Saturday, 07 November 2009
-
Adoption Drama -Is Adopting Ever a Bad Thing?
Have you ever noticed that when a "regular" person adopts a child it's almost always viewed as an exciting occasion that calls for celebration, yet when a celeb adopts, it can quickly become controversial?
Being that November is National Adoption Month, it got us thinking about the good, the bad, and the ugly aspects of the media's coverage of celebrity adoptions. There's no question that in recent years there has been somewhat of an adoption boom in Tinseltown, but why is this phenomenon often referred to in a negative way?
What do you think? Is adoption ever a bad thing?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to momaroo's Momaroo Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in momaroo's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: MyRegistryWedd@xanga
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 2 Views: 0 1416 Comments: 0 52 View all posts by MyRegistryWedd@xanga
Comments (29)
Most of the controversy has to do with the other regular people being upset that they've been waiting forever to adopt, and it seems to them that celebrities get their kids faster. Often the reality is that the celebs don't announce it until they know it's going to happen soon.
@SeeBeeWrite@xanga - Couldn't have said it better myself.
i only think adoption is bad in two scenarios that i can come up with on the top of my head:
1. when celebrities adopt just for attention
2. when people adopt children and then abuse them (wtf?! but it has happened...)
otherwise i think adoption is great. i'm the oldest of four children and the two youngest are adopted from central america.
I think the major objections to Madonna adopting both of her children from Malawi are three fold :
1. Both of those children had biological family member who wanted them and had only given them to the orphanage with the understanding that it was a temporary situation, not to place for adoption because
2. Malawi has no official international adoption program and therefore Madonna used her celebrity to force these adoptions to happen
3. With those two things under consideration, in Madonna's case if she felt so strongly about loving these kids she could have looked at the two previous facts and come to the conclusion that privately supporting them and being involved in their lives while they remained with their biological parents was a better option than, for all intents and purposes, buying them.
Sometimes celebrities make adoption look bad when it comes across as baby buying. As an adoptive mother, it's infuriating and incredibly frustrating, especially when there are celebrities who do it the right way.
I think it would only be a bad thing if you are unfit to raise a child. Whether it be money issues or other things. Other than that, they're giving a child a better life than they might have had growing up in a foster home.
2 types that I believe shouldn't be able to adopt:
1. people who adopt to get govt assistance, but neglect their children, should burn in hell.
2. people who adopt to fulfill a sick fantasy (physical and sexual abuse related) should burn in hell... slowly.
I don't believe adoption is right for anyone who just wants attention or government money. Madonna, I feel is just doing it for the attention.
I don't think adoption is really the way to go. I know that some parents can't provide for there child but how can you give up something you have had for 9months??
I think with celebraties its COOL to adopt at the moment the more kids you adopt the less kids you have to pop out and you are not at risk of "LOSING THERE BODY".
It depends on the family. I don't think my parents were mature enough to adopt, and it ended badly for our family. As far as celebrities go, we don't know their heart, and we can't judge them. We can only judge based on the outcomes- so far, none of which have been bad.
I think celebrity adoption needs to be scrutinised when you consider the number of children of celebrities (biological and adopted) who end up with drug, alcohol, psychological problems from being in the media spotlight and having famous parents. Adoption is not the sunshine and lollipop scenario that most of society believes it is. It is a difficult thing to be taken from your natural family and given to people who start out as strangers and to be expected to love and be grateful to those people when there has been such great loss in your life that, more often than not, is not recognised by anyone. People are far too quick to tell adoptees that they were lucky and should be grateful and that they wish they were adopted without considering the consequences of being adopted.
The idea that a child is “meant” to be yours, and not of its own family, people, heritage, community, language, and lineage is a repugnantly selfish thing to say. Speaking as an adoptee who has moved back to his land of birth, I would like simply to point out the following: Adoption is a violence, based in inequality; it is candy-coated to make it seem about family and children, but it is an economic and political crime, a treating of symptoms and not of disease; it is a negation of families and an annihilation of communities that are not seen as having an intrinsic human value equal to that of those adopting, for reasons having to do with race, with class, and with a preconceived notion of what makes for a “valid” life in this world.
"National Adoption Month" is a marketing ploy of the dominant discourse of those in power. Advocating it is thus to make a political statement of war against the entire planet that you do not consider valid enough to have the same rights and standard of living that you currently enjoy. This is a disgusting and horrifying stance to take; anyone who makes it should be ashamed of themselves in the extreme.
I sure hope celebrities are adopting for all the right reasons. However good their intentions might be, it takes more than good intentions to raise a child. Joan Crawford was a perfect example of that. Although there was controversy about the actual truth of Christina Crawford's accounts of child abuse, I do believe there was enough there to make a child turn on the only mother she knew. I guess what I am trying to say is that we won't truly know until the cat is let out of the bag and many other movies are made on the subject...which will inevitably happen due to the fact that there are so many children who are adopted by celebrities. I guess the benefits outweigh the risks in the lives of some children though...growing up a poor orphan or a rich celebrity child, they have a much better chance of changing their circumstances being adopted. Hopefully it's not the worste thing that will happen in their lives.
@Ibn Zayd - I agree with some of your points. But also remember that there are reasons why 'some' people choose to adopt. Some have everything they can ask for in life but a child because they can not conceive naturally and adoption has become their only option. There are also others who adopt to save a child from being aborted (which is legal in most US states). In some countries it is not a natural practice to raise a child that is not your own and adoption is unheard of and some people believe they are saving the child from a life in an orphanage vs a life bonded with loving parents. Although, I believe that anyone who decides to do this should integrate the child with his/her cultural community. I totally agree that people should not feel so hopeless that they would have to be put in the situation of relinquishing their child to an institution but putting all the political rhetoric aside, I still believe that there are people with genuinely good hearts and good parenting skills that will provide a good and loving home.
It wouldn't suprise me if Madonna only adopted to have slaves. Those kids had biological family members to take care of it. She basically bought those kids from their biological family by paying them tons of money.
i do not think adoption is a bad thing at all. of course i think there are certain types who shouldn't be allowed to adopt, but i'm pretty sure these days they do a lot of psychoanalyzing before they let you take home a kid.
do i think it should be pushed on everyone as an alternative to having their own kids? absolutely not.
In answer to your question - is adoption ever a bad thing? Just ask the 14 Russian adopted children who were murdered by their US adopters! Oh, right. You can't. They're DEAD...and so are many other adopted children, not to mention those who were survived their abuse and torture.
OK, then...why not ask the media princess Anita Tedadli (sp?), a common every day military wife and mother who adopted an African boy and then TERMINATED THE ADOPTION! And she is far from the only one to do that, just the loudest and proudest about it! She even went on the Today Show!
You could also ask the mothers who have had their children kidnapped for adoption in Guatemala if they think adoption is a good thing.
As for the celebs...no,it's not jealousy.
1) It's the fact they skirt the laws or have them bent for them.
2) In the case of Madonna's two adoptions and at least one of Jolie's it was the fact they adopted kids WHO HAD FAMILIES! They were NOY orphans. With all the truly orphaned kids in the world, why did they have to take these kids whose families wanted them???
If any celeb wants to be a real role model in terms of adoption, they should adopte a special needs kid from foster care. These are the kids adoption is SUPPOSED to help. These are who tax benefits are SUPPOSED to be fore and all the campaigning for adoption month. Yet, these are the kids left behind every time as the rich, the families, and the average Jane Doe, shop the world for their imported designer babies. Either do the right thing or shut up!
Mirah Riben, author
The Stork Market: America's Multi-Billion Dollar Unregulated Adoption Industry
http://AdvocatePublications.com
@thesecretlifeofayoungmum@xanga - Ugh. Your comment pretty much really offended me. I was adopted, and adoption is probably the
bestchoice my birthmother ever made. Not to mention, my own parents couldn't have children and my mother is the
bestmother anyone could ever hope for.
If you're talking about celebrities never adopting, that's still silly. One can only hope they're doing it for the right reasons, but then look around-couples have a 50-50 chance of staying married and nobody's perfect. People do things they shouldn't, and it sadly these actions can hurt kids but celebrities aren't the only ones that aren't perfect parents.Adoption is an amazing thing. I wrote a play about it a while ago, and I'll mention two lines from it.The birthmother said: [Adoption] was the best choice I ever made, and I'll never forgive myself for it.
The adoptee said: I always thought giving up a child was cowardly, my [adoptive] mother said it took courage. As always, my [adoptive] mom was right.
@thesecretlifeofayoungmum@xanga - What do you think IS the way to go? Maybe you don't understand how someone could let go of a baby they've been nurturing inside for 9 months, but that actually takes more love - to realize that maybe someone else could provide a better life for your baby than you can, and unselfishly give the baby to that person.
Celebrities don't seem to have too tough of a time regaining their pre-baby bodies after they give birth anyway, with their personal trainers and cooks. Perhaps they really do just have the goodness in their hearts to use their resources to help kids.
Some of these comments have me shaking in anger. Adoption is an amazing wonderful thing. How many children actually get to say they were PICKED by their parents.
I am adopted, and its the best thing my birth mom could have EVER done for me.My parents could not have their own, so they adopted.I also found my birth family when I was 19. My Mom came with me to meet them. My adoptive family is amazing. My husband and I are foster parents, who are also adopting our 2 year old. We have no been able to have our own. Is it for everyone? No.Is there a dark side? Yes.But better an adopted living child then an aborted one.Angelina Jolie adopted her first child from Cambodia. No sooner did she get him out of there than the whold country shut down its adoption program. And the individuals she worked with were arrested for their involvement in corrupt practices. She adopted her next child from Vietnam and again got out of Dodge city just ahead of the law. Then you have Madonna who is so concerned about older HIV positive orphans in Malawi that she found herself a younger HIV negative non orphan to adopt even though it meant taking his family to court and then a year later turned around and did the exact same thing with another HIV negative non orphan toddler whose family also had no means to fight her. These are not adoptions, these are kidnappings. The least they should do is make the papers. Doubtless the people in line behind Angelina in Cambodia or Vietnam are upset because her actions brought scruitney to the programs they were working with to get a baby and consequently their plans were either delayed or cancelled altogether. More importantly though is what the investigations uncovered. see www.brandeis.edu and search: "the orphan manufacturing chain" Clare
Yeah, yeah, yeah. "You were picked"; "you were chosen"; "your birth mother loved you so much she gave you up"....this is disgusting fairy tales.
I'm speaking to you as someone who has MOVED BACK TO HIS COUNTRY OF BIRTH. I am telling you this as someone WHO KNOWS what went on in his orphanage. Who understands what baby trafficking means. What coercion of a birth mother means. Your fairy-tale justifications mean nothing, because they are part of the systemic oppression and dispossession of people worldwide. I'll thank you not to lecture me about adoption and how happy-happy-joy-joy it is. Why have 200 Korean adoptees moved back to that country, in order to end adoption from their homeland? Why is suicide the number one killer of Korean adoptees in Scandinavian countries? Please, have a sense of humility.
To consider: Your first-world lifestyle, in which 5 percent of the world's population uses and consumes 25 percent of the world's resources, comes at the expense of those you CLAIM to be so concerned about. Your government's foreign policy, economic and political wars in other countries are responsible for the so-called "orphans" which you seem to think appeared out of thin air, just so rich white people can selfishly console their empty nest syndrome. If a woman's child were kidnapped, you would fall over yourselves in sympathy for her. But a woman who is coerced into giving up her child to people whose lifestyle is the reason she cannot keep her child, you PRAISE HER for making the "right" decision. This is sick and twisted if you think about it for two seconds. If adoptive parents were really so concerned with these children, they would take the tens of thousands of dollars they spend on buying children and give it to the extended families and communities of the children they are treating like dolls in store windows so that they might remain with those they come from.
Honestly. Madonna is only one small part of the problem. And please go read any Malawi newspaper on the subject, and see how she is seen as the colonial imperialist idiot she is.
"Adoption is an amazing wonderful thing."
Somehow I doubt the Korean biological mothers would say that.
"How many children actually get to say they were PICKED by their parents."
Parents do not "pick" children from orphanages - at least, not anymore. Okay, maybe in domestic adoption this still occurs frequently enough (aka profiles and such), but in overseas adoption? Uh, no.
Biological families are [supposed to be] wired to care/love/nurture for their children. A mother doesn't want "a" child; she wants HER child.
TRA
"your birth mother loved you so much she gave you up"
I grew up believing that. It is not the case for most adoptees - the politically correct phrase would be:
"Your mother loved you, but due to cultural regulations, lack of social and economic assistance and/or resources, she felt she had no choice but to surrender you."
It has NOTHING to do with love.
"She unselfishly gave her baby as a gift." I see this all the time. Another myth in adoption-land - please read the following link.
http://cchronicle.com/2009/11/what-does-%E2%80%9Cgotcha%E2%80%9D-mean/
TRA
@tobethinagain_xoxo@xanga -
I am happy for you. Adoption has given many children good homes. But do you not see that you happiness in YOUR or any adoption does not apply equally? Surely you would recognize that the mothers of the babies adopted and abused or killed are not to keen on adoption. Nor are the mothers who are coerced, exploited or have their babies kidnapped fro adoption. In fact, many adoptees are not as happy with it s you are.
Many who feel grateful and have had good, loving adoptive parents, are still not happy with the fact that their rights are denied them; that they are discriminated against for being adopted and have less rights than non-adopted people in terms of access to their own birth certificate!
Bottom line It's like asking is marriage good or bad: Obviously 50/50. It is for some and not for others since half of all marriages FAIL!
It aint all about you!, and neither is about anyone's infertility.
Wonder how you would have liked being adopted by a celeb?
There's obvious times when it's a bad thing; in cases of abuse and when the kids had families that loved them and would/could have taken care of them just fine, as many have pointed out. But there's also the not so-obvious...like when celebrities or "regular" people do it just for the attention and spend the rest of their days talking about their adopted children this and adopted children that. I can't imagine that not being detrimental to the children involved.
I have no doubt that money and fame grease the wheels of the process no matter the motivation behind it, but that's not really reflective of adoption as much as it is society.