OCR Text |
Show LIU FOSTER PARENTS AND A MOTHER S RIGHT The supreme court of Utah had a puzzling problem to solve in deciding , whether the 4 year-old son of M i Belle Hansen should be taken from his foster parents and restored to his mother 'The (oun was divided, though a majority held in favor of the foster parents Tho child was born out of wedlock ' Later the mother married and her husband, discovering that the bal J was an illegitimate threatened lo leave her Under the mental stress i the mother gave her child to the Call-1 llornin Society for ihe Prevention of Cruelty to Children and the society found a good home for the little one in the family of Mr. and Mrs dray. Repenting, the mother, after a laps ' of two years, sought to recover hv 1 child. Fustics Btraupi in his dissenting opinion, held that the evidence show-! . ihe surrender of the child b;. Itl mother was under "irresistible- mental pressure ' There bolnc nothing to Show thai the mother is not hol! fit io rear the child, he 6ald the mother's moth-er's claim is superior to any legal Is sue that may be invoked. Thai would appeal to ihe average pi r ,ii as good Judgment, but the ma jority of the court answers' 'We ome now to the question ol ther, under all I've factl and ( :r unistances of law, the social and intellectual in-tellectual training and future happi imss of the child would he better promoted pro-moted if given to the custody of lis mother or allol to remain with ;is foster parents." Thai is the para mount issue, it is held, and thou.li the fitness of Mrs Hansen to rear her child Is not questioned at anj point, ihe higher court rules ihat she inns' create a burden of proof to show thai the fosier parents are not doing their full duly by the fluid. By such I proof only can the contract of adoption adop-tion be annulled not because of the ' legal issue, but purely on a basis '. the . hilij'p bi'Si Interests, the cour: holds. In concurring in the opiuion, Chi ; Justice Prick declare3 chat 'lillo ae ia ni full sympathy with th mother ly Instinct of Mrs Hansen to recover possession of hor bah, unprejudiced iudgmon points unequivocally to the conclusion that the Interests of the child will be best served In the session of the foster parents. Tim, affections of the child have become entwined Inseparably about those of its foster parents, and to break those ties would be but to open old wounds j and expose the child to a future the i certainty of which Is not nearly eo ovident as the future it is llkoly to find under its present conditions, Chief Justice Frlck hold6 The court made no mistake. A mother who will give up her child for a man Is not the very beat mother Furthermore, after two .vara, the baby no doubt has become attached to the foster parents and they In turn have come to love the child as their own. To tear the child from those s (lections would make a farce of the legal proceedings which today allow children to be adopted. Had it been shown that the child had been abused or the environment wsb bad, then tho mother's claim to repoeses9lon might bo considered bo', cause of the foster parents forfeiting their right to the child by failure to do their whole duty. oo |