PROFILPELAJAR.COM

Save Lily

Save Lily is an online campaign held by a freebirth[1][2] parent of Tsang Wai-bong (曾偉邦) and Kwan Pui-sin (關佩仙) in Hong Kong. It urges taking back the custody of their daughter, Lily, who was taken by the Swedish authorities in 2023 due to health conditions and welfare concerns. The Hong Kong authorities arrested the parents in 2026 after they refused to do a DNA test for their son, Danny.

Timeline

Background

Born in 1983, Tsang Wai-bong is a former physiotherapist.[3] He claimed that he had physiotherapist certifiation issued by Finland and the UK.[4][5] Kwan Pui-sin is a former teacher. After dating Tsang, Kwan agreed to move to Finland in 2016. Tsang studied at a university in Finland at the time.[6]

The couple is a part of the freebirth movement.[1][2] Their first daughter, Constance, was born at their home in Finland in 2019, but died after one month.[3][1][7] Finland later charged the couple with "abandonment" and "negligent homicide", but dropped the charge afterwards.[8]

Custody of Lily

The couple's second daughter, Lily, was also born at home in October 2021. She did not have a birth certificate since the Finnish authorities believed that Lily was a Hong Kong resident rather than a local Finnish resident. The family moved to the Finland–Sweden border after the refusal.[3][9]

In December 2023, the Swedish authorities arrested the couple when they found a large amount of cash, and removed Lily from the couple due to health conditions and welfare concerns over the child.[10][1][9] Lily lived with an adoptive family in Sweden.[10] In March 2024, Linköping court supported Swedish authorities.[11] The couple later moved to Hong Kong and launched an online campaign called "Save Lily", attempting to take Lily back. Their campaign caught public attention in 2026.[1][12]

Danny

The couple's third child and first son, Danny, was born in April 2026. They refused to take a DNA test for Danny's birth registration due to privacy concerns and their religious beliefs.[10][9] Danny was, therefore, not registered in Hong Kong for weeks.[7][10] According to an interview with Commercial Radio Hong Kong on 2 June 2026, Tsang claimed that he would take a DNA test for Danny only if the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal order them to do so.[4][8]

On the same day, Hong Kong police arrested the couple for child neglect and not registering Danny's birth. In Hong Kong, it is a criminal offence for anyone to fail to register the birth of a child deliberately.[7][10] The couple first opposed the DNA tests, but eventually agreed on 3 June. The Hong Kong government later confirmed that the couple are Danny's biological parents.[13]

On 26 June 2026, the West Kowloon Magistrates' Courts [zh] ordered that Danny's protection order be extended for three years, meaning the couple lose custody of Danny for 3 years.[2]

Reception

Peter Douglas Koon criticised the couple as "abnornal" and "unthinkable". He also supported the Swedish authorities taking Lily, believing that they are protecting children.[14][15]

Initium Media cited a commentary by Wong Kwun Lun (黃冠麟) of HK01, who described the action from Swedish authorities as the "last resort maintaining safety net" (最後安全網) for parents who failed to guarantee a basic living for a child. Wong also suggested that "protecting children is a universal consensus in civil society".[11][16]

Doreen Kong expressed her opinion in Hong Kong Economic Journal over Save Lily, noting that public attention over the incident shifted from Lily's custody to concerns about Danny's environment. She suggested that it reflects society's growing trend toward child protection. She also compared the intervention threshold for child protection between Hong Kong and Singapore.[17]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Tse, Hans (25 June 2026). "HK 'free birth' couple hope to reunite with son Danny under gov't supervision". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  2. ^ a b c Tse, Hans (26 June 2026). "Hong Kong 'free birth' couple lose custody of baby Danny for 3 years". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  3. ^ a b c Yu, Theodora; Sun, Fiona (3 June 2026). "Sweden outlines child care policy amid registration row over infant in Hong Kong". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  4. ^ a b "【Save Lily發起人同881晴朗主持激辯！】係咩宗教令到佢地拒絕交DNA？". Commercial Radio Hong Kong. 2026-06-02. Retrieved 2026-06-03.
  5. ^ 容惠玲. "Save Lily專訪丨非常父母相識到戀愛過程全曝光 無悔棄教職赴芬蘭只為1原因回應領綜援疑雲". Hong Kong Economic Times (in Traditional Chinese). Retrieved 2026-07-04.
  6. ^ "香港「在家分娩」父母跨國虐兒疑雲：我們目前所知多少". BBC (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). 2026-06-04. Retrieved 2026-06-04.
  7. ^ a b c Liu, Oscar; Chow, Fiona (2 June 2026). "Protection order sought for baby after parents arrested in DNA test refusal case". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  8. ^ a b 羅嘉欣 (2026-06-03). "Save Lily 事件｜兒子淪無證黑戶「Save Lily」港爸強調1情況下才肯交DNA　高學歷職業曝光曾到芬蘭留學". Hong Kong Economic Times (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2026-06-04.
  9. ^ a b c "在家分娩幼子無出世紙兼未獲正規照顧　港人父母拒交DNA涉疏忽照顧被捕". Pulse HK (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). 2026-06-02. Retrieved 2026-06-03.
  10. ^ a b c d e Chan, Irene (2 June 2026). "HK couple arrested for child neglect after refusing DNA test for 'free birth' baby boy". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  11. ^ a b "Save Lily 風波：拒驗DNA的港人父母，與兩個沒有身份的孩子｜Whatsnew". Initium Media. 2026-06-03. Retrieved 2026-07-04.
  12. ^ "ID-limbo baby concern rises over 'Save Lily' couple - RTHK". RTHK. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  13. ^ Lee, James (4 June 2026). "'Free birth' couple confirmed as parents of infant boy after DNA test - reports". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 5 July 2026.
  14. ^ "Save-LilyDanny父聲稱宗教理由拒驗DNA-管浩鳴感匪夷所思-醫生家中分娩風險極高". Sing Tao Daily. 2026-06-03. Retrieved 2026-07-04.
  15. ^ "非常父母在家誕幼子-至今無出世紙-社福界斥偏離常人做法-入境處須確定無可疑才辦出生登記". Sing Tao Daily. 2026-06-01. Retrieved 2026-07-04.
  16. ^ 黃冠麟 (2026-06-02). "「Save Lily」的潘朵拉盒子——嚴斥奇行父母的自私考慮". HK01 (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2026-07-04.
  17. ^ Kong, Doreen (2026-06-05). "Save Lily事件暴露香港保護兒童短板". Hong Kong Economic Journal (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2026-07-04.

Further reading

  • Case Numbers 9070-23, 9347-23 och 187-24 (Dok.Id 635538) (Matter: Beredande av vård samt överklagande av beslut om placering respektive umgängesbegränsning enligt lagen (1990:52) med särskilda bestämmelser om vård av unga (LVU)) (Report). Förvaltningsrätten i Linköping (Administrative Court in Linköping). 2024-03-01. p. 1.

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.