Madonna clears the air on Oprah

Oprah dedicated half of her Wednesday show to letting Madonna give her side of the story behind the adoption of her new son, David. 

Instead of our rephrasing her words, I’ll let Oprah do it- here is a synopsis on Oprah’s site and on People.com. (And JustJared.com has more screencaps of David with the family.  Notice in this image, Madonna is wearing David in a sling in a backcarry!)

Here are some choice quotes, thanks to Us Weekly.

Was the adoption fasttracked because of her celebrity status?
"I assure you it doesn’t matter who you are or how much money you have, nothing goes fast in Africa. There are no adoption laws in Malawi. And I was warned by my social worker that because there were no known laws in Malawi, they were more or less going to have to make them up as we went along. And she did say to me, ‘Pick Ethiopia. Go to Kenya. Don’t go to Malawi because you’re just going to get a hard time.’"

How she first saw David:
"I’m financing a documentary about orphans in Malawi, so I was allowed to view footage and photographs of a lot of the children. An 8-year-old girl who is living with HIV was holding this child. I became transfixed by him. … But I didn’t yet know I was going to adopt him. I was just drawn to him."

Lourdes and Rocco have accepted their new brother, without question:
"They just embraced him, and that’s the amazing thing about children. They don’t ask questions. They’ve never once said, ‘What is he doing here’, or mentioned the difference in his skin color, or questioned his presence in our life. That is an amazing lesson that children do teach us."

What she thinks of the media frenzy:
"I’m disappointed because it discourages other people from doing the same thing — for anybody who had the idea that they, too, would like to open their home and give a life to a child living in an orphanage who might possibly not live past the age of 5. Anybody who had that idea would be discouraged from doing it. For me, that’s what disappoints me the most. I feel like the media is doing a great disservice to all the orphans of Africa, period, not just Malawi, by turning it into such a negative thing.”

Does she believe David’s father understood the terms of the adoption? 
"I sat in that room, I looked into that man’s eyes. I believe that the press is manipulating this information out of him. I believe at this point in time, he’s been terrorized by the media. They have asked him things, repeatedly, and they have put words in his mouth. They have spun a story that is completely false."

I think this statement sums up why the so-called human rights group should let David stay with Madonna and family.
"David had been living in this orphanage since he was two weeks old. He had survived malaria and tuberculosis, and no one from his extended family had visited him since the time he arrived. So from my perspective, there was no one looking after David’s welfare."

If you watched the show, has it changed your mind about the whole situation?

Proceeds from Madonna’s book, The English Roses, Too Good to be True will be donated to the Raising Malawi project (www.raisingmalawi.com). The book is in stores now and at Amazon.com

Photo of Guy and David, courtesy of Madonna and Guy Ritchie

Comments

It is really inappropriate for you to tell human rights group to “shut up,” especially when we’re dealing with a wealthy woman who seems to feel entitled to someone else’s baby. This child’s father visited him every week. He was put in the orphanage on a temporary basis because his father couldn’t support him. Madonna doesn’t know what went on in Malawi and for her to pose as an expert when it’s self serving is ridiculous.

If Madonna wanted to adopt an orphan, perhaps she should have, instead of taking a child who already has a family. If this baby was the most photogenic, well, too bad. Even in the US, birth parents have 45 days to change their mind about adoption, never mind a case where the father doesn’t know how to read and it’s very likely that local officials misrepresented the situation and leaned on him to make the wealthy American happy. Madonna should give the child back immediately, and if she had any class and really wanted to do something good for Malawi, she’d make sure this family is reunited, it owuldn’t take much. The fact that she’s holding on to this child knowing his father can’t hire a lawyer and couldn’t fight her and her millions even if he did is appalling. It’s a gross abuse of power and she should be ashamed of herself. She says she wants to help, this is only making the people of Malawi hate all Americans.

And for everyone who thinks David would have a better life with Madonna, well, if it’s all about money, so would your chioldren, that doesn’t mean Madonna’s entitled to tehm.

- Anya on October 25th, 2006

You mentioned her children’s books in the post. In my humble opinion, they are terrible and did not interest my two daughters at all. I’ve asked my daughters’ friends’ mothers what they thought and most did not like the books. I think a lot of people bought the books because Madonna wrote them (we didn’t buy them, thank God, because I would have regretted it) and I think a lot of people may not have considered them of much literary worth if another author’s name had been attached to them. I think Madonna is a master at marketing herself and keeping her “brand” growing…hope the adoption is not just another marketing strategy to keep her name in the media.

This whole adoption situation sounds fishy. How can a man who doesn’t speak your language, and who is illiterate and depending on interpreters to tell him what he thinks is the truth, really know what is going on? And there is no solid proof that the child spent all that time in the orphanage without a visit from relatives…that is only what Madonna portrays as the truth. And even if that turned out to be true (which I do NOT believe), what were the obstacles that a family might face in getting to the orphanage? Might the relatives be too poor to obtain transportation? Did they think that the child’s only chance of survival and access to medical care would come at the hands of people at a facility which offered assistance? (These things have to be considered because they don’t have the “luxuries” that we take for granted). I’m only posing questions that I don’t have all the answers to (and I don’t believe Madonna has either and is just grossly misrepresenting statements as facts)…I just don’t believe that David’s father never visited his child and was uncaring. I don’t believe he fully understood every single part of this adoption process given the disadvantaged position he was in. People get taken advantage of every day due to ignorance and language barriers…it’s sad, but true. How did this poverty-stricken man even stand a chance at understanding the workings of the adoption process and communicating with the type of attorneys Madonna can afford? I agree with the previous poster. Money and material possessions do not necessarily guarantee a child a “better” life.

- PinkRoses on October 26th, 2006

I believe that Modonna & Guy are doing the right thing and should proceed with the adoption.
Good luck to your family!!

- Barbara on October 26th, 2006

“that’s the amazing thing about children. They don’t ask questions” WHAT !?!?! :-b

I thought the amazing thing was the amount of questions kids (normally) ask !!!!!!

David is definately a cutie. Especially in that pic with Guy. If the media have made up or manipulated stories – shame on them. But this whole situation leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Madonna says she looked the father in the eye…so? I think it’s sad David was taken out of the country so quickly. No time for the family to change their mind and at this point I don’t believe the father understood the terms of adoption. This has happened too many times in countries where adoption is unheard of. How do you explain to a parent with no concept of what adoption means: “you are giving someone your child. Giving up all your parental rights. You may see your baby again when he/she is 18 years old”. It’s devastating when the parents find out the truth. It’s a form of kidnapping.

- Heavenly_Hibiscus on October 26th, 2006

Wow David looks so happy in that picture. I think he’s going to have a lovely life with Madonna and her family – thousand times better than in an orphanage in Afrika. Sorry but that’s just a fact. He’s a lucky boy…

- fynn on October 26th, 2006

Very nicely put, Anya!

- LaMama on October 26th, 2006

I guess I am a little out of the loop on this. What is the deal with the child’s father? Did he change his mind or somthing? Can someone fill me in on this please?

- alicia on October 26th, 2006

Give the child back to WHO? A father who can’t feed him? That’s really smart. I’m glad to know what an authority some of you are! Well, if you say so. Let’s watch him die because you think his father would like that. And in case you just don’t know the facts, the boy’s father never said he wanted him back. He still HASN’T. He said, number one, that he wanted the child to come back after she raised and educated him, and number two, that he wanted him back in the orphanage. Now, this is just what has been printed so who knows if he said anything at all. He clearly never knows what he is saying, so we’ll have to wait for his next contradicting statements for your next judgement.

Bottom line: THIS CHILD DID NOT HAVE A FAMILY. HE WAS IN AN ORPHANAGE. PEOPLE ADOPT CHILDREN IN ORPHANAGES. Simple enough for you?

- Annie on October 26th, 2006

I can understand a lot of your points of view, Anya…but I can’t help but think that David’s smile in the photo with Guy says it all, doesn’t it? I mean…he looks so healthy, happy, and at ease. Surely that would have to be better than being in an orphanage for years and years, right? I think with Madonna’s help now, David can one day return to Africa if he chooses, only this time with more options for a better life.

- Joy on October 26th, 2006

I’m not going to pretend to know what went on in Malawi. But I think this summary brings up a good point: that a child has a right not to live in an orphanage, and that for many, it’s even a matter of life or death.

It’s such a shame that there are children who go to bed at night wishing they had parents, and couples who go to bed at night wishing they had children.

- Nancy on October 26th, 2006

but our children don’t live in disease-stricken area with no means of taking care of them and constant hunger. it’s not even about quality of life with a rich family, but about the environment providing the child’s basic needs. should she give back the child so he will live happily ever after in the orphanage until he dies in a few months from malaria or another disease?

it’s heartbreaking, but giving your child away to save his life shows how much a parent loves his child more than selfishly keeping the child with him when having no means to care for him and ensure he will even stay alive at all.

- Ella on October 26th, 2006

I think it’s awful that the media is turning something positive into a a negative. This child’s father knew exactly what he was doing. He gave her permission to adopt his son. his earlier quotes show this. i applaud madonna for what she’s doing.

- Erin on October 26th, 2006

Anya, just wanted to clarify some things…. Madonna/the orphanage said that David was left at 2 weeks of age and has not had one visitor the entire time including the father. And also the father does not want him back from Madonna.

- momof2inNJ on October 26th, 2006

I don´t wanna say something about the adoption because everything has been said in different discussions.

I just love the picture with Guy holding David and they are both looking so happy. David looks like he is in great condition and that is the most important thing.

- laraso on October 26th, 2006

All I have to say is that David is a cutie pie!!! Very sweet.

- Ana on October 26th, 2006

Anya,

How can you possibly know what you are talking about is true? Were you there when Madonna sat down with David’s father? Have you been to the orphanage where David came from and spoke with his caretakers in regards to whether or not he was ever visited? Give Madonna a break, although she is a powerful celebrity, she is also a mother and do you think she would let someone do what you are suggesting to Lourdes and Rocco, if the shoe was on the other foot?

I believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions but come on, do not pretend you are an expert or know the intimate details of her case. I mean no disrespect to you, I am simply sharing my opinion.

I applaud Madonna for trying to make a difference in the life of David, and all of the other children in Malawi.

- Drysdale on October 26th, 2006

WOW Anya—

My son has a birthmother in another country…

Does this mean I should have just given the money I spent to pay for his adoption costs and now his care to her to raise him instead? While I do not shun such ideas, my goal was to be a mother, and his birthmother made personal sacrifices and our worlds met in such a way that I became my son’s mother. Yes, he has “another family” but he is my son.

NO ONE knows the absolute true story of the Ritchie adoption but the Ritchie family and the birthfamily of this little boy. The media has likely blown up little bits and pieces of this story out of a huge mess.

This little boy’s adoption story, too, should have been VERY personal, and I am very sorry that this has been stolen from him.

In the end, it is ultimately about the welfare of this little boy and his happiness and what is best for him. I have no doubt that Madonna and her family are indeed looking out for that. He is now her son and her family’s heart are also invested in that. How heartless and cold is it to think that she shouldn’t care.

- rebekalynn on October 26th, 2006

Hear Hear Anya!
Madge will get her way anyway because she is the wealthy American as you said. What amazes me is how she thinks this will put people off from adopting in Africa (despite the obvious fact that if a normal person’s social worker tells them to pick a country where international adoptions are allowed as opposed to a country where they’re not, the normal person will choose to adopt somewhere they can adopt). But Madge doesn’t like publicity unless she’s actually going to make some money off of it (i.e. the cross controversy in her show).
I’m just thankful she didn’t see a child in a documentary about a traditionally Muslim country where adoptions are NOT allowed (unfortunately). She could have launched WWIII by being the crass rich American who has to have the little Muslim child no matter what.

- ili175 on October 26th, 2006

Just like the media can spin the baby’s father’s story, Madonna can spin her own. I don’t know enough about the adoption to form an opionion but I do have an opinion about the history of Madonna’s public life. Decisions made for shock value (sex book, writing songs and choreographing performances that denigrate Christianity), “reinvention”-it’s hard to trust a chameleon. Madonna may very well be doing a wonderful thing by adopting the child but it is too bad history has proven most of Madonna’s actions are fame motivated.

- zaoli on October 26th, 2006

I disagree. You know it’s just sad that the media had to get involved. If David had stayed in that orphanage, he may have not made it past his third birthday. He may have a father, but what life would he have if he is dead, not even making it to the next birthday or next? I watched the show with madonna and she never came off like you just wrote. She did everyhthing she was suppose to do to adopt a child. She’s even going through Child Services in london for the rest of the process. You are intitled to your own opinions, but I have my own and she did everything she was suppose to, to adopt David and I believe that David’s father knew perfectly well that she was going to adopt his child. I think the media may have been apart of him changing his mind. Still even if Madonna didn’t adopt the child and the kid stayed in the orphanage, is that better then not living past the age of 2 or 3, since the father can not take care of his own child at all and he is still in the orphanage waiting to die? So what’s best for the child? For him to stay in the orphanage and die and not live past the age of 2 or 3 or 4 or whatever or the child is adopted and given a chance to grow up? I think it’s petty that the so called Rights groups don’t think about the fact that madonna is giving this child a chance to grow up and do something wonderful with his life. I see it like that. David’s father knew what he was doig and the media just started messing with his head. Just my opinion to the whole thing, but I did watch her on Oprah and believe her. You may or may not, but I do.

- nanny on October 26th, 2006

I don’t agree with her keeping him, and the interview doesn’t change that.

The picture of him sleeping on her back is precious.

- Ali on October 26th, 2006

I cannot believe that some of you just want this little child given back to a father who already admitted he cannot take care of him and he would just be put back into an orphanage. He was given up; when the father turned him over to the orphanage, I am pretty sure he had to sign something giving away his rights at least temporarily. Madonna may not be my favorite person in the world but God Bless her for changing this little baby’s life and inviting him into her home and raising him as her own. I cannot see how that is a bad thing. This is just all being blown WAY out of proportion. I think she is doing a great thing and I do not think that the father was lied to. Just a week ago he said how happy he was that his son was going to be given a better life. And I totally believe her that this little boy will know who his father is and he will get to stay in contact with him…how is that a bad thing? I think this is just another thing that people are going to get on her about. If Madonna had adopted a kid from the US there would be people up in arms about all the kids overseas that need homes so whatever. I doubt she cares what any of us think, she is just happy with her new son.

- Kelli on October 26th, 2006

It makes me laugh how some people on here speak with such authority about this situation, as if they were actually there when the adoption took place. The fact is, none of us know the details of this situation. Furthermore, Madonna doesn’t exactly have the best reputation. She’s well-known for pulling stupid stunts just for the media attention. After all, that’s her job… she’s a celebrity and that’s how she makes her money.

Honestly, I think it would have been better if she just donated some money to that little boy’s family and gave them the resources they needed (food, shelter, etc.) to remain together… as a family! It doesn’t sound to me at all like the father wanted to give up his son, but he felt like he had no choice. Madonna is supposedly funding some orphanages there anyway, and she’s wealthy enough to support a small country if she really wanted to. Adoption is a wonderful thing, but she has the money to support entire families in Malawi… why just adopt a one boy? Why not “adopt” several families instead and give them the resources they need to thrive together? It would have been better if she adopted a child who really had no family to help them.

- Ash on October 26th, 2006

Anya – I think you’re a bit off here. For starters, most children that are adopted within the US (and many other countries as well) have living family members who have decided that it’s in the child’s best interest to be raised by someone else. My dearest friends adopted a little girl who has a bio mother and father who love her very much, but decided that because of their age and financial situation, that their daughter should be adopted by my friends. So I think it’s ridiculous to say that Madonna had to get a child with no family.

I think it’s pretty obvious that David’s father is being affected by the media and other interest groups. He began by saying that he was happy his son would get a better life and that people should stay out of it, to a complete turnaround. BUT, most importantly, he said he didn’t want his son returned. I think that pretty much puts an end to the hysteria.

And by the way, there are rules that are broken/changed all the time when it comes to adoption, and it’s not just with celebrities. I have some other friends that adopted from Lithuania. They were supposed to go on an initial trip to visit with the child for 3 weeks, and then were to return to America for 3 months before going back to pick their child up. However, the judge liked them so much he released the child to their custody immediately and they were only in Lithuania for 9 days. Nobody has a problem with that. Sometimes celebrities get a bad wrap even when they haven’t done anything wrong.

- alexp on October 26th, 2006

Would Madonna be going though all this hoopla
if she adopted a child from a former Soviet
territory?Probably not.What the press is doing to her while she’s trying to compleate the
process of adopting is almost like what mean
kids do at recess-It’s called bullying.I think
it’s all because of who she is.Now,if,say,Bono
was adopting,I doubt he would’nt have this
conterversey and debate.

- Erin on October 26th, 2006

She’s saying everything that she should to defend her actions, and I think she probably truly believes most if not all of it.

I just think there’s no way we can know the truth on both sides. I trust that child services in both countries, who have access to all the facts, will make the right decision with regard to the child’s welfare and his family’s wishes. What a doll he is.

- Chiara on October 26th, 2006

Pretty pathetic that people would sign the dead condamnation of a little boy just because his adoptive mother is a celebrity.
Imagine she sends him back. IF he survives, who is going to tell him: “you know, you could have had a wonderful life with your adoptive mother and your brother and sister, too bad you’re now just a starving homeless. But oh well, you’re with your biological family!We did everything to ‘protect’ you”

- al on October 26th, 2006

For the record, I never proposed that they give the child back to his birth father. I simply pointed out that all may not be as it has been portrayed and we will hear more of Madonna’s point of view than a poor, illiterate man’s. I don’t know what did or did not happen because I wasn’t there. I do think, however, rather than adopting a child who is definitely wanted (IF that’s the true case) Madonna could have helped a LOT of children and/or families have what they needed and remain together. I don’t think the decision for where a child “should” be placed should be determined solely on the fact that Madonna is wealthy. Again, money does not mean that he will receive the nurturing and love (food, yes; fancy clothing, yes; media attention, yes, etc.) and be taught life lessons if he’s put with the person with more wealth. I have friends who were members of prominent homes (example: one’s father was a renowned heart surgeon and mother an entertainment attorney) and they had every material possession money could buy. But, they were completely raised by nannies and rarely ever SAW their parents, and grew up feeling depressed, lonely, unloved, angry and bitter. They were still expected to perform above average at school, do things to perfection and reflect well on the parents with “rewards” (all costly items) replacing love and praise as motivators. It also affected the way they interacted with others, both professionally and in relationships. So, money should not be used to “tip the balance” (so to speak) when weighing options for a child’s life. There were many win/win options here. But, Madonna has always been proud of the fact that whatever Madonna wants, Madonna gets.

- PinkRoses on October 26th, 2006

Why does everyone keep saying Madonna is a wealthy American when she’s from ENGLAND! She’s English people!

- Raebees on October 26th, 2006

She was born in America Rae.

She lives in England.

Big difference.

- Stacey on October 26th, 2006

With all the hatefull comments I just wanna say: David is beautifull!!! And they will make a lovely family. Congratulations!

- Elisa on October 26th, 2006

Madonna is from Michigan, which is a distinctly un-British origin. She has only lived in England since she married her British husband. You may have been fooled by the pseudo-accent

- Chiara on October 26th, 2006

A boy gaining health by the day and smiling, fantastic!!
Additionally, I hope for positive thoughts to enter the world about how people all over can support children like David rather than arguing who is right, who has money, whose books aren’t brillant. A child for this moment is receiving care and love. What about the rest of them?

- Tracey on October 26th, 2006

If everything is legal, that baby’s going to have a much better life with Madonna than he would in Africa, and I’m not talking about the economic level. I’m talking about opportunities for that little boy that he would have not had over there. I think it’s a good thing.

- J. on October 26th, 2006

Read the article People magazine has on this situation. If anyone is being manipulative it is the media, as they usually are. They have turned this into a career-making story for a fatter paycheck!

- izzy on October 26th, 2006

You know, what? I agree with Anya. It might be only a impression, but I feel like Madonna thinks she is a god among women, just because she is a celebrity. We are talking about Malawi here, I do believe that the man didn’t understand what was really going to happen! And why she had to adopt a boy that actually have a father? Only for the media have something to gossip about? For all the newspapers to have in the front cover? Does she like problems or something like that? It’s sad… But I think she is enjoying all this, and I’m a Madonna’s fan!

- Luciana on October 26th, 2006

i may not be a fan of madonna but i still support her in her decision. David’s dad wasn’t able to feed him. he was living in an orphanage and his dad never visit him once. i agree nobody knows what the adoption process was. If this was Brad and Angelina adopting David then people would say oh good for them they adopting another baby and they are just in the media as much as madonna. Also the media has a way of twisting things for money. even newspaper are all gossip. CNN, today show all these shows that are suppose to have true fact focus on gossip now. it just horrible how the media has become

- Christine on October 26th, 2006

the way madonna talked about david with her children made me think, “most people buy their children a dog but madonna got hers a boy.” i found the whole interview disgusting…but yet every word was humorous with her incredibly phony accent.

- augustmoon6075 on October 26th, 2006

I’ve really enjoyed reading all of the comments associated with this article; very insightful and persuasive points, from both sides.

I’m not really sure how I feel about this situation, as I said, I think people have made some very valid points for and against Madonna’s adoption of David.

To me what’s clear is that: 1.) None of us have all the facts, therefore I don’t think we can really judge. 2.) while I think it’s plausible that David’s biological father may not have fully understood what was happening, I really have my doubts. More likely, the media are spinning stories to sell magazines and newspapers. It may even be possible that he has been paid to make some of these statements. 3.) Just because Madonna has been controversial with her career should have no baring on her family life or her mothering skills; I think they are separate. 4.) David looks healthy and happy, and at the end of the day that’s what is truly important.

Maybe Madonna has made some mistakes with this, who knows? I do believe her intentions were good when she decided to adopt David.

One more thing, it bugs me when people say that Madonna should have opted to give money to David’s father instead. Why? She’s already funded 6 orphanages in Malawi. You know, when you think about what most of us probably make, versus what David’s father brings in, most of us on here could probably give up a few luxuries and donate to families like these. I don’t think it’s fair to single Madonna out just because she’s loaded; loaded is a relative thing. Madonna’s millions don’t obligate her to charity any more than it does the rest of us.

At the end of the day, Madonna has every right to be an adoptive parent. I wish her the best. I’m convinced that David will have more opportunities and greater choices in life by being placed with her and Guy. If David’s father gives his blessing, which appears to be the case, then the rest of us need to accept it and move on…

- gargoylegurl on October 27th, 2006

A boy is well who was sick–he may even be alive when he might have been dead. So far that’s a good thing.

- Beth on October 27th, 2006

I believe that Madonna chose Davie because she wanted another child and felt she was too old to have one herself or didn’t want to go through the hassle of pregnancy and childbirth again or thought another pregnancy would disrupt her lifestyle and carreer or maybe she was afraid, if she got pregnant again, of her baby having Down’s or something. I honestly don’t know but imo Madonna just wanted a kid asap so she went and got herself one.

If she’d truly wanted to help, she could have sponsered the orphanage, visited the children there once a year or so and could have made many poor, abandoned children there very happy. Maybe that would have encouraged her children to ask some questions about the how different their lives are to those less unfortunate. But maybe Madonna doesn’t like to be asked questions?

- pink.lioness on October 27th, 2006

I’m happy for Madonna and her family and most of all David. Life in an orphange is no kind of life for a child. Some people are saying very mean things about a simple act of love. I think it’s quite ugly to say she adopted this baby for attention or fame. Did she get married for attention or move to England for attention or have her other 2 children for attention? Those were personal choices, just like David’s adoption. He looks happy and beautiful. I think he’s probably the happiest he’s ever been and in a loving home. That is what matters.

- melanie on October 27th, 2006

I find it hard to believe no one explained to his father the meaning of adoption. Get serious. He couldn’t, and never could take care of David. Someone who abandons their child, for whatever reason, doesn’t deserve to be a parent in the first place. Bravo to Madonna, and I hope things work out for their family.

- Charlotte on October 27th, 2006

“I find it hard to believe no one explained to his father the meaning of adoption.” – This has happened many times over in third world countries. Just because a child is “adopted” does not mean they came from poor decrepit (sp?) backgrounds. It just means an adoption agency managed to pass a baby on to an adoptive parent.

The adoption agency Angelina Jolie adopted Maddox from was shut down not long after due to the babies being obtained through false means. Can you imagine being duped, co-erced or tricked into an adoption scam? Adoption is a beautiful thing, however, like everything else in this world scam artist take advantage. Adoption makes BIG money. Especially in poor countries. And when it’s international adoption the babies are taken out of the country never to be seen again. It’s very sad

- Heavenly_Hibiscus on October 28th, 2006

I agree that David will have a “richer” life living with Madonna but wasn’t she just admitting a while ago that was a crappy mom because she didn’t have enough time for the two children she already had. I just hope she reorganizes herlife and priorities to be there for all 3 of her kids now. I’m just not sure she needs another kid on her plate, sure she has money but we all know children need so much more than the roof over their head, clothes and food.

I think Bon Jovi made a good point on her parenting:
“I’ve been in this industry for 22 years and no one has any idea what my four kids look like. I keep my private life private and I always have. You see these people who let their kids become famous for nothing – what’s that all about? She can say what she likes but Madonna takes those kids out to every premiere she ever goes to. These kids have done nothing and yet we all know what they look like? It’s crazy, man, but each to their own. My kids don’t have security guards outside their school because no one knows what they look like. And that’s the way I’m going to keep it.”

One more thing, I am always a little put off by how incredibly photogenic all these recently adopted “celebrity” babies are. Am I alone here? I always wonder what the adopting parents must be thinking while they meet (pick through) the available children to see which is the cutest. Not even the so-called do gooders want a “not so cute as a button” (i hate to say ugly) baby.

Overall though this is a good thing and I’m glad to see people who can afford to actually adopting instead of having to always make a mini me. My DH and I plan to adopt if I ever get the mommy & daddy urge.

- agtdonut on October 28th, 2006

What Bon Jovi said about Madonna and her kids was way out of line, as he later came to point out when he said…

“Jon Bon Jovi has apologized to Madonna after wrongly accusing her of exploiting her children by proudly displaying them at movie premieres. The “Livin’ On A Prayer” hitmaker berated the pop superstar for allowing Lourdes, nine, and Rocco, five, to attend public events, advising her to shield them from media intrusion. But the 43-year-old soon realised his mistake after the Material Girl hit back, insisting her children had never attended a single film opening. He says, “I put my foot in my mouth recently with a comment about Madonna. Let me apologise because I don’t know the woman.” However, the rocker continues to express distaste for publicity hungry celebrities: “There are celebrities who will go out of their way to get their picture in the paper and I just think that is a load of rubbish.”

The point is, none of us “know the woman”…I, for one, am tired of people judging her parenting skills. Celebs can’t win. If they are frequently photographed with their children then they’re “exploiting or parading them.” If they are seldom photographed with their kids then they’re accused of being “selfish or neglectful parents!

- gargoylegurl on October 28th, 2006