Do you agree or disagree with what this Sheriff has to say?

All I know is that if I tried to put my kid (any of them) on a plane halfway across the world with a STRANGER to pick them up once they landed my a$$ would be hauled into jail so fast it would make your head spin... But I'm not an AP so I wouldn't get any preferential treatment based on how selfless I am.

It doesn't matter what the sheriff _thinks_. He gets to apply the law as it stands. If it's illegal for a seven year old and legal for an eight year old, then it's absolutely most important whether the boy was 7 or 8.

What I don't get is why the fact the child was adopted is even relevant. The adoption had been finalised, right? He was (is?) legally her son? In that case, it should be legally exactly the same as if she'd put her biological child on an unaccompanied flight to Russia to be met by a stranger.

The video link didn't work for me-- it may have become outdated. So my words are without having seen that. But...

One thing you have to bear in mind is that this woman lives in Tennessee, and Tennessee does not have laws specifically criminalizing child abandonment. For her to be prosecuted, this would have to be ruled abuse or neglect, or would have to fall under a federal statute, or would have to be prosecuted under Russian law with cooperation from the US courts to extradite.

In general, I don't think it matters from a moral standpoint whether the child is seven or eight, but from a legal standpoint, it could. Airline and federal regulations about unaccompanied minors may very well distinguish between those two ages if that happens to be their cutoff.

If Tennessee had legal penalties for abandonment, this would not be an issue. It doesn't. So they're having to get her on what they can. To get her on what they can, the child's age and the applicable transit regulations do make a difference in this specific case. It may seem picky, but chances are if they don't get picky, she'll get off with no punishment at all because of a quirk in state law.

No Matter What The Sheriff Or Anyone For That Matter Has To Say About The Different Laws (Local,State,Federal,Or International) That May Have Been Broken In This Horrible Act Of Inhumanity, It's The Clear Cut Disregard & Unacceptable Treatment Of A Child's Human Rights.

Sadly This Is Just Another Story Of Many, That Emphasizes The Reality Of Human Flesh Being Bought & Sold As Just Another "Commodity". And Just Like Any Other "Commodity" In This Day Of Age, If It Turns Out To Be Not What We Really Wanted Or Broken It's Simply Tossed Out & Easily Replaced. Adoption Regulations & Laws Must Drastically Change, In All Parts Of The World.

"Bless The Children..........................................Gods Speed"

There are children all across the country who are sent unaccompanied by airplane to their non-custodial parent. The airlines have an age limit. Clearly, he fit that.

It's the pickup up at the airport by a stranger is what I thought not good. I also thought that the grandmother should have accompanied him since they claimed he was mentally ill.

“United Airlines allows unaccompanied children as young as 5 years old on direct flights. Children age 8 and above can catch connecting flights, as well”so it's not that unusual.

While I he did mention that the age of the boy was one of the issues, his last statement (paraphrase - that there are a lot of issues to untangle here) was what I took away from the interview.

My take was that there was really no definitive opinion to either agree or disagree with here - he appeared somewhat taken aback by the whole situation, and I got the feeling that he hadn't formed any definite opinion yet because of lack of information.

If the airlines allow it, then I doubt it's against the law, no matter what his age was - I dunno about America, but I know they certainly have laws over here about what ages kids can travel unaccompanied.

Personally, I don't think it's the unaccompanied travel that was the major danger, it was the unknown person the other end who'd been paid to go to collect the boy from the airport that was the biggest issue.

Kids have been travelling unaccompanied for at least a century or so - it's not usually horrible, it's usually an adventure. But then this kid wasn't your average, everyday, well looked after kid who'd spent a happy and productive childhood learning how to deal with an adult world.

I don't know what they're planning on doing to her, but she absolutely needs to be charged with something like reckless child endangerment, if nothing else.

Surely there are some federal laws at play here as well. Somehow I doubt that the investigation stops with the local sheriff.

As far as I'm concerned, the most important issue here is that adoption has become a consumer driven market instead of a mechanism for child welfare. Many people choose international adoption for extremely selfish purposes. They simply want to avoid any possibility of future entanglements with the child's natural family. That is NOT in the best interest of the child's welfare. That's just pure selfishness on the part of the purchaser. This is just one example of an extremely predictable consequence of the industry catering to that sort of client.

Personally, I think that sometimes what is legal is not necessarily ethical.

I personally do not blame Russia for being offended and what was that adopted family thinking in the first place?