Sunday, October 22, 2006

Adopted child or trendy accessory?

I wonder if rich celebrities like Madonna and Angelina Jolie have to go through the strict, tedious, frustrating and sometimes agonizing scrutiny that my brother and his wife had to when they spent over a year going through the process of adopting their child from Guatemala? Or is it more like a shopping for shoes for the superstars? If millionaire stars really want to help, one million of their dollars could help many children and their whole families instead of just exploiting one child for publicity.

9 comments:

Tommy said...

That cartoon would have been even more hard hitting if the prospective adopters were a same sex couple.

Stardust said...

It sure would have been, tommy.

BTW - I notice a certain chicken is pecking around your parts. I know you don't want to get into mud slinging on your blog so I will say it here -- she may provoke you to it after a short while.

Jewish Atheist said...

I don't think it's fair to say they're exploiting those children. Do you think they're going to give them away when they hit 12? Your point about preferential treatment of celebrities, if true, is a good one, but their adoption of poor orphans has got to do more harm than good.

Stardust said...

ja - did you mean to say it will do more good than harm?

The adopted kids most likely will be raised by nannies and tutors. I am sure some have good intentions, and
who really knows what is in their minds, but my point really was why separate these kids away from the parents. Why not bring a family here and get them educated and into jobs and able to raise their own kids? Why just ONE kid when you have money to support the entire family and even a whole village? If these millionaire stars and billionaire stars really wanted to do something, look what they could accomplish by actually pooling their resources instead of hording insane amounts of money for themselves and their estates with pastures filled with pastel-dyed sheep. (Madonna has sheep on her farm in Scotland and dyed them all pastel colors.)

Jewish Atheist said...

ja - did you mean to say it will do more good than harm?

Oops, yes. Thanks.

who really knows what is in their minds, but my point really was why separate these kids away from the parents.

I've been assuming those kids are orphans, not that celebrities are ripping them away from their biological parents! Do you have any evidence that there are biological parents involved?

Why not bring a family here and get them educated and into jobs and able to raise their own kids? Why just ONE kid when you have money to support the entire family and even a whole village?

I don't see a lack of doing more voluntary good as taking away from the good someone is doing. Moreover, I don't know about Madonna, but Angelina Jolie has certainly done a lot more for Africans than just adopt a few of them.

If these millionaire stars and billionaire stars really wanted to do something, look what they could accomplish by actually pooling their resources instead of hording insane amounts of money for themselves and their estates with pastures filled with pastel-dyed sheep.

Again, that they could do more doesn't take away from what they do in my mind. Otherwise, I'd have to criticize myself for blogging rather than being out there fighting for the poor and dispossessed 24 hours a day. :-)

As for the pastel-dyed sheep, all I can say about that is W. T. F.???

Stardust said...

I've been assuming those kids are orphans, not that celebrities are ripping them away from their biological parents! Do you have any evidence that there are biological parents involved?

Yes, it's been on the news that the biological father of the child is now saying he didn't know that he would be giving away his son, David for good and now has a problem with the papers he signed. He is seeking to reverse the move.
Madonna's adopted baby's father tells how he was powerless to stop her

and

Boston Globe

Quote: "If we were told that she wants to take the baby as her own we could not have consented, because I see no reason why I should give away my son," he said. Banda's wife died shortly after childbirth, and he left his son with the orphanage. He lost two children in infancy to malaria. Banda said he is illiterate and so had no idea of the significance of the adoption papers he signed in the High Court in the capital, Lilongwe . "Mr. Kilembe and the pastor explained to me that Madonna would take care of my son. I am just realizing now the meaning of adoption," he said, claiming that he has no copies of adoption documents. "All the documents are with Mr. Kilembe," he said.

My beef isn't with them adopting unwanted children, but it seems as in Madonna's case she actually DID rip the child away from the family...via lies and misrepresentation.

I know I could be doing more than criticize people like Madonna, however, since they come back and rub these actions in the face of the public like "look how good and awesome we are" then their actions would be highly commended. There are many other stars who have adopted that never "flaunt" it. Mia Farrow has adopted 4 from around the world, for example. (Woody Allen married one of them *shiver*)

My own brother and his wife recently adopted a poor child from Guatemala paying a huge sum of money in legal fees and expenses. However, they were scrutinized with a fine tooth comb right down to a petty teenaged shoplifting incident of a $2 ring when my sis in law was a kid. That tiny incident was almost the deal breaker. Fortunately everything turned out well. The child is doing really well.

Stardust said...

My beef isn't with them adopting unwanted children, but it seems as in Madonna's case she actually DID rip the child away from the family...via lies and misrepresentation.

And I just want to say instead of taking advantage of the illiterate father who had no idea of the meaning of adoption (via the help of a PASTOR), she could have helped the child's father along with the child, and that would have been a more compassionate thing to do. That is how I would have spent my money if I had it. If the parents are living, and nonabusive then all should be done to keep them together unless the parents HONESTLY want their child to be given away for good.

The child was in an orphanage, but that isn't permanent. When my grandfather left my grandmother with 7 kids to raise and a farm to run, she had a nervous breakdown and the kids were sent to various relatives, and two of them were temporarily placed in an orphanage. She got them back two years later when she got on her feet again.

Jewish Atheist said...

Obviously, if Madonna took a child away against it's parent's wishes, I have a big problem with that. I thought they were adopting orphans.

Stardust said...

ja - I thought they were adopting orphans, too. I was surprised when I read that the father was alive and had to sign papers, etc. I don't know if the parents of the child Angelina Jolie adopted are alive. I haven't found anything on that yet.