I'm no Madonna fan, but I wonder....

[scaeagles]

I haven't the time to follow news stories that I'm interested in, much less ones about celebs, but what is going on with the Madonna adoption thing?

So she goes to Malawi and adopts a kid. Some are saying she's doing it because it's fashionable, some say it is againt Malawi law for foreigners to adopt a Malawi child, the dad says he didn't know, she did a lineup of kids and selected one out of the line....perhaps she didn't go about it in the best way, but isn't she taking a kid out of poverty and providing a home and education?

Like I said, I'm no Madonna fan, but I don't see what the big deal is. Again, I haven't followed the details of the story at all, just wondering.

[wendybeth]

I think the dad senses the opportunity here to make a buck, or whatever their currency is. All involved, excepting him, state that he was made very aware of what she was doing with regards to adoption. He either caught a lot of crap for it from his family and neighbors, or he's trying to get something more out of it.

[lashbear]

....perhaps she didn't go about it in the best way, but isn't she taking a kid out of poverty and providing a home and education? .

From what I read, most of the objections are that the money shw will spend on adoption, education etc for the one child, could have raised, educated and benefitted a lot more children in the village if it had been given as a donation, and let the children stay where they are.

Of course, then she wouldn't have had a child to have and hold, so I can see why she did it this way instead.

**Hey - lucky post # 600 for me.... Yay !

[Moonliner]

I agree on the "no fan" part, well at least her recent stuff.

So far I'd say that Madonna is the only one acting in the best interest of the child.

The dad first said he was happy for the boy, now it feels to me like he's looking for a big slice-o-pie.

The Malawi human rights group are using the case to bring attention to their cause. Yeah, the adoption was probably fast tracked due to "star power" but they don't seem to have a case for stating that the adoption was illegal.
The Malawi would bring the kid back just to make a point.

So assuming that the child really was up for adoption, which seems to be the case, I don't see the issue here. The kid gets a mom who cares (flakey as all hell, but still cares) and a chance at a better future. I thought that's what the adoption process is for.

[Jughead P. Jones]

I agree on the "no fan" part, well at least her recent stuff.

So far I'd say that Madonna is the only one acting in the best interest of the child.

The dad first said he was happy for the boy, now it feels to me like he's looking for a big slice-o-pie.

The Malawi human rights group are using the case to bring attention to their cause. Yeah, the adoption was probably fast tracked due to "star power" but they don't seem to have a case for stating that the adoption was illegal.
The Malawi would bring the kid back just to make a point.

So assuming that the child really was up for adoption, which seems to be the case, I don't see the issue here. The kid gets a mom who cares (flakey as all hell, but still cares) and a chance at a better future. I thought that's what the adoption process is for.

I think you said basically what I've been thinking about this situation in this whole post. I agree 100% with this.

Especially about Madonna's career..."Ray of Light" was probably her last album that I liked. :)

[innerSpaceman]

paging Mr. zapppop, paging Mr. zapppop.

[Stan4dSteph]

I'm a bit confused about the situation with the father. The baby was in an orphanage, so clearly the father was not acting as a caregiver. Then he found out that Madonna was adopting his son and he seemed fine with it, but now the father decides that he wants the baby? Either the father wasn't informed of what was happening or he's trying to take advantage of the media coverage.

[Ghoulish Delight]

There are only two real issues I would have, if actually gave a crap. One is the inconsistent story from the father, as others have pointed out. The other is the fast-track that celebrities seem to have to adopt, while many many other fine parents have to wait for literally years. But I suppose that has to do with it being far easier to assess the stability of someone worth several million dollars. At least, I hope that's why and that it's not simply preferential treatment due to their wealth and status.

[Stan4dSteph]

I think that people with more wealth are able to pursue avenues that others find too expensive given the uncertainty in the process. I don't think this is necessarily any more unfair than any other part of a capitalistic economy.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I think that people with more wealth are able to pursue avenues that others find too expensive given the uncertainty in the process. I don't think this is necessarily any more unfair than any other part of a capitalistic economy.
No, simply paying for better service I don't have an issue with. Completely circumventing certain processes/being offered avenues that aren't even offered to non-celebreties (at any cost) would be...questionable.

[Moonliner]

I agree it's not fair to the prospective parents but is a "fastrack" for the rich and famous a bad thing for the kids?

If Mr. and Mrs. Delight of CA adopt a child that's great for that one kid but if Ms. Ciccone of CA adopts a child it's great for that kid and it makes headlines all over the world. That type of press coverage will probably inspire at least a few people to adopt a child themselves. Win-Win.

[MouseWife]

I thought that Madonna was going to make a big contribution to the Malawis? To help build a school or something?

I wonder why, at this stage, is all of the complaining coming about? Obviously it has been in the process for a while.

About the adoption. {and I am only going by what little I've heard} The boy was living in an orphanage? This is something I heard many years ago...

My sister used to go to TJ with her church to the orphanages to tend to the children and the families. See, the families would place the children there because they couldn't tend to them but they were still their parents. Maybe they aren't really called orphanages?

We had been considering adopting a child from there and my husband spoke with a friend from work {who lived in TJ}. He said the kids were not up for adoption. They frowned upon adoption. The parents didn't want to give up their kids, they just couldn't take care of them.

Perhaps this father thought that it would be best for the child for Madonna to adopt him {maybe she did give him money or else just the thought that he would have a better life/he wouldn't have to worry about him any more} but then he got flak from it {like others have mentioned}.

[Strangler Lewis]

I agree it's not fair to the prospective parents but is a "fastrack" for the rich and famous a bad thing for the kids?

If Mr. and Mrs. Delight of CA adopt a child that's great for that one kid but if Ms. Ciccone of CA adopts a child it's great for that kid and it makes headlines all over the world. That type of press coverage will probably inspire at least a few people to adopt a child themselves. Win-Win.
Yes, the same people who now carry little kick dogs in their purses because Paris Hilton does. Needy children are needy children wherever they live, but the fact that Madonna and Angelina adopt from abroad rather than from America gives the whole thing an unpleasant whiff of the exotic.

[Isaac]

paging Mr. zapppop, paging Mr. zapppop.
You paged ? ;)

I've been keeping track of the story & I really don't understand why Madonna is getting so much crap for this.

To my understanding, this is what happened:

A few months ago, Madonna & Guy wanted to have another child. Madonna's doctors recommended she'd not have another pregnancy after having health complications with last two. Just for example; Rocco was born a month early after her placentia detached. She had to be rushed to the hospital for an emergency "C-section" or else the baby would have died. Also she suffered huge loss of blood & could have died as well. So with that in mind, Madonna talked with Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie, and Angelina highly recommended that Madonna adopt a child, just like she did with little Maddox. So after her Confessions Tour ended, Madonna & Guy went to Malawi to visit several orphanages. While there Madonna also donated money to fund the construction of a new orphanage for children who lost their parents to aids. Madonna eventually picked out a little boy named David (1yr old). David's father Yohane Banda found out about his son's adoption and was thrilled. He claimed " I am very very happy because as you can see there is poverty in this village and I know he will be very well looked after in America." Madonna filed adoption papers & was granted custody of the child, with an 18 month evaluation period. Baby David was flown to London to live with the Ritchie family & that's when a wierd backlash took place. For some reason, people in the press as well as a few human rights groups began making false accusations that Madonna did not follow proper adoption procedures, and began trying to vilify her actions, claiming she was destroying a family by taking away a son from his father. Yahone quickly blasted those critics by saying " Where were these people when David was struggling in the orphanage? These so-called human rights groups should leave my baby alone. As father I have okayed this, I have no problem; the village has no problem, who are they to cause trouble? Please let them stop." Then Yahone did a 180 and claimed he had no idea that his son would be leaving the village and moving to England. He's now claiming he was tricked by Madonna & the orphanage. The orphanage blasted Yahone's comments and quoted his previous statements to prove he was full of crap. So for now, Madonna has little David in her care & the media is having a field day. What did Madonna have to say about all this ?
I expect to be given a hard time about many of the things I do. I know they are provocative and I prepare myself, but I did not expect the media, the government or any human rights organisations to take a stand against me trying to save a child's life.

My husband and I began the adoption process many months prior to our trip to Malawi.
I did not wish to disclose my intentions to the world prior to the adoption happening as this is a private family matter.
After learning that there were over one million orphans in Malawi, it was my wish to open up our home and help one child escape an extreme life of hardship, poverty and in many cases death, as well as expand our family.
Nevertheless, we have gone about the adoption procedure according to the law like anyone else who adopts a child. Reports to the contrary are totally inaccurate.
The procedure includes an 18-month evaluation period after which time we hope to make this adoption permanent.
This was not a decision or commitment that my family or I take lightly.
I am overwhelmed and inspired by my trip to Malawi and hope that it helps bring attention to how much more the world needs to do to help the children of Africa.
My heartfelt thanks for all the good wishes I have received and I hope the press will allow my family some room for us to experience the joy we feel to have David home.

I really don't understand why she's being bashed for this. Madonna has said that she would take David on trips to Malawi so he could keep in touch with his father & his roots. My only concern about her adoption of David is the timing of it. Madonna just finished a new set of children's books and the first one titled 'Too Good To Be True' (a sequel to The English Roses) was released today. I suspect people will misinterpret her adoption as a publicity stunt to promote her new books.

As if Madonna wasn't getting enough attention, NBC as announced that when they air Madonna's Confessions Tour next month, they will re-edit her performance of 'Live To Tell'. Some people had a cow when the saw Madonna singing the song while tied to a cross. NBC has decided to censor the performance by using alternate camera angles so you won't see her on the cross.

Madonna will be on Oprah tomorrow. It could be interesting.

[Alex]

Apparently the newish element of the scandal is that her educational foundation in Malawi will promote kabbalah. I'm not sure why this bothers people (any more than any other religious missionary-ism that goes on in Africa), but then just seeing that teaser was enough to make me change the channel so maybe there was something actually important in the story.

I don't really care, so long as the appropriate people gave consent for the adoption. The people I know who have adopted from other countries (three from Eastern Europe and one from China) did so simply because it was a much faster process than trying to adopt in the United States with much more certainty of success and minimal risk of later intrusion from birth parents.

[wendybeth]

Well, now bio-dad has changed his story, and as much as I am not a Madonna fan, I'm inclined to believe him. Dad changes stance on adoption (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/africa/10/26/koinange.banda/index.html).

While I mostly agree with SL with regards to exotic adoptions, the thought that this little boy would probably die without Madonna's adopting him makes me think that maybe anything that gets this little guy a chance at a life is alright. He's adorable, as are all little ones, and he deserves a chance every bit as much as anyone in this world.

[Isaac]

If anyone's interested, here's an audio clip (http://download.yousendit.com/A9F7CFC6580DF18B) from Oprah's interview with Madonna.

[Nephythys]

I read it was the UK who had a problem with her adoption- that it possibly had not been done according to UK law?

[Moonliner]

I read it was the UK who had a problem with her adoption- that it possibly had not been done according to UK law?

I believe it was the special interest groups claiming that, as far as I've read (which I admit is not much) the UK gov has not had any issues.

[Nephythys]

let me look for the link-

can't find the original link but found this-

Legal experts in Britain have also raised concerns over whether the UK's equally tight criteria regarding foreign adoptions have been met, as the process normally takes between two and four years.

It was something about the group that does the home study not being contacted- though they admit it could have been done privately. But it was not a special interest griup, it was the people who make sure adoptions are done legally in the UK.

[Moonliner]

Legal Experts

A group of non-governmental citizens perhaps with special knowledge and interest in this particular area who were not personally involved with the case.

[Nephythys]

In that quote yes- but the article was not legal experts it was the UK organization that oversees international adoptions. I can't recall it-

Obviously without being able to find that article which was from last week I won't be able to show you-

[mistyisjafo]

A friend of mine has spent some time in Africa and has a very good understanding of the culture, the people and the adoption process there since she worked with a few orphanages.

Basically the feeling is that the Malawis and other Africans are reluctant to release orphans or adoptees mainly to the fear of those children not maintaining the culture or being raised in that culture. The wait time is to insure the parents will provide that and will stay so that the child can have their roots.

In their eyes, taking that child to America is removing an important part of their culture, history,roots, whatever you want to call it.

At least that's how it was explained to me.

[katiesue]

So they want the adoptive parents to stay in their country?