Angelina Jolie on the cover of "Hello" with her new son - is it me...

[emkana]

... or could she just have waited a little bit before thrusting this child into the limelight?

LOL expat - you so dry!

But remember the cartoon of madonna in the orphanage saying:
"do they come in any other colours?"

Suejonez

Why Oh why is someone like Jordan voted celebrity mother of the year, with lots defending her when Angelina, adopting with reasonable age gaps between and clearly making huge contributions to charity and also giving a loving and caring home to orphaned children gets villified.

She can't win - either refuses any publicity whatsoever and is constantly hounded by the gutter press, or does a covershoot where she can control the images used and the impact on her new son AND donate the fee to charity. I know which I would choose in her situation.

Anyone see the 'Laura Croft: Womb Raider' spoof video on the net?

LOL!

I really feel for Issymum and Sue on these threads.

ipanemabunny that is unkind

She has adopted with a two year gap inbetween, but also had a child of her own between those two.

So she has had three children in less than two years, plus Maddox.

I think she is to be admired for what she does, and I'm sure she has the best intentions, but I'm just hoping for all her family that it doesn't get too much.

I see what you're saying about her having control over the pictures.

Did she give the photoshoot money to charity? If so then it's a good way of deflecting the media attention and getting something good aout of it.

It was a bit unkind nailpolish but I thought the cartoon was fair comment on the way the superrich seem to adopt international babies: "I want that one" sort of thing.

I just found the whole Madonna adoption really dubious. I mean why adopt a child with a living parent albeit one who is too poor to support it? It seems questionable when there are plenty of real orphans in Africa.

Angelina on the other hand at least adopts children that seem to have no other hope of parenting.

yes that was a bit confusing i agree

I actually think Angelina's connections with the countries she adopts from are quite impressive. She lived in Cambodia properly and they own a property there. She actually had a child in Namibia and adopted one from there (I think?)
I met a Namibian woman who said she totally put her country on the map and that they were very grateful to her.
But also she has the huge advantage of being part of UNHCR and its networks. Something Madonna could have done with!

The majority of children in institutions around the world have one or more living parents. I don't know the true circumstances of Madonna's newest son so can't comment on her case.

"I really feel for Issymum and Sue on these threads."

Thank you my dear. This thread and the others like them are just a reflection of the opinions held in society as a whole - some thoughtful, benevolent, considerate, some not so. Personally I could easily cease to care about people's opinion of inter-country adoption as so much of it is ill-informed and ill-considered. However, I do care about it because of my daughters. I'm afraid that so much mis-information and even hostility on the subject creates a sort of adoption miasma and that that may ultimately harm my children as they grow up grappling intellectually and emotionally with their own adoption stories and their place in British society.

well said issymum

emkana - I'm sure you didn't intend to imply that adopted children are only on loan to their adoptive parents but "a child of her own" isn't the most tactful terminology.

Before I'm accused of being over-sensitive I did think for quite a while about whether to post anything but I've been corrected before about using certain terminology eg on special needs topics so feel entitled to point this out when the area is my own special interest group.

I didn't know that suejones, I guess the whole business is inevitably fairly murky where money is non-existent, babies plentiful and life cheap.

Angelina isn't the worst, imo. Sure, it seems a lot of children in a short time, but she seems well able to look after them all, and she researches well into the issues.

I actually met her once, so I'm biased. She's so gorgeous in real life that I don't think she's photogenic at all, if you kwim

Sorry, I have been insensitive! I crossed posts there. I'm afraid it's not something I know enough about but have a relative who adopted internationally and it just seemed as if she could adopt because she is super rich. Part of me just feels that isn't fair - not a rational response, more a response of resentment!

I agree with Nailpolish about doing what she is doing - I visited Romania when I was a student and the sheer number of unwanted children there, at the time, was mind-blowing and deeply, deeply saddening. If I could have brought even one child home to provide for it then and there I would have. Sad to think that if I had actually been in a position of wealth and influence to enable me to do it, all I would have received is suspicion and criticism.

Well she's on the front of the National Enquirer with headlines about Brad's cheating and why she will never trust him. Makes you wonder what she's playing at adopting and having babies with a man she doesn't trust, of course everything in the National Enquirer is true.

I'm very sorry suejonez, it was totally the wrong way to put it.

I mean she gave birth to a child -

tell me the best way of saying it so I won't say anything insensitive again like that.

Apologies.

That really is extremely hurtful.

sorry Emkana - I do understand that you didn't mean any offence and I try not to wince when I hear it because I know that people just don't think about the implication of the language used around adoption. Why would they, so few people have first hand experience of adoption. For what its worth, I think "real" parents is far worse followed by "natural" parents. Also I find it far more forgiveable said to an adult than a child.