Honestly, I need to say more on the subject for a couple of reasons. One is this comment which was on my Sandra’s blog.

"The little guy is better off I think. Isn't that what is important?"

Better off? Right, he will not starve to death, he will have nice clothes and good schooling. But, he will still be growing up away from his people - like most children of adoption do. That doesn't seem to matter to some people, and I guess I wish that it did. You have to weigh all the options when deciding if adoption is "right" for a child, and I sometimes believe that being separated from an original family is given little to no thought.

Next, Michelle blogged about the diva again and I could barely believe what I was reading. I do not mean what Michelle wrote, but all the quotes attributed to M about saying that she offered money to David’s father so that he could keep his son. The interview I saw of her last week contradicts that. I too am thoroughly confused about the true story, as most probably are.

Then, there is this article

I don't doubt that she has the best of intentions. But good intentions aren't always good enough, and I wish she had publicly acknowledged the huge potential effect of the adoption on the child's future, psychological identity and emotional development.

This article was written by an adoptee, and speaks volumes, I think.

All the judgments that we make are based on the hype that we read. I know that much of what we read is probably not entirely accurate whether it is what Banda says, or M. or anyone else. The longer I live, the more I believe in the concept about the truth being in the middle of any situation.

Blogger Grant pointed out Madonna could be doing much less noble things with her money than adopting, and of course, that is certainly true. She could have chosen to buy a Ferrari instead of adopting, or maybe a new diamond necklace. I think the money she is donating is certainly an admirable act, and I believe that she has good motives.

I just saw M. interviewed, and now she is confirming that she offered the dad money to help him raise his son in Africa. She says he said he turned the offer down. Funny she did not mention that in her last interview. Somehow I have to wonder if she isn't saying that now to redeem herself in some people's eyes.

When asked why she thinks all the furor is swirling around? She said that she thinks it is partially because people are questioning why she is adopting a black African boy. Nahhh, not in a million years do I buy his race has anything to do with all her bad press.

The father? They interviewed him too. His take on this situation seems to keep changing too - and even worse, anything he says goes through a translator. Who the heck really knows how he feels?

I do not think that M. is evil for adopting; I believe that she has good intentions. Any act that gets us discussing adoption is good too. When asked if she thought if was important for her son to get to know his father, she said that "she believed most adopted children want to meet their birth parents some day." Not exactly acknowledging a need to "know", but it is something at least.

In some respects she seems woefully ill-informed about adoption. However, I have to hand it to her, at least in her second interview she showed some pause about taking David away from his father. She seems to at least have some inkling that adopted child need to know about their birth parents. That is positive.

Maddonna is not all bad or all good. She comes across in interviews sincere one minute, and smug and elitist the next. I do not think she deserves to be demonized or sainted. She is raising America's consciousness about adoption, I agree with Dr. G.; that is good!