【新唐人2013年02月07日訊】24年來收養上百位棄嬰的河南蘭考「愛心媽媽」袁厲害，日前被媒體指責是一位「房媽」。雜誌還把袁厲害刻畫成擁有至少20套房，並且分等級對待棄嬰等「精明、狡猾、心思縝密」的《厲害女士》。報導讓袁家人再次嘆息好人難做。這篇報導是否可信？
5號，袁厲害的女婿郭海洋在博客上發文表示，人民出版社《人物》雜誌的報導純屬誣陷，郭海洋對報導中的各種指控一一做出了解釋。
他表示，岳母只有4套房子，可在當地房管所土地局查證；所謂對棄嬰「分等級」，是孩子多的時候，讓親戚、鄰居幫著代養一些疾病較輕的孩子，疾病較重的就留在了袁厲害的身邊；至於「開發房產」等，是有些建築開發商借用袁厲害的社會名聲來出售房屋，而袁厲害視情況收取一點辛苦費，來補貼孩子們的生計。
雜誌在《厲害女士》文章中的指控是否屬實？爲此，《新唐人》採訪了蘭考當地的居民。
《新唐人》記者：「一則消息說，袁厲害有20套房產，您知道嗎？」
蘭考居民:「不可能！沒有，哪有20套房？那不可能，那是謠言。」
記者:「還有人說，她收養的孩子分三等啊？」
蘭考居民：「她的孩子有的是白化，有的是豁子，有的是痴呆症。她養活的儘是這玩意兒孩子，哪有好胳膊、好腿給她來養活。」
知名媒體人韓福東在《華商報》發表文章說，「袁厲害不可能沒有私心與缺點，這毋庸置疑。但《厲害女士》卻的確想走得更遠些，從而逾越了媒體所應遵循的邊界與倫理。請將袁厲害還原為一個人，不神化，不妖魔化。而如果沒有證據證明她在收養棄嬰上存在嚴重的謊言與欺騙，妖魔化無疑是更大的一種主觀惡意。」
媒體人魏英傑分析，這篇報導顛覆了公眾對袁厲害此前的印象，卻又有點語焉不詳。另一方面，報導在下結論的地方卻又有些憑空臆測成分。
北京大學博士斷橋指出，《南方週末》之前根據同樣的材料，寫出了一篇完全不同的稿子，標題為《蘭考大火之前的“棄嬰王國”》。 《厲害女士》的報導和其他同行較勁的意思很大，有妖魔化的傾向。
《厲害女士》再次把袁厲害推上了輿論的風口浪尖。郭海洋對大陸媒體表示，袁厲害本人願意接受調查，公開所有財產狀態，以證清白。大量網友表示聲援。
網友說，「當官的不公開財產，做慈善的倒要公開，很搞笑的。」
另有網友留言表示:「調虎離山嗎？當地民政幹嘛的？幹嘛討論袁幹嘛幹嘛，不討論民政幹嘛幹嘛。」、「揭露袁厲害的人，用心是非常險惡的！是不是想扼殺、泯滅當前社會本已所剩無幾的良知？」
大陸網絡作家荊楚：「這場大火以後，有關部門可能對她進行了打擊報復等等形式，這樣的打擊報復，那就更加不會有人信的。」
郭海洋在博客文章的最後說：「都說好人一生平安，好人好報、我現在靜下心來仔細的想一想、看一看突然醒悟，原來現實中的社會竟是這樣的殘酷！我們愛心的萌芽也逐漸枯萎……只剩下了痛痛……做人難，做好人更難！」
相同的嘆息，人們早從2006年底的「南京彭宇案」中聽到，相同的苦果，人們已從2011年底「佛山小悅悅」事件中嚐到。一次又一次，人們心中對善良的憧憬被破壞。現在的中國，究竟是怎麽了。
採訪/陳漢 編輯/尚燕 後製/黎安安
Official Media Accused of Defamation, Deliberate Tarring of “Charity Mother”
Yuan Lihai, known as “Charity mother” in Lankao, Henan
province, has raised over 100 abandoned and orphaned children in the past 4 years.
An official magazine recently accused her of
owning at least 20 houses and extending hierarchical treatment to her adopted kids.
Yuan was described as “shrewd, cunning, and thoughtful",
the report made the Yuan family very sad.
Is it a convincing report? And why is it so hard
to do goodness in China nowadays?
On February 5 blog post, Guo Haiyang, Yuan Lihai’s
son-in-law, accused Figures Magazine of defamation.
The magazine publisher is People’s Publishing House,
an official publisher of the Communist regime.
Guo Haiyang said that Yuan Lihai has four houses,
however, all have formal registrations.
He refuted the alleged “hierarchical treatment" of
the adopted children.
He said the truth is, relatives and neighbors are helping
to raise children suffering minor ailments, and Yuan herself raises those with major diseases.
He admitted that some building developers used Yuan’s
reputation to sell houses.
Yuan, depending on the circumstances, charges a little
money to be spent on the children’s livelihood, he says.
So, did the magazine make a truthful allegation?
an NTD reporter interviewed local residents over the phone.
NTD reporter: “Did you hear that the media said that
Yuan Lihai has 20 houses?”
Lankao residents: “Impossible! How can she get 20 houses?
No way, it’s a rumor."
NTD reporter: “It’s also said that she divides
her adopted kids into three groups, is this true?"
Lankao residents: “Of the children she raised,
some suffer from albinism, some are hare lipped, and some had dementia. All are handicapped."
Han Fudong, renowned reporter, commented on
Huashang Daily. “Yuan Lihai is unusual in that she is not selfish or weak.
But the magazine’s article really went too far beyond
the boundary of media ethics.
Please present Yuan Lihai as person,
instead of deifying or demonizing her..
If it cannot be proven she has lied and cheated in her
adoption of abandoned babies, her demonization is unwarranted and malicious."
Media professional Wei Yingjie commented in his article.
The report had overturned Yuan’s previous public image,
however, it was written in a rather vague manner.
It’s conclusion made many false presumptions,
according to Wei Yingjie.
Dr. Duan Qiao from Peking University said that previously,
Southern Weekend published a completely different report.
It’s called “Abandoned Babies Before Fire Disaster.”
He remarked that Figures Magazine’s report smacked
of vying with other media.
This would explain the need to demonize Yuan.
Figures’ article put Yuan Lihai once again
at the centre of the public’s attention.
Guo Haiyang told the media that Yuan herself would like
to be investigated and to declare all her personal assets to prove her innocence.
A large number of netizens voiced their support of Yuan.
A netizen posted, “Officials have covered up their assets,
but a person doing charity is forced to make a declaration, what an absurdity.”
Another said, “Do they just want to distract public attention?
What have local civil affair officials done?
Why did the media focus on Yuan, instead of focusing on
the Civil Affairs Department?”
“The author tarring Yuan is very malicious! Isn’t he stifling
the very little conscience that exists in this society?
(China’s cyber writer) Jing Chu: “After the fire, she might well
be attacked by the relevant authorities. But such an attack won’t convince anyone.”
Guo Haiyang ended his blog post saying,
“We all know that good people receive their reward.
But when I calm down and ponder the issue,
I realise what a cruel society it really is!
The love buds of our hearts began to wither…
leaving us only pain and bitterness…
It’s not easy to behave oneself,
It’s really so hard to be a good person”
The same cry was heard from the case of
Peng Yu in Nanjing in 2006.
The same bitterness felt on the death of toddler
Yue Yue in Foshan in 2011.
Time and again, people’s aspirations for goodness
have been smashed in China.
We are just wondering what’s wrong
with us in today’s China?