Way too many conclusions are being drawn here based upon a really poorly written article. It's a currently pending contested litigation and the article writer apparently only interviewed the birth parents and presents only their interpretation of what happened in court. So we are dependent upon a highly biased (wacko) layman's view of rather technical legal issues and questions.
Third parties like us trying to evaluate what actually happened is near impossible, but it appears to me that only some sort of preliminary ruling occured with the main hearing yet to happen.
Given the basic standard applied in these cases (what is in the best interests of the child) it's not too surprising to me what apparently has happened so far.