e-mail
Some people have suggested that everyone should lay off Madonna and stop picking on her. I guess I do not necessarily see discussing her adoption as “picking on her”. Besides, there are so many possible breaches of adoption practices involved in regards to her adoption, I think it would be irresponsible to ignore them, and pretend that they do not matter.
Although I really do not care to personally pick on Madonna, the furor surrounding her impending adoption raises so many questions. I wonder why with so many true orphans in Africa, Madonna happened to pick a child whose father is still living? On the other hand, people adopt in the U.S. when children have parents – sometimes who are encouraged to relinquish because they seem too poor to care for their children.
I do not know the true facts of this case any more than anyone else. All the conclusions I can reach are based on the many conflicting reports I read. I imagine the truth of the matter lies somewhere in the middle, as it usually does. I understand that news reports are not always accurate and complete.
However, there are many troubling questions that I have about this whole frenzied media episode. First, I am puzzled why all the media buzz even came about to begin with. Does an entourage of reporters follow Madonna’s every move? Could she have quietly popped into this tiny African country discreetly and avoided much of the stinging criticism that she is now receiving? Did she intentionally publicize this adoption with the intent to promote international adoption? While that is a noble motive if that was the case, is it healthy and positive to promote the idea that people can circumvent the usual adoption practices? Did she want to change her image? Is it good for adoption to make it appear that if you have enough money that you do not have to follow the rules? Maybe I should be glad that her adoption is pointing out some serious flaws in adoption?
It is curious to me too that in a country with so many true orphans that she happened to pick a child who has a father who now says that he hoped to reclaim his son someday. Did she think that does not matter? Is she right? Maybe the father never actually voiced his intentions to reclaim his son before the adoption, and she just assumed that because he was in an orphanage that his father did not want him? I wonder how common it is for children in orphanages to ever be reclaimed by a parent? Perhaps the father of the boy was just dreaming to believe that he ever could get his son back?
On the other hand, in America people adopt children who have living parents on a regular basis for a variety of reasons. We sometimes encourage women who are impoverished to relinquish their babies and give them a chance for a “better life”. Are there double standards for foreign and domestic adoptions? Where are the human rights’ advocates here when women are cajoled into relinquishing babies due to poverty? When Sharon Stone adopted her child baby recently, there was no uproar. Did she adopt an orphan? How about Rosie’s children?
If Madonna is adhering to all the age guidelines, has successfully completed a thorough home study, has no serious marital issues and is following all the usual channels for an adoption in Malawai, then yes, we should all just mind our own business and wish her the best. However, if her tactics are promoting the idea that with enough money, all the usual adoption practices fly right out the window, is that really what anyone wants? Is that really okay?
