March 2, 2004
Culture Clash with Only One Loser
In a child custody case in Tennessee, two couples fight over the future of a 5 year old girl. The He family and the Baker family. The He family is Asian, the Baker family is white. The Hes are from China, the Baker family is from Tennessee. Five years ago, when their daughter, Anna Mae was born, the Hes were in poor financial shape and unable to care for their child. Now, their finances have improved, and they would like their child back. If it ended there, it would be too easy.
The Baker family doesn't want to give Anna Mae back. In 1998, they entered into a temporary custody agreement with the Hes. Through this agreement, the Bakers would care for the child until the Hes could care for her. The agreement was never fully explained to the Hes, and required the Bakers and a judge to consent to the return of the child. It doesn't stop there. The Bakers argue that Anna Mae has and will have a better life with her them in the United States than the Hes can provide in China. While this may be true, is it fair for them to decide the future of this child? Do the birth parents not have the right to raise their child? They should be allowed to. The Baker family has no right to assert that the He family is less capable in raising Anna Mae just because they are going to raise her in China.
Never mind that the Bakers wanted to adopt a child and raise them in a Christian home. That's a whole other issue. On a positive note, the Bakers have had to sell their home to pay for their lawyers.
- NY Times: Chinese and American Cultures Clash in Custody Battle for Girl
Posted by tien mao in Culture at 2:17 PM
There's a lot at play here. In thinking about it from all sides, the real loser is the kid, just as you cite. I have serious issues with an adoption/guardian clause that states that is temporary "until the family can care for the child again." While this is foster care, I think that the fact that it's an international issue complicates things. It's one thing to shuffle a kid between families in one location. It's another to ship a kid off to another country for "a better life" and then shuffle her back. There's absolutely no continuity. How could people do that to a child? They're both at fault. Adopt to adopt, don't take in child on a temporary basis and then expect that she's yours forever. And on the other end, if you plan to give your child up temporarily, don't send her to a family overseas. I'm sure that I'm missing a lot of information about China, adoption, and foster care laws...so please correct me if I'm wrong. It just infuriates me when people yank children around like this.
Posted by: corie at March 2, 2004 3:00 PM
actually, i think the hes were already here when they gave the child up for temporary care.
as far as china, there are lots of children in china that are unwanted, most of which happen to be girls. some of them are adopted by foreign parents, some are not. it's tragic, but this family seems to want their child, so why not let them have her back?
Posted by: tien at March 2, 2004 3:07 PM
I was quite upset after reading the article this morning, what I gathered from the articles is that the adoption agency took advantage of the Hes, by not disclosing what kind of agreement they were entering. And that from the start the Bakers never had the intentions of return custody of the child to the He's.
And the Bakers argument that the child would have a better life in the US because they will have the financial wealth to better support her is total bullshit! How does breaking up a family do any good for the child.
No matter how many time I hear about things like this, it's still mind boggling to me the whole idea of seeking to terminate someone's parental rights. Family is family, no amount of legal process can change that.
Posted by: Keith at March 2, 2004 4:57 PM
exactly keith. and why do they need more children? they already have four. i think they are trying to start some sort of cult.
Posted by: tien at March 2, 2004 6:34 PM
I'm from Tennessee and living in China and this is the first I've heard about this case. Damn, this is embarrassing.
Posted by: Brian R. Ruckle at March 3, 2004 11:52 AM
This is very sad. I mean, the child is definitely the victim here, even though she is clearly much loved. I hope the judge takes into account the many factors (culture, quality of life, motivations).
I'm also unimpressed that the one photo the Times publishes with the story has the Chinese family eating Chinese food with chopsticks. Chinese food may be very accepted, but it still makes they seem very "foreign" to use chopsticks.
Posted by: Jen at March 3, 2004 12:21 PM
brian, there are tennesseans (?) in china?
the print verstion also had a picture of the american couple. no "typical" stuff for them though. unless you count ties and such as typical white person gear.
Posted by: tien at March 3, 2004 12:35 PM
Yep, there are a few of us living over here in the PRC.
You ought to come check out are blog community over here in Asia. We have a really nice group blog called LivinginChina.com. Also, if you do write often about Asia you might want to join The China Blog list over at Sinosplice. He has an overseas category.
Posted by: Brian R. Ruckle at March 3, 2004 6:23 PM
i mean, it makes sense brian. but i guess you never really think of it. i don't really write that often about asia. just when something catches my eye.
how did you find the adjustment from tenn. to china?
Posted by: tien at March 3, 2004 6:55 PM
Each side is saying something different. Both cannot be telling the truth. What is clear is that this child has been in the care and custody of the Baker's since she was three weeks old. She is now five years old. On one side she would be ripped from the only parents (at least to her) she has ever known and sent with strangers to a country she does not know. On the other side she would be reunited with her birth parents and the process of becoming a family would start. Either way the child loses. I wish there was a way that she could stay where she is and yet have free contact with her birth family. So sad!!
Posted by: Ryan Ubanks at March 24, 2004 6:09 PM
Post a comment






Ryan Ubanks: Each side is saying something different. Both cannot be telling the truth. Wha... {read on}
tien: i mean, it makes sense brian. but i guess you never really think of it. i don'... {read on}
Brian R. Ruckle: Yep, there are a few of us living over here in the PRC. You ought to come check... {read on}
tien: brian, there are tennesseans (?) in china? the print verstion also had a pictur... {read on}
Jen: This is very sad. I mean, the child is definitely the victim here, even though ... {read on}
Brian R. Ruckle: I'm from Tennessee and living in China and this is the first I've heard about th... {read on}
tien: exactly keith. and why do they need more children? they already have four. i ... {read on}
Keith: I was quite upset after reading the article this morning, what I gathered from t... {read on}
tien: actually, i think the hes were already here when they gave the child up for temp... {read on}
corie: There's a lot at play here. In thinking about it from all sides, the real loser... {read on}