单选题 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 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 (收养孩子的家庭) 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 victory could eventually help children who do. Kimberly has been the object of an angry custody baffle 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 claim" 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, one that"s long overdue. Shortly after birth in December 1978, Kimberly Mays and another infant 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 Kimberly was, thus sparking a custody battle with Robert Mays. In 1989, the two families agreed that Mr. Mays would maintain 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 rendered her suit debated. But the judge made clear that Kimberly did have standing to sue (起诉) on her own behalf. Thus he made clear that she was more than just property to be handled as adults saw fit. Certainly, the biological link between parent and child is fundamental. But biological parents aren"t always preferable to adoptive ones, and biological parentage does not convey an absolute ownership that cancels all the rights of children. (357 words)
单选题 What was the primary consideration in the Florida judge"s ruling?
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析：本题属于细节推断题。文章第三段提到“The ruling…sets aside the principle that biology is the primary determinant of parentage”，由此可知法院并未将血缘上的联系作为评判的标准，排除选项A，C、D在文中未提到。只有选项B可从第五段“But the judge made clear that Kimberly did have standing to sue on her own behalf”这里找到依据。
单选题 We can learn from the Kimberly case that______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析：本题属于主题推断题。文章第五段说“Thus he made clear that she was more than just property to be handled as adults saw fit”，虽然这是法官的观点，但从最后一段来看，作者是赞同这一观点的，因此选项A正确。B与文意恰好相反，C、D都过于绝对，不可选。
单选题 The Twiggs claimed custody rights to Kimberly because______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析：本题属于细节理解题。文章在第四段讲述了案件发生的始末。正是因为Twigg夫妇发现他们死去的孩子不是自己亲生，而Kimberly才是，他们才开始与Robert Mays争夺监护权。选项A没有根据；选项B虽在文中有所提及，但不是他们诉诸法律的根本原因；选项D在文中没有提到。
单选题 Kimberly had been given to Mr. Mays______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析：本题属于细节判断题。由第四段内容(见上题详解)，可判断Kimberly之所以成为Mays先生的养女是由于“mistakenly switched”(抱错了)，这里的“mistakenly”直接对应A中的“accident”，所以本题选A。
单选题 The author"s attitude towards the judge"s ruling could be described as______.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析：本题属于观点态度判断题。作者的态度可从文章第一段和最后一段得出结论，文章第一句就说“many children would be healthier and happier with adoptive parents than with the parents that nature dealt them”(许多孩子与养父母一起生活会比与亲生父母在一起更健康更幸福)；最后一段又说“biological parents aren’t always preferable to adoptive ones”，(亲生父母并不总是比养父母更适合养他们的)，由此可知作者对法官的判决是持支持态度的。