I have completely changed my mind about Madonna's adoption

[sorrell]

If she is telling the truth - and I honestly believe she is - then I would do exactly the same in her place. I thought she was taking a child from his family, but he was never visited, had had malaria and TB and had pneumonia when she saw him. She's wanted another child for five years and been planning to adopt for two. I think he will be very loved.
I have often wanted to take home one of the poor beautiful children you see in orphanages, to the point that I cannot watch footage of them on Children in Need or on the news. Just makes me cry. If I had money and influence and could do it, I would.
Now, if she would take all the Kaballah crap out of her plans for the Malawian orphanage she would go up even higher in my estimation.

I have been working on a story to do with one of the adoption charities this week, and was absolutely amazed to realise that Madonna has in fact gone through adoption preparation and thought this one through.

Which changed my mind. A lot.

And lots of us pick a likely looking sort of a bloke to serve our general children-having purposes, dammit. It's just that for many of us we have to consider stuff like attitudes to and energy for co-parenting. Which Madge didn't.

And what do we really know about Lourdes father except that he's never, ever said one word against her and sees his daughter?

I agree sorrell, and yet I also agree with custy's point.

I think her heart is in the right place. Most definitely. We are all mothers, right?

If it's a celeb "fad" it's been going on a long time. Julie Andrews adopted 2 Vietnamese orphans in 1974. Mia Farrow has adopted at least ten kids (on top of her own biological 4). George Lucas adopted decades ago...Stephen Spielberg has 2 adopted kids; Tom Cruise's kids are mixed race (& adopted in the mid 1990s). Angelina Jolie adopted a Cambodian child in 2002 and an Ethiopian baby in 2005. Were they all just following "celeb fad"? Maybe it's just a rich person's option, eh? I'd adopt desperate orphans too if I had oodles of money and good nannies to help out.

WTF not?

Am no fan of Madonna, btw.

She admitted herself that she 'used' Lourdes father purely as he fitted the 'criteria' for the child she wanted. I don't see that as putting the child's feelings/needs first.

On the other post about this, someone said she admitted she had never changed a nappy (her nor Guy) in their lives - they have 2 children???

I don't mean to be nasty or callous but I just don't think she is going to give him the time he needs to adjust to a) being in a new country (whether the other one was a sh*thole or not!) b) having new parents/siblings etc (eventhough the other ones were not around/didn't seem to care?). After all she is going to be his mother and needs to act like it.

Why then did she not pick him up - why did she get an aid to do it? Wouldn't that have been important to you?

I think she is a hypocrite. She is quoted as saying she doesn't let her kids watch any TV because of the rubbish they could see on there. Yet she let them sit front row in a recent concert of hers where she was scantily clad, chained to a cross with another scantily clad man whipping her with an S&M theme! Does that make sense or seem a good idea for two young children?

In the UK if you want to adopt they make you jump thru hoops. I know of a couple who despite several IVF attempts have no children and are progressing thru adoption. They are having to move house (and they don't have a mansion) as the SS have told them that one of them will have to give up work at least for the first few years in order to give the child stability. They are willing to do this as they are so desperate to be parents. No mention of a nanny there then? Do you think Madonna is going to look after that child all the time - she could afford to I'm sure.

Sorry but I am entitled to an opinion. I normally don't get too involved or heated about things and take a back seat but here - the issue gets my blood boiling. I see what my friend is going thru.

With regard to adoption - yes at one point we did consider adoption from abroad but thank god we were finally able to have a beautiful DD on our own (after several years of heartache). Our family is now complete so I now would not think about it. I don't know why others don't adopt abroad but it certainly was a very real possibility for us at that time.

Of course you are entitled to an opinion, but, it seems to me that you are making quite a few judgements based on very few facts.

Parents do their "job" in many and varying circumstances. Madonna's is unusual for sure, but that doesnt mean that her children wont feel loved, have the care and attention that they want and need, or live a happy and fulfilled life. She has travelled the world, I'm sure she is best placed to see to a child who is coping in a new country - she's an expat, after all. I think there are very few of us that actually know how much time she devotes to her work etc. Just because her face might be splashed over schleb mags and tabloids all day every day, doesnt mean she is doing that same thing all day every day. It is simply a snapshot of her life - quite literally in fact. There are lots of working mums, I dont think we can penalise her on that issue, can we?

As for her first child, didnt we all make decisions based on what we knew at the time before having children, but changed our minds totally about it once having given birth? Being a parent opens up a whole new world and as such our choices and decisions change accordingly. We dont take things for granted, we some some things as more important, and many things as far less important. I think you are being a little harsh. She isnt superwoman - she is just a woman.

I don't get this. Angelina Jolie is completely mad - got married first time drenched in her own blood, second time carried a vial of her husband's blood with her. Then, as a single woman, she decided to start adopting ' a child from every continent'. She was single, no family support, kissed her brother with tongues in public but wouldn't speak to her father. No experience whatsoever of being with, let along bring up children. But she's very pretty.
Madonna is not completely mad, is married, has experience of bringing up two children, is seriously involved in caring for children overseas, yet she adopts a child and the world and her husband can't wait to bitch about her. It's just wrong.

Despite what we do or don't think of Madonna, I think we need to be careful when we talk about whether or not David will be grateful for not carrying water in his village. Just because it is something that we can't imagine or find terrible doesn't mean it is. I've been reading a book about an Eitrean woman who was adopted and brought up in lovely leafy suburban England. When she turned 30 she decided to go "home" and one of the things that she regrets and has always regretted is not carrying water with her brothers and sisters. She regrets not being with her extended family and whilst grateful to her adoptive parents and being thankful for all that they had given her, and loving them immensely, it is a sense of regret and longing that she has to live with.

As I said earlier.. I don't know how I feel about Madonna and this adoption (other than it doesn't sit easily with me), but what I do know is that we need to be careful when assuming that a natural way of life for another country/culture is something that the native of that country would be mad to miss.

Not really assuming. This baby has NO brothers or sisters. They are all dead and he was abandoned by his family. He would be dead to. I don't think the choice is, happy rural life v high stress urban life, think it is literally life or death.

Superb post.

I am in agreement with Sorrell here. How many of you who are commenting on what David might have "lost" by leaving Malawi have been to Malawi or any other central African country, or worked with, or even seen, conditions in places such as the orphanage where David was?

This is the last time I am going to post on this thread (was going to leave it last night but it's been getting at me)

Yes, VVVQ I agree with what you are saying to an extent but I am forming my opinion on what facts I have read/seen over the years of Madonna (including live interviews she herself have given - so can't necessarily be misconstrued). But isn't that what everyone else is doing too? Do any of you know Madonna personally? Are they not forming opinions from they've read/seen in the press too?

And as for being nasty. I took that to heart tbh Sorrell. I didn't mean to say she won't show the child any love at all, I am sure she will, but that's not the be and end all - adoptive children need a hell of a lot of your time and I don't think she has that to give (yes she works and so do many other Mothers - that doesn't make them bad (someone has to pay the bills!) but when your work takes you away for long periods/abroad etc and you may not see your children during that time then it's a difficult one - esp with a child that will need so much time to build bond/bridges etc). I am not the only one on this post that doesn't agree in principle to this adoption. No-one jumped down Freckle's throat when she mentioned that the adoption could be to do with the colour of David's skin... and someone else also mentioned they too thought it was a 'fad'.

Maybe I came over strong (things can get v misconstrued/blown out of proportion over posts) but as I said I have a friend going thru adoption and I see how much their lives are being picked at by SS (I am sure for legitimate reasons = welfare of the child etc).

The end from me - I am off to find a post about happy fluffy bunny rabbits .

I think that the problem is that Madonna appears to be living in England, so we expect her to be going through UK adoption rules, which are very time consuming and onerous, but in fact she seems to be going through US rules, which seem to be pretty lax (or at least much more relaxed). Having heard that she sponsors several Malawi orphanages, I am much less exised on the couldn't she have provided support bit (as she is doing so already), but did think it very strange that she or Guy didn't take the child on the plane - that must have been a scary experience, and one that most new parents would have been there for. Of course she may have felt that there would be less press attention that way (although I bet that Guy wouldn't have had the attention she would have had) and that the cameras might be more scary than flying. I am a working mother, and I don't think that my childen suffer for it, but if I were adopting (and it is something I consider for the future) then I would expect to take several years out to settle the children in - it's just not the same as having your own baby.

Great posts, Marsy.

And if being a "good mother" means that you have to want to change nappies, I'm not a good mother...!

As sleb fads go it's not exactly up there with the worst of them. More positive than being a skeletal clothes horse or shoving white powder up your nose.

Not at all sure how the fact that adoption is so hard for other people detracts one iota from the fact that this one little boy will be brought up in safety with a roof over his head and food and health care. Madonna! What a cow eh?

I thought about this a lot especially about why she didn?t go over to collect the child herself. IMO if she had gone over there the media would have gone with her ? there?s no way she could have gone in and brought the child out without several hundred cameras being flashed at her and her child before he?d even left the country. Also, although as a new parents you might want to be there for the child, reality is that the child doesn?t understand that you are his/her new parent, not yet, so best to bring the child over in the manner that would be least stressful to him?

And she adopted through the US because the process is less rigorous, well if you had a US passport and you wanted to adopt can you honestly say you wouldn?t do the same? Honestly?

And it?s not just celebs who don?t give up work when they adopt. My dh?s boss adopted a little girl about 18 months ago. When she came to live with them she was 18 months old, the woman took a month off work to be with her, and then went back to work full time leaving the child with the nanny, (she also has a 4 year old son who is her?s). Within 9 months this child had begun to exhibit ?behavioural problems?, and she decided it was unfair on her biological child to let the little girl stay. So having been passed through the fostercare system and having finally found a home, and with this woman having gone through three years of checks and having been matched with a child,this little girl has now been given back to social services where she will no doubt be just a bit more screwed up than before she went to live with her ?new parents?. Being a celebrity and having a nanny doesn?t necessarily make you a crap adoptive parent, even someone who goes through the ?brittish rigorous system? can turn out to be crap and fail. But sorry I digress.