【新唐人2013年02月07日讯】24年来收养上百位弃婴的河南兰考“爱心妈妈”袁厉害，日前被媒体指责是一位“房妈”。杂志还把袁厉害刻画成拥有至少20套房，并且分等级对待弃婴等“精明、狡猾、心思缜密”的《厉害女士》。报导让袁家人再次叹息好人难做。这篇报导是否可信？
5号，袁厉害的女婿郭海洋在博客上发文表示，人民出版社《人物》杂志的报导纯属诬陷，郭海洋对报导中的各种指控一一做出了解释。
他表示，岳母只有4套房子，可在当地房管所土地局查证；所谓对弃婴“分等级”，是孩子多的时候，让亲戚、邻居帮着代养一些疾病较轻的孩子，疾病较重的就留在了袁厉害的身边；至于“开发房产”等，是有些建筑开发商借用袁厉害的社会名声来出售房屋，而袁厉害视情况收取一点辛苦费，来补贴孩子们的生计。
杂志在《厉害女士》文章中的指控是否属实？为此，《新唐人》采访了兰考当地的居民。
《新唐人》记者：“一则消息说，袁厉害有20套房产，您知道吗？”
兰考居民:“不可能！没有，哪有20套房？那不可能，那是谣言。”
记者:“还有人说，她收养的孩子分三等啊？”
兰考居民：“她的孩子有的是白化，有的是豁子，有的是痴呆症。她养活的尽是这玩意儿孩子，哪有好胳膊、好腿给她来养活。”
知名媒体人韩福东在《华商报》发表文章说，“袁厉害不可能没有私心与缺点，这毋庸置疑。但《厉害女士》却的确想走得更远些，从而逾越了媒体所应遵循的边界与伦理。请将袁厉害还原为一个人，不神化，不妖魔化。而如果没有证据证明她在收养弃婴上存在严重的谎言与欺骗，妖魔化无疑是更大的一种主观恶意。”
媒体人魏英杰分析，这篇报导颠覆了公众对袁厉害此前的印象，却又有点语焉不详。另一方面，报导在下结论的地方却又有些凭空臆测成分。
北京大学博士断桥指出，《南方周末》之前根据同样的材料，写出了一篇完全不同的稿子，标题为《兰考大火之前的“弃婴王国”》。 《厉害女士》的报导和其他同行较劲的意思很大，有妖魔化的倾向。
《厉害女士》再次把袁厉害推上了舆论的风口浪尖。郭海洋对大陆媒体表示，袁厉害本人愿意接受调查，公开所有财产状态，以证清白。大量网友表示声援。
网友说，“当官的不公开财产，做慈善的倒要公开，很搞笑的。”
另有网友留言表示:“调虎离山吗？当地民政干嘛的？干嘛讨论袁干嘛干嘛，不讨论民政干嘛干嘛。”、“揭露袁厉害的人，用心是非常险恶的！是不是想扼杀、泯灭当前社会本已所剩无几的良知？”
大陆网络作家荆楚：“这场大火以后，有关部门可能对她进行了打击报复等等形式，这样的打击报复，那就更加不会有人信的。”
郭海洋在博客文章的最后说：“都说好人一生平安，好人好报、我现在静下心来仔细的想一想、看一看突然醒悟，原来现实中的社会竟是这样的残酷！我们爱心的萌芽也逐渐枯萎……只剩下了痛痛……做人难，做好人更难！”
相同的叹息，人们早从2006年底的“南京彭宇案”中听到，相同的苦果，人们已从2011年底“佛山小悦悦”事件中尝到。一次又一次，人们心中对善良的憧憬被破坏。现在的中国，究竟是怎么了。
采访/陈汉 编辑/尚燕 后制/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?
