Like many others, my knee jerk reaction to this story was that the Tuohys probably screwed him over. That's the direction most of the headlines and articles were leaning, and I already had a vague impression that their original motives were to get a star football recruit to attend their alma mater, moreso than to genuinely help out a high school student with difficult life circumstances. So it was kinda easy not to like them, just from the general angle of rich Ole Miss boosters have shady dealings.
The more I read about it though, I'm struggling to understand what the Tuohys specific transgression was, at least regarding these new allegations, both from Oher and the media.
People seem up in arms about the conservatorship vs. adoption part. Why? Is this due to a perception that he didn't have financial independence or that they somehow exploited his finances? Is there any evidence of that? It seems Michael Oher has been aware of the conservatorship for a long time, so if it was problematic for him in any way, why didn't he dissolve it?
Do people have an emotional preference for a legal adoption because it sounds like they truly welcomed him into their family? According to that quote from Michael, which was supposedly many years ago, he knew about the conservatorship all along and it didn't matter because they felt like family. Why would it suddenly be offensive many years later?
Or is this all about him not receiving proceeds from The Blind Side? The counter from the Tuohys is claiming he did receive an equal cut, which should be a pretty easy thing to prove. Also, it seems we are talking about a grand total of less than $100k, which is peanuts compared to their fast food proceeds and his NFL earnings. If they didn't give him a cut, that's foolish for people in that financial situation. If they did give him an equal share, then what exactly is the problem? If this is all over <$100k, then both sides would be much better off squaring up privately. Someone is going to look pretty foolish when the dust settles.