2014届高考英语二轮阅读理解精英训练精品题：20.docVIP

2014高考英语二轮阅读理解精英训练精品题（20）及答案 高考英语冲刺阅读理解专项-----A It’s no secret that many children would be healthier and happier with adoptive parents than with the parents that nature dealt them. That’s especially true of children of children who remain in abusive homes because the law blindly favors biological parents. It’s also true of children who suffer for years in foster homes because of parents who can’t or won’t care for them but refuse to give up custody (监护) rights. Fourteen-year-old Kimberly Mays fits neither description, but her recent court victoty could eventually help children who do. Kimberly has been the object of an angry custody battle between the man who raised her and her biological parents, with whom she has never lived. A Florida judge ruled that the teenager can remain with the only father she’s ever known and that her biological parents have “no legal right” on her. The ruling, though it may yet be reversed, sets aside the principle that biology is the primary determinant of parentage. That’s an important development, though not so much in time. Shorly after birth in December 1978, Kimberly Mays and another baby were mistakenly switched and sent home with the wrong parents. Kimberly’s biological parents, Ernest and Regina Twigg, received a child who died of a heart disease in 1988. Medical tests showed that the child wasn’t the Twiggs’ own daughter, but Kim only was, thus causing a custody battle with Robert Mays. In 1989, the two families agreed that Mr. Mays would continue to have custody with the Twiggs getting visiting rights. Those rights were ended when Mr. Mays decided that Kimberly was being harmed. The decision to leave Kimberly with Mr. Mays caused people to debate her suit. But the judge made clear that Kimberly did have rights to make a decision on her own behalf. Thus he made clear that she was more than just possession to be handled as adults saw it. Certainly, the biological link between parent and child is important. But biological parents