Being a mom is more than financial, I know, I have 2 young children. If one is able to do something/in whatever capacity they can, out of love and compassion like a mother can, more power to Oprah. I haven’t read the US Weekly article. It’s only fair to read the interview first… it is how it’s perceived or interpreted. Oprah might feel she’s their mom, but there’s nothing wrong with that. So call whatever you will like. She’s invested more than just financially like some “sponsors” might who just sends a check and feels good about that. Oprah has given more. She’s invested her heart and cares about them on a personal level. She visits them, makes sure they are provided for — a house, caretakers, school. They have a better life. I do think these children do think about the individual who has made it possible for them. Oprah isn’t their mom, but I’m sure they are grateful to her. People could critize Oprah for not helping orphans. And she does get criticized for helping. If only more financially-able people would help orphans and poor, the world would be a better place.

whatever Oprah is doing it is helping a few childrenm have a better life. I don’t think that makes her a saint. Something about Oprah has always rubbed me the wrong way. her charitable endeavors fall flat to me. I just can’t put my finger on it though. I don’t think supporting children in another country an seeing them a few times a year constitutes a “mother”. But, if the kids are thriving and happy then it’s great for them.

it was never said if these children had paerents of not. some of them might very well have both their parents.

I have never commented on this site before, but I thought what I had to say would maybe be useful…my dad went to Malawi for a few weeks in May, and met a young man named Peter, heard his story, and him and my mom are now paying for him to go to college and are also giving him money to help support him and his sister. In his culture, because they are being a parent-like figure to him, he calls them “mom” and “dad”, and me and my sister his “sisters”! Maybe that’s what Oprah means?

I am a mother of 3. So I certainly know what a mother is and is not. However, I agree that what she is doing is fantastic and I don’t give a rip what she chooses to call her self.

I think Oprah is doing a wonderful thing but I wouldn’t call her a mother to those children based on what I know. I would call her their devoted sponsor.

I have mixed feelings about this. Are the children actually offically “adopted” by Oprah? Or is she just sponsering them by providing for them financially?

Don’t get me wrong. Oprah is doing a wonderful thing for these 10 children. God bless her for that.

But, to call her their “mom” seems kind of wrong, somehow.

As an adoptive mother to a child from China, whom I brought home to live with me 2 years ago, it is a totally different experience having the child with you in your home.

I am with my daughter 24/7. I give her a bath each day, read to her, play with her, cook her nutritious meals three times a day, tuck her into bed each night, teach her about her heritage, and on and on. To me, THAT is what a “mom” does.

I think this is great. Adopting from developing countries is great too, and I definitely think it constitutes “saving” a child (as per the other post). However, for many of these countries, including South Africa, to develop, its children need to stay in that country and get an education to help the country grow and change, rather than coming to North America and leaving behind the ravished country. I think Oprah is right on the mark in helping South Africa and the world and making real change.

I think she’s doing what a lot of people thought Madonna should have done for her son, David. His father was still around but unable to care for him. People questioned why she just didn’t give money to his father so he could afford to raise them. I see nothing wrong with what Oprah is doing. I’m sure she feels this is the best for these kids, to be raised in the culture they were born.

I agree with all of you. Parenthood is not just funding and giving of material things. She’s a sponsor, not a mother.

Shmoo, my youth pastor when I was growing up wanted so badly to have children of his own with his wife. They tried looking into adopting and their finances couldn’t afford it. So many many deserving people are hindered by this problem and it’s ultimately unfair.

How about instead of the adopting fees being so expensive, the majority of the money go towards raising an adopted child?