court to get her back, insisting that they never intended to permanently relinquish custody.

So was it within a year or 3 years. Don't you love the press and their "facts"?

45 posted on 07/20/2007 8:32:34 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (Jesus loves you, Allah wants you dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: definitelynotaliberal

http://scribblingredhev.blogspot.com/

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=first,_kill_all_the_judges&ns=BurtPrelutsky&dt=06/08/2007&page=full&comments=true

The child is one thing. The Chinese parents seem to be in the right here. They live here! Not in China and sure seem to be illegal aliens with three anchor babies. Having anchor babies was something they did right away.


46 posted on 07/20/2007 8:40:20 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle

Read the history of this case.

The He’s didn’t ‘abandon’ the baby.

Judge Childers ordered them to stay away from the Baker’s, and they complied with his order. Based on their complicity with his order, he slapped them with a bogus abandonment charge.

Judge Childers has a history of bad judicial decisions, subsequently being overturned by the Tennessee Supreme Court.


47 posted on 07/20/2007 8:44:31 PM PDT by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jra
"...but the He’s deserve to have THEIR child."

What about the best interest of the child? A long time ago in this country that was the decision that a judge would make in a case like this, not awarding the prize to one side or the other. Things have changed in that regard and not for the better IMO. Besides the lack of available healthy infants for adoption, couples wanting to adopt prefer to find children overseas now, since there is far less chance that the birth parent or parents will have a change of heart several years later and sue to have the child returned to them. In our court system presently, they have a good chance of "reclaiming their property."

48 posted on 07/20/2007 8:48:07 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USA Girl

I’ve read EVERY keystroke ever written on this case.

My advice to you is to research the history of this case before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

The villain in this case is the judge.

If he makes the CORRECT LEGAL decision initially, this situation would have never developed.

I know more than I’m willing to post on a public forum about judge childers, but do some research.

Don’t let the emotion of WND’s (very poorly researched and slanted) article overcome you.

Do you have any children?


49 posted on 07/20/2007 8:51:15 PM PDT by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: penowa

Don’t make an online fool of yourself like others in this thread.

Read the backstory.

Shame on the He’s for wanting to raise their OWN child.

/sarc


50 posted on 07/20/2007 8:52:49 PM PDT by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: USA Girl

This is sickening...
we live in a country that is fast losing all her integrity and moral convictions. Throw the children to the wolves... that will do!!!!!!


51 posted on 07/20/2007 9:01:26 PM PDT by pollywog (Joshua 1:9 Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: USA Girl

Sad, bad news - our next door neighbors traveled to China a few years back and adopted a cute little Chinese girl whom they’re raising as a litle sister to their own two children - primarily because they wanted to give a child who otherwise might be neglected or worse a chance for a better life with a family who loved her - they’d be crushed if the had to give her up - hope this sort of reversal doesn’t become a trend.....


52 posted on 07/20/2007 9:02:30 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: penowa

The best interest of the child doesn’t seem to be considered much in foster child cases. There are literally thousands of children in the US who are being subject to the same experience. It is unfair, but not uncommon. I was in the foster care system 30 years ago, and not much has changed since then.

As for this case, there is more to the story than what is in this article. Anna Mae was a foster child, not an adopted child. Every foster parent is well informed that the child can be given back to the parents or to other foster parents. The biological parents tried to get the little girl back for a long period of time, and the foster family fought them every step of the way. The biological parents are no doubt hurting the child by taking her away, but part of the fault lies with these foster parents. She was not adopted, and these foster parents have no rights to her at all.


53 posted on 07/20/2007 9:02:43 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: jra
Which version should I read? The one with the "facts" you like, or the one someone else likes?

I preferred the courts of this country when a judge in an adoption case like this made his determination on the basis of what is in the best interest of the child; obviously you do not.

54 posted on 07/20/2007 9:05:24 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: machogirl
just out of curiosity, i thought that you were only allowed to have 1 child in china? they have 3?

The Chinese father was a student in Tennessee when this started, I think they still live in Tennessee, according to the Memphis paper, it is doubtful if the kid are the parents leave the country.

As per usually with the world net daily, they never get the facts out up front. The parents are probably permanent green card holders, you could not kick them out of the country as long as they were in a court case. That is why they are referred to as Chinese nationals.

55 posted on 07/20/2007 9:07:13 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USA Girl

About a week ago, my brother-in-law and his wife were told to come to the hospital (within an hour’s drive); the baby boy they were to adopt had just been born. While there, the birth mom and her boyfriend’s parents wanted to meet the adopting parents. Not sure really how the meeting went, but two days later, the little boy’s new parents drove home with their baby.

I am happy for these two, but stories like this one are always out there and they really scare me.


56 posted on 07/20/2007 9:08:08 PM PDT by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL (****************************Stop Continental Drift**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jra

For the ignorant (albeit well-meaninged, I’m sure) people who’ve been on this thread, here’s the Reader’s Digest version of this story:

Baby was born.

Child’s parent(s) felt they were unable to adequately care for said baby, and baby was sent to live with the Bakers.

At some point, the Bakers had a conflict with the Hes, followed by a ruling by judge childers (rightly or wrongly) for the Hes to stay away from the Bakers, which the Hes complied with.

Because they COMPLIED to the order, they weren’t allowed to visit Anna for a period of time. Then, and only then, came the BOGUS abandonment charge.

Since then, the Hes have been trying to get THEIR child back, and if it weren’t for the Tennessee Supreme Court, they would never have been able to get THEIR child back.

The Hes have done the right thing top to bottom, period.

Idiots.


57 posted on 07/20/2007 9:08:25 PM PDT by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: doc1019
Yes, take her out of a nice comfortable bed in the US and subject her to the Hell of a communist government. Sounds like justice to me.

The little girl is in the united sates and the parents are in the united states.

58 posted on 07/20/2007 9:09:49 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

The article says they were here on a student visa and they wanted to return to China, but wanted to regain custody of their daughter first. I don’t think they are using the children as anchor babies.


59 posted on 07/20/2007 9:10:46 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: penowa

There is only one version of the facts in this case.

Don’t be overtaken by the emotion of the WND story...it’s extremely reckless, and borderline irresponsible.

Do some reading.

And thinking.


60 posted on 07/20/2007 9:10:53 PM PDT by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-155 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson