Madonna's Adoption Request Rejected

04/03/2009 at 07:30 AM ET
Tom Munro/AP

Madonna has filed an appeal to a court ruling that rejected her bid to adopt a second child from Malawi, her lawyer said Friday. “I have just filed a notice for the appeal,” said the lawyer, Alan Chinula. He added that no date has been set for the appeal yet.

Earlier Friday, a residency requirement in Malawi prevented Madonna from adopting 3 ½-year-old Mercy James from that African nation, a judge and a lawyer told the Associated Press on Friday. The news service described the judge as a witness not involved in Friday’s court ruling, and the lawyer as another who was present at the time of the decision. Both the judge and the lawyer spoke on conditions of anonymity.

The residency requirement for prospective parents is 18 to 24 months in Malawi. Madonna has homes in New York and London.

Madonna, 50, adopted her son, David Banda, now 3 ½, from Malawi in 2008. The move was not without its controversy, amid claims that her application received special status because of her celebrity.

The singer, a single mother, was planning to adopt Mercy, whom she first met in an orphanage in 2006. Her other children are daughter Lourdes Maria, 12, and son Rocco John, 8 ½. There has been no word on whether Madonna intends to appeal the ruling.

When her Malawian lawyer, Alan Chinula, broke the news that High Court judge Esme Chombo had rejected her petition to adopt a Malawian toddler, an incredulous Madonna “kept wringing her hands,” a source at Kumbali Lodge, where the pop star is staying, tells PEOPLE. Madonna, who filed her adoption papers on Monday, was not present in court.

At the hearing, the judge said child welfare officers are required to find suitable prospective parents and “not someone who just flies in and out.” In terms of the child, “I think the welfare of [Mercy] will be better served if she grows within the environment of the culture of Malawi,” she said.

The judge also said that because Madonna is already assisting other orphans, Mercy will still benefit from star’s generosity.

Source: PEOPLE

— Stephen M. Silverman

FILED UNDER: Uncategorized

Share this story:

Your reaction:

Add A Comment

PEOPLE.com reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.

Showing 123 comments

Manda Jo on

Wow this really surprises me! My question is if the reason they denied it was for the residency thing, then how did she adopt David? Was that what the “special status” comments were about?

Andrea on

Good. I’m glad. These celebrities think they can get whatever they want, whenever they want. She’s trying to bee too much like Angelina Jolie

sillyme on

I don’t know how anyone can say “good” about this. I think it’s a sad situation. I mean, “good” Mercy will probably spend the rest of her life in an orphanage, instead of a loving home. Yeah, I guess that’s good. I can understand that there are laws to be followed, but I’m not sure how Mercy benefits in this case.

Jace on

i never get why people are so anti-madonna when it comes to adopting…and yet Angelina has all these kids shes collected from all around the world but because shes “Saint Ang” its ok?

in my view – and i am certainly not a madonna fan – at least madonna is concentrated on one region in one country. she has pumped money into that region over the last 15 years, shes paying for an orphanage and now she has adopted a child from that same region. where as angelina seems to want to adopt child from every corner of the world just to satisfy her want for a “rainbow coloured family”. Im not saying she doesn’t also help with money but if anyone out of the two “swans in and picks a kid” its Angelina.

but maybe its because im not from america and dont worship the brangelina bunch!

dee on

Wow I feel so sorry for Madonna her family and Mercy. Who really has 18mons of free time? Malawi has over 1 million kids without parents. Looks like that # won’t be going down. I think this will turn good ppl off from adopting in Malawi.

Linda on

Angelina stuck to the official rules. Madonna it seems did not. That is a big difference.

As for Mercy, no one can say she’s off worse now imho. She may still be adopted by people living in Malawi or live with one of her ralitves. And if Madonna keeps the cashflow going the orphanage will be very able to take decent care of those kids. Madonna has just been divorced and fresh from two flings. Maybe she should focus on her private life and the three kids she already has for now.

Alex on

I think, on a very basic level, that this will be an eyeopener, that celebrities can not just get whatever they want because of money and status. No matter what Madonna claims, it seems fairly obvious at this point that there was some effort on her part to circuvent the rules/laws. And to be honest, if she’s not willing to play by the rules, I don’t know what else she expected. The judge can’t be bought.

And I would just like to say that I have no objections to celebrities adopting from abroad, and have nothing against Madonna being one of them. My problem with this is that rich and famous people need to play by the rules as much as anyone else, and as I (and probably others) mentioned in the post where little David met his bio-father, if one of us ‘normal’ people tried what Madonna has here, we’d have been laughed out of the door long ago.

My only thought now is to whether Madonna will withdraw or curb her financial assistance in the country, and I sincerely hope that she doesn’t.

Mary on

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Angelina Jolie, who adopts by following all the rules of adoption as do many other celebrities around the world, so don’t use this as an excuse to take dislike of her out on this situation. So if you don’t like international adoption, that is fine, but don’t pick on one person only.

I don’t believe that international adoption should ever be frowned upon, but I do believe that rules should be followed, no matter what your celebrity status is. But it does look strange that the rules did not count the first time, but do this time. I guess it comes down to who hears your case and this judge went strictly by the rules. I am sure she will fight the decision but if the rules are bent for her, then they should be bent for anyone who wants to adopt and that would be a dangerous precident.

I hope this does not discourage others from adopting internationally though, but again, if there are rules, they are there for a purpose and should be followed.

Estelle on

Jace, before you critice the way Angelina adopts, perhaps you should do some research first. Otherwise, you come across looking very ignorant.

I feel conflicted about this. Whilst I understand that Malawai has rules in places and rules should not be broken, this decision leaves another child languishing in an orphanage. Life with Madonna could have provided Mercy with health, education and all the oppourtunites to succeed in life. Now she is condemned to life in a country on its knees with no real prospects for the future. That, for me at least, is extremely sad.

Lis on

Why is she so stuck on adopting from Malawi, anyway? There are oodles of children all over the world who could EASILY be adopted? It just makes me wonder, does Madonna just like the controversy? Is she just trying to prove that she can “beat” the system? Is it like a “feat” for her?

I am honestly not trying to bash Madonna, I just am so confused as to why she feels the need to adopt from a country that makes it so incredibly difficult? It’s not like there aren’t other orphans out there…. 😦

I dont get it on

I don’t see how a viable parent being rejected for adoption is a good thing. O get the judge wantin gher to grow up in her culture but there certianly is not guarantee that she will be adopted by a Malawian family. If they were thet proactive in getting the children adopted wouldn’t she have been adopted by now? Madonna wanted to adopt her in 2006 and it’s 2009 and she still has not been adopted. From a psychological and cognitive point of view if the caretakers at the orphanage do not have the time to spend with her and love her she could have learning and behavioral deficits.

It is funny to me that the very people that are in arms about Brangelina and Madonna adopting these children are not makign their way to these countries to adopt these children or give money to these orphanages to help take care of the kids. So if Angelina and Madonna can’t adopt them then who will? Instead of berating them for their efforts, how about we all step up and do somethign to make things better

Sam on

“. . . rich and famous people need to play by the rules as much as anyone else, and . . . if one of us ‘normal’ people tried what Madonna has here, we’d have been laughed out of the door long ago.”

Instead of making it harder for celebrities and the wealthy to adopt, why don’t we wish that they instead made it easier for the ‘normal’ people you speak of to adopt?

MZ on

ITA Alex.

Sam on

What gets me about Madonna and Angelina is that it seems both of them got to hand pick their children. I may be wrong about this, but their adoptions have always come across to me like that. Angelina has spoken about choosing Maddox before. And she also said when she went to Korea to choose a new child, Pax was the only one available (it sounds like she thought she would get her pick this time but didn’t). When Madonna adopted David, there were reports she was going to adopt Mercy first, but then decided on David. Normal people don’t get to choose a child from an orphanage; they get what they get.

Kelly on

i don’t get it.. they let her adopt her son, but now when she wants to help another child they deny her?– I hope she appeals it, as i don’t recall her living there when she adopted her son… my thought is that they are punishing her for being a divorced single mom, but, don’t want to come out and say for fear of being told they are discriminating her.

nicole 27, chicago on

i think it’s very sad. she is helping an orphan. have compassion. she is helping someone in need. i think it’s very commendable and selfless. to have a child, and be a devoted parent is nothing less than that.

Mommy of 3 on

I bet the fact that she is single has something to do with it. Even tho these children are in an Orphanage as it sits right now, they deffinetly want them to be placed in a stable home enviroment for the future. It could be possible her age also has something to do with it.
As much as I am not a Madonna fan whatsoever I feel for her. Everyone just has to remember that everything happens for a reason…..

lihalee on

I live in a third world country and while it is not as poverty stricken as Malawi I think we must respect each countries rules and regulations. I have seen people from so called “developed” countries very naively (and most of the times it is with good intention) apply their rules and their customs to other people countries and it is not always practical. What may be important to you may not be important to another person. It is obvious that to the Malawian people of prime importance is the ability to be able to pass on to their children their traditions, their customs. Hence the law that a person be resident 18-24 months in country before adopting was set up. Everything is not solved by money, we know that don’t we?
Yes they have huge problems but I think they should be allowed to figure out the solutions and if we really want to help we would allow them the dignity to do so.

Julianna on

but angleina doesn’t follow the rules either, she hand picks her adoptive children. i adopted a child from china 5 years ago. it took us a very long time, although not as long as the adoption process in our own country, and we were shown and subsequently adopted a child who had been picked by the authorities.

angleina talks about how she selected maddox and zahara, that doesn’t happen, that isnt following the rules! so shes just as bad as madonna in that sense. plus what also always bothered me about angelinas adoptions is she changed the childrens names and its not even like they were babies when she adopted them! at least madonna had the decency to keep her boys name the same!!

Haylo on

Sam, you’re very wrong. Even “normal” people get a choice in child. If you stay in country and just take a child that they place, then yes you may not get a choice. However there are things called waiting child photolistings and also just orphanages where you go and see what child you bond with. I have two relatives who have done both domestic and international adoptions. In both cases they chose certain children rather than taking random placements. They wanted to make sure that they connected to the child (they both have adopted older children).

Call me crazy, but i’d rather have the chance to meet an older child and see if we were a good fit before just grabbing up whatever kid they placed with me. It’s different for infants, obviously an infant will not have any pre-formed behaviors etc. But as someone who works with children who are in foster care, I would not advocate any parent adopting an older child (3 and up) without first meeting the child. We’ve had more kids get returned than you would believe because the parents couldn’t connect to the child. In the end that’s much more harmful than a parent first meeting and getting to know the child they choose to adopt.

Alice on

As much as it’s a little sad for both Mercy and Madonna, I still think it’s a good decision. Not because Mercy is “deprived of a loving home”, but she already has loving relatives.

You’re right there’s no guarantee that she will be adopted by a family from Malawi but with the residency requirement, it’s more likely that they will live there. And she will be closer to her relatives, that are alive!! If Madonna wants a child from Malawi to take him/her half a world away, she could at least take one who has no parents, no link back.

Jeanine on

That really sucks. But perhaps she should try adopting one of the TONS of children in her own Country waiting to be adopted?

Aelys on

This is sad for the little girl but I can’t say, in all honesty, that I feel sorry for Madonna. Malawian law provides a residency requirement for prospective parents for a reason, Madonna got around it the first time so I think it’s only fair she went by that requirement, just like any other prospective parents. Just because she’s Madonna doesn’t mean she can not go by the laws like other prospective parents do, famous or not famous.

Jamie on

Adoption should have the same rules for all people, be they middle class or rich celebrities. If you check, many countries have different rules for adoption, some very strict, some not so much and for the most part it takes a long time and the process is complicated.

Just an FYI, Pax is from Viet Nam, not Korea and the only thing that Angelina and Brad (who always seems to get lost in these conversations by the way) asked for a healthy boy between 3 and 5, so no choosing was involved and they knew that up front. When they visited the orpanage together (Brad and Angelina), they met Pax at the same time they met quite a few other children, so again, no choosing as was also the case with Zahara, they got what was given to them by the orphanage within the parameters that were set up (baby girl–I include Mr. Pitt as he was there when Zahara was picked up and they became a family as they all moved in together when Zahara was released from the hospital). Not sure how it was for Madonna, but the circumstances were not the same.

What is so confusing is why the rules for adoption in Malawi were so fluid the first time, so it seemed that she would be able to do it again witout any difficulty. I don’t think we know all the facts, but I do believe she should have been a bit more discreet and not made a circus of the process as now there is, at least for the moment, a child still in an orphanage. Not sure if this child has family who is willing to take care of her or not, but it is a complex situation and we only know what is written in the press, who we have learned are not always accurate.

Haylo on

If I were famous, i’m not sure that I would even consider adopting from the US. The US makes it extremely hard to get a child and then with all of the media etc. that would be involved, you can bet that every family member with a slender tie to the child would be coming out of the woodwork trying to complicate matters. No thanks. Heck i’m a normal single woman who’s trying to adopt and i’m so tired of the hoops i’m ready to safe up and go the international route.

Estelle on

Reading some of the comments on here from people who quite clearly have no idea about the adoption process Angelina Jolie use is both annoying and humorous at the same time.

1. Maddox is the only child Angelina has selected. She applied to adopt, was accepted and was taken by the authorities to one orphanage where she met Maddox.

2. Zahara and Pax were the children *assigned* to Angelina. She had no choice in their selection.

3. Angelina only adopts from countries with a clear set of rules regarding adoption so that she doesn’t get herself into this kind of mess.

Seriously, a simple Google/Wikipedia search on Angelina Jolie will tell you all you need to know. Perhaps people should check before writing about things they know nothing about?

Shirelle on

It’s really sad because that girl would have a great life with madonna

dawn on

My question is….How does she have the time so spend with the kids,touring so much? I think she should just be satisfied with the one adoptive child she has,and be thankful that she is blessed enough to offer him a good life. jeez!

Stacey on

I have looked into international adpotion myself and the waiting lists are long, the rules are strict and there is often a lot of disappointment and frustration. Why should Madonna and Angelina(or any other “star”) be shown any preferential teatment just because of thier celebrity status? “Normal” people such as myself couldn’t just walk into a country, files papers on a Monday and expect to leave with the child on Friday. If she really wants another child, get on the waiting list and follow the rules…just like the rest of us!

Shannon on

I agree about adopting right here in America. There are millions of childrens in orphanages here. I commend Sheryl Crow for adopting from within the U.S.

Neisha on

I am very saddened by this situation. I don’t understand how they say Mercy will be better off living with relatives when she is already 3 years old and has been living in an orphange. What relatives? I am not saying that her grandmother and uncle did not want her, I am sure they do, but evidently they could not afford to raise her. I think the judge’s comment about Mercy still being able to benefit from Madonna’s generosity was out of order. So it is okay for Madonna to sponsor and support all these orphanges, but it is not okay for her to want to take and love another of the kids as her own? True, Madonna should abide by their laws. I am sure she can find a way to buy a home in Malawi and fly in regularly. She should appeal.

Elle on

I think the reason that they didn’t let her go through with it this time doesn’t have anything to do with her being a single mom or any other crazy reason. I think that after she adopted David so “easily” in comparison to their laws there were other officials that had something to say about it. I’m sure they didn’t want to take him away from her once it had already been done but I bet that is the real reason. They probably didn’t want backlash again like they had with David. I’m sure there were people that got in trouble for granting her request because they do have some strict laws in place. I don’t think that law is that great because it does make it difficult for people to adopt there. But I know that country has a lot of pride in itself and they aren’t just going to allow someone come in and start sliding through their laws. Again, I bet some people really heard about it after she adopted David.

Janey on

People complain that celebrities are above the law and I say this is good solely because for once a big celeb is asked to follow the rules. If she is upset then it’s her own fault for feeling that she were above the law.

In the case of little mercy, I do feel bad for her because she like all children deserves a good life. Hopefully something like a trust fund will be set up for Mercy. If Madonna felt like she had a really stake in this girls future she can still have a hand in this girls life. She can send the girl to school(africa is filled with boarding schools) get that girl an education work WITH the family. It isn’t her responsibility but it is the next best option if she really cares for the child.

Janey on

“filed adoption papers on Monday”

Does that sound right to ANYONE? File adoption papers on Monday pick up your baby on Friday?

Suzy Q on

Reading some of the comments on here from people who quite clearly have no idea about the adoption process Angelina Jolie use is both annoying and humorous at the same time.

1. Maddox is the only child Angelina has selected. She applied to adopt, was accepted and was taken by the authorities to one orphanage where she met Maddox.

2. Zahara and Pax were the children *assigned* to Angelina. She had no choice in their selection.

3. Angelina only adopts from countries with a clear set of rules regarding adoption so that she doesn’t get herself into this kind of mess.

Thank you, Estelle for setting the record straight because some of the stuff people believe and write about the adoptions in the Jolie-Pitt family are downright lies. Seriously it makes me wonder where there heads are at.

So can someone please tell me how it is in the best interest of Mercy to grow up in an orphanage rather than with family who can provide her love, exceptional health care and education?

SweetDiva on

According to other reports, the judge also commented that the residency law is in place in part to prevent child trafficking. There are a lot of people with ill intent that could adopt the most vulnerable children for heinous purposes.

Allison on

It does seem odd that the residency requirement would be waived once and not a second time. Maybe Madonna will go ahead and establish a residency in Malawi. That wouldn’t surprise me; it seems like she’s involved in enough charity work there anyway that it would make sense, even if she didn’t want to adopt again.

ElleJsis on

“It’s really sad because that girl would have a great life with madonna”

Aside from the fact that she would be physically well taken care of we don’t know Madonna as a parent. We simply don’t know how she is as a mother. We know what the media tells us and what she says but since we’re not there we don’t know. I’m getting a little sick of people saying “Oh she’d have a such a great life” as if David and Mercy are Annie and Madonna is Daddy Warbucks. Yes, I agree her physically comforts and her health would improve, but the other aspects of her life could’ve ended up all mother dearest. We don’t know.

I hope that Mercy’s life improves from here on out tho.

Jade on

Can’t Madonna live in Malawi for 18th months? She has the money and can organize her life to live there if she wants that little girl so much.

I like this quote from this blog (a blog about international adoption)

And yet it when it comes to the overall welfare of an adopted child, the standards for “what is best” too often becomes, “what is good enough”. And too many times, the actions of APs/PAPs becomes justified by what this child is “getting in return”.

“How many times have we heard “Adopted children deserve to be treated just as well as bio children?”

If parents really mean it when they say, “I would do anything for my child”, then hopefully this applies to adopted children as well. ”

http://heartmindandseoul.typepad.com/weblog/2009/04/material-girl-is-denied-lucky-star-treatment.html

Anna on

Janey this adoption process has actually been going on for 18 months from what the news has been saying. But I guess the actual papers were only filed on Monday. She has been visiting the little girl and getting to know her this whole time.

But, if she continues to give her support to the orphanage where the little girl is at, the little girl will be taken care of. If her main concern is the little girl. That is one of the things the said by the judges. She can continue to support and take care of the little girl in her own country. That is, if she is really concered about the well being of the little girl.

Janey on

Anna,

I didn’t know that. 18months? Thats a perfect amount of time to establish residency. I read that she met Mercy in 2006. If she had always intended or even had the slightest inclination to adopt a Malawian child she should have established residency. Instead of just intending to skirt the law again! I really would like to feel sympathy towards Madonna, but I feel like this all comes down to her skirting the law. Even if she’s been working on it for 18 months, the adoption papers will read from Monday to Friday. The law is not only there so the adopting parent can understand Malawi culture, but to also prevent false adoptions.

It really helps keep down, negative things like Child-trafficking and sexual slavery. Now the ‘bad’ people will know that you can’t just walk into this country and pick up a baby. It will say to the people of Malawi that hey! we can follow the law.

I actually found this quote: “The solution to helping kids in poorer countries is not to remove a couple chosen ones. ”

I really think it rings true.

D.S. on

I hate when people say just google it to find out the truth!
I work in the adoption field and I have more knowledge of adoptions than some random person from internet land! Just because it’s in the internet doesn’t mean it’s true!
So I have to say 2 things:
1) Angelina has not “followed the rules” completely. Just as an example (because I don’t have the time to go into the laws that were “forgotten” with all her adoptions) Pax was adopted 4 months after they put in an application for adoption in a country where there are more people waiting to adopt a child than there are “adoptive” children. The usual waiting time averages about 1 and a half to 2 years. She was moved to the front of the line because she “made a donation.” As I said, I work in the field and I’ve never known anyone else to get an adoption through so fast. I do know many parents though who were waiting the legal time for a healthy boy and were pushed back down the line because of it. (And to anyone who thinks different, yes it was 4 months later. They had to wait 6 months after Shiloh’s birth to put in the papers and he was adopted 10 months after her birth, 4 months after the application went in.)
and
2) I have been working with one family in particular who have been waiting to adopt a son from Malawi. They are a wonderful family and, while they don’t live in a mansion of have millions of dollars in the bank, they are wonderful parents. They were accepted to be parents to a 7 month old baby boy 3 years ago. The little boy is now 3 and a half years old and still in Malawi for the next 5 weeks because they had to follow the rules. They couldn’t do the 18 months in Malawi in a row because they have a 6 year old girl at home and of course work. They are legally allowed to break up the 18 months living in Malawi (ie: 2 months there then home for 2 months, 1 months there, 1 month home ect.) and as I said in 5 weeks they will finally be legally allowed to take him home. Now this is a little boy who could have had a family since 6 months of age but he will be nearly 4 by the time he gets “home.” While I agree that the Malawi laws are unfair on the children (to that extent) I don’t see how on earth it’s fair that Madonna was allowed to take David home without the 18 months, so I am extremely happy that this judge couldn’t be bought. There is no reason why Madonna would be a better parent than any of the other people trying to complete the 18 months so that their child can be legally adopted.
It’s time for people to realise that there are so many people out there who would be amazing parents, who have to wait a long time to get their child, while celebrities make a “donation” and laws are “forgotten” or changed for them. As someone who has to see the faces of the waiting parents who are doing everything right to get their child and then see celebrities get a child after only a few months, or have laws broken so they can take the child home quicker, I find it absolutely disgusting!!

Anyway, I’ve said my part. I just wanted to put some information out there from someone who actually works in the field and knows the legalities of adoption, and from an (for lack of a better word) “insiders” point of view with true knowledge of the adoptions not something they’ve read online.

Emily on

I think it’s absoloutly disgusting that people can say that this a good thing to have happened. I don’t necessairly agree with the way celebs can go and adopt from abroad. But this siutation has been refused I think clearly to make an example, but who at the expense of? I think the little girl will suffer a lot more from this decision than Madonna. I don’t like Madonna one little bit, but I still think without a doubt this little girl will have a better life with her than in an orphanage in Malawi. That little girl is the one that will suffer from this and its disgusting that people think that is a good thing.

ElleJsis on

Emily

Then who should be made an example of? Why should as d.s explained other potential adoptive parents be pushed down the list because Madonna has more money?

As Machiavellian as it may seem someone would’ve had to be made an example of.I’m almost certain she is not the only person to have broken the law. And the story doesn’t need to end there. Madonna can do her residency, which is the law and then she can adopt the child. Or another couple who has been doing there residency in Malawi can adopt her. Or as several folks have said if she really cares for the girl, she can still have a hand in her life. Actually if she really cared for the child and Malawi she wouldn’t break the law in the first place.

Mrs. R. on

No matter how I personally felt about Madonna’s adoption and the whole fiasco, it must have been very personally disappointing for her and very sad for her children to think about getting a new sister only to learn they would not.
That’s tough no matter what.

Tracey on

I find it sad that a woman wanted to adopt a child and give that child a loving home and family and was not able to. I know there are rules that everyone must go by but this child has already lived 3 years without a family and she deserves one.

Rose on

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I’m glad that Madonna is being held to the same standards as any other adoptive parent would be. On the other hand, I really wish the adoption laws there were different, because I think it’s highly unlikely that very many children will be adopted from Malawi with the residency requirements.

Aitch on

wow, I was so shocked when I read this! I wonder what she is going to do now.

Dlynne on

I think she was denied for a combination of many reasons. The backlash the government received when she was allowed to circumvent the rules when she adopted David. The fact that she’s now divorced. Mercy’s grandmother has contested the adoption. And maybe because she promised to keep David in touch with his father & his culture, yet this is the first visit in almost 3 years.

While the Jolie-Pitts may have jumped to the top of the list to adopt their children, they still adopted children who were totally available for adoption and followed the rules set out by the children’s respective countries. If Madonna is serious about wanting to adopt in Malawi, she needs to respect their adoption laws.

Rose on

“and yet Angelina has all these kids shes collected from all around the world”

It’s incredibly disrespectful to refer to someone adopting children as “collecting kids.” I really wish people would be more respectful towards adoptive families. Just because we are not building our families in the so-called conventional way does not mean we are collecting kids.

Abbey on

I stopped commenting here because most people are really way too judgmental for me to handle and I get really disgusted by many of the comments left, but adoption is close to my heart & I just have to say none of you have any idea what anyone else is going through regarding adoption (or any other personal situation for that matter). it’s not your place to say who should or should not be able to adopt. You have no idea the reasons behind a celebrity or any person wanting to adopt. You only have the media to tell you what they want you to think.

leah on

Dlynne – You can’t say the Jolie-Pitts followed the adoptive countries rules if they jumped to the front of the line. That’s illegal for everyone else but apparently not for them. That’s not following the rules at all. In fact that’s not only not following the rules, that’s breaking laws.
And if I remember correctly, there was troubles after the adoption of Zahara because it turned out her mother wasn’t dead after all and again after Pax because it his mother didn’t sign the papers.
They also broke the laws everyone else has to follow because she left Brad off the adoption papers because it is very difficult for an unmarried couple to adopt. She adopted them as a single parent knowing Brad was going to adopt them as a father once she was legally the parent. If anyone else tried that, and was found out by the orphanage/adoption agency, their application would be revoked because of deception. That is a fact. It is in adoption applications and told to you by adoption agencies, that even if it seems bad, you have to tell the truth because if your application gets revoked for deception you have pretty much NO chance of ever getting accepted.

Erica on

If anyone can afford to uproot and move to Malawi for the next 18 months, it’s Madonna! For most people it’s the financial burden which would get in the way, but if this is really the main reason the adoption was blocked than I think she should be relatively grateful. If Madonna’s serious about being a mother to this girl, I can’t see why she would let this residency requirement get in the way of doing so and just follow the rules.

Kaylie on

I think it was the right decision b/c if she can just fly in and adopt a child it may open it up to everyone else and the last thing you want is a bunch of child molesters going over there and taking home children.

Carolyn on

I personally suspect that Madonna’s motives are altruistic. Madonna has sought out attention since she was a small child and that has not changed. The fact that she has engaged in questionable conduct with a married man while being married herself should certainly be a red flag to anyone.

Ana on

In these situations the laws doesn´t matter! I´m really sorry for Mercy and all the kids around the world that are submitted to these conditions and laws.

The children should be the most important thing in all this adoption process and it doesn´t happen.

I´m sure her life would be better with Madonna.

Sad situation! And I don´t understand how someone can be proud ou happy about this fact. If you don´t like Madonna think about Mercy ou any other child!

Rose on

“And if I remember correctly, there was troubles after the adoption of Zahara because it turned out her mother wasn’t dead after all and again after Pax because it his mother didn’t sign the papers.”

That information was in tabloids. It wasn’t confirmed by a credible source. I can’t believe the number of people there are on here who take tabloid informatino as gospel.

“They also broke the laws everyone else has to follow because she left Brad off the adoption papers because it is very difficult for an unmarried couple to adopt. She adopted them as a single parent knowing Brad was going to adopt them as a father once she was legally the parent. If anyone else tried that, and was found out by the orphanage/adoption agency, their application would be revoked because of deception.”

It’s actually not against the law to do that when adopting from some countries. I know of several people who are not rich or famous who have done that successfully. There are a lot of people on here who need to do a little research on the actual adoption laws before spouting off about other people braeking the rules.

txgal on

If you look at adoption statistics for Malawi it shows that most of adoptions take place from people adopting outside of the country. I think every child deserves a home and I don’t think Madonna is an unloving and uncaring person and a child would be lucky to have her as a mother. I feel badly for little Mercy and hope she finds a home soon.

em on

Adoption IS a business, like it or not, and Madonna or Angelina are not the only people who have had rules bended for them or been moved to the top of a list because they made a donation or gave “gifts”.

Personally I do think she is too old to be adopting such young children, and I really respect countries that have certain limitations (such as parents over a certain age can only adopt the older children, etc.) But she is not the only wealthy person adopting, whose children will be raised more by nannies than anything else.

sonia on

Of course famous rich people receive special treatment . Life isn’t fair . Get over it.I’m sure Mary Louise Parker received special treatment when she adopted Ash ,they all do. As for leaving Brad off the adoption papers I’m sure the orphanage and the adoption agencies were aware of their relationship since they conducted home visits so complain to the adoption agency. Adoption agencies do that all the time especially with gay couples.Do you honestly think the agency didn’t know that Brad was going to adopt Pax later like he did with the other two

txgal on

Carolyn, I think you meant to say “not altruistic” as altruistic means unselfish. Also,Kaylie, as someone who works in the welfare system and worked on international adoptions, this ruling against Madonna will not stop or even hinder people with nefarious reasons for adopting from doing just that. I think the backlash for Madonna adopting has little to do with her being a good mother and Mercy needing a good home which is a shame.

leah on

Rose
“That information was in tabloids. It wasn’t confirmed by a credible source. I can’t believe the number of people there are on here who take tabloid informatino as gospel”

No those are facts. The tabloids absolutley exaggerated some things but the base of it is factual.

“It’s actually not against the law to do that when adopting from some countries. I know of several people who are not rich or famous who have done that successfully. There are a lot of people on here who need to do a little research on the actual adoption laws before spouting off about other people braeking the rules.”

It IS against the law to do so, and the “several people” you speak of were lucky not to get caught.
I agree, people should know laws before they speak of them. The problem for you in this situation is that I DO know the laws of adoption (been there, done that) so please don’t tell me I don’t!

And it is still a fact that jumping to the front of the line because of celebrity status or extra money paid IS illegal in ALL countries.

leah on

sonia – of course they knew about Brad – that’s the point! Special treatment for celebrities that others don’t have.

Grace on

GOOD. I’m very sorry for the emotions Madonna must be going through right now, but am delighted to hear that the courts actually glanced at their own laws before making a ruling.

Malawi is a country that is not structured for this type of adoption, and you can’t “trailblaze” by being the first person to break almost every rule they have (foreign, unmarried, divorced, 50+, non-Christian..) I hope that this entire situation prompts Malawians to reevaluate their adoption laws, but I also hope that this sends the message that third-world kids do not exist to be “rescued”.

What people have to realise is that, comparatively, almost any child in the world would be “better off” in the US. We have the highest standard of living, and usually better healthcare statistics, etc. But that is a bizarre way to view the world; in that case, ever child in any country should be up for grabs to wealthy westerners! Stick with the adoption programmes that have been rigorously examined by the US AND by the country of adoption, and donate to those places that want to keep their children in-country.

Being wealthy doesn’t fix everything, and while adoption is a wonderful thing, it’s enormously important for everyone involved (including the child) that it all be above-boards and as clean as possible. How on earth would one of these kids feel, grown up, looking back on this sort of situation and realising that they were maybe sort of bought?

Emily on

ElleJsis, what I mean though is that if Madonna wasn’t Madonna then it wouldn’t have happened. I am sure Madonna is not the only person to adopt a child from Malawi and if the negative press attention hadn’t been recieved, there would most likely not have been a problem. The majority of the time there will be no press attention at all, especially if it is not a famous person, therefore no one would have been made an example of. I just think its sad because it is the little girl that suffers. I don’t think anyone should be made an example of more or less than anyone else, because in the end, its that little girl that ends up remaining in the orphanage and thats what is so sad.

JMO on

Well I’m not a Madonna fan but I still think it’s sad all around.

The rules are rules so what are you going to do, however these rules are what keeps children in orphanages for YEARS instead of homes!!

My question is, why does it take so long to take a child home. In the case of the person above who said she knows a family who has waited over 3 yrs to bring home their son, was it taking this long bc they had to split up their 18 months or is this bc paper work takes this long to be filed??

Either way it’s all sad. Mercy and all the other children of Malawi and other countries will sit in orphanages with no families because of all these strict rules.

I’m not saying Madonna, Angie or anyone else should get “special” treatment but seriously if they have the means to do it why give them a hard time about it?? Are we so upset their not “following” the rules so much that you would hate to see children being adopted??

I don’t know, even if I was a person trying to adopt, I don’t think I’d be so frustrated with celebrities getting a child before me. I would look at it as a blessing of a child finding a home and know that eventually I’d be able to give one to a child someday myself when the time is right.

Well I do hope Madonna eventually gets a child to adopt. Nobody can question her as a parent if you don’t personally know her. And many single parents have children. That is nobody’s concern.

Lana on

I don’t think it is sad at all. There are African countries where you can adopt from if you play by the rules. These children are just as needy as the children in Malawi. Madonna is using her star power to not have to follow rules. Come on, she is not a good prospective adoptive mother. I am so glad that no special treatment was given to her. Justice was served

Amanda on

DS- please don’t further the misinformation by claiming you work in adoption. If you worked in adoption you would know the 1.5-2 year wait is for healthy infants. Brad and Angelina did not apply for an infant, they applied for an older child. You can get an older child faster because people don’t usually go the foreign adoption route for older children.

It isn’t a good situation, but I am glad to see that the laws are not being compromised because of her status once again. She could have very easily set up residence for 18 months and wouldn’t have had this issue. Honestly I’ve always wondered why Madonna is so set on adopting children that have families that want them. She does give off a ‘because I can’ feel when it comes to this subject.

Alex on

Grace, I would be very careful describing the US as having the best standard of living if I were you. That kind of bias offends people, and the standard of living anywhere is completely subjective. I’ve lived in America and the UK as well as six month stints elsewhere and I’ll tell you for nothing that there are good and bad things about everywhere I’ve lived, and the “standard of living” in the US is no actually no better in real terms than the UK where I have ultimately chosen to live (for the standard of living it provides me with). But that is my opinion and someone else will disagree and have every right to do so. I also much disagree with you on the healthcare thing, as the NHS system in the UK makes good healthcare available to all, not like other places. Every country’s healthcare system has its issues, but the NHS is a fantastic concept that, to me, is head and shoulders above private health insurance.

But back to the Mercy issue, whether the child would have been raised in New York or London or wherever Madonna intended to take her, if she really is desperate to parent her, she will now rethink her plan and play by the rules. That’s all there is to it.

Alex on

Too bad Madonna wasn’t able to adopt. That child would have a great life with Madonna. Love, food, shelter etc. versus what will she get in the orphanage? What will be her future? I feel sad for the child.

Rose on

Leah: You are mistaken. It is legal in some countries to adopt while single, even if you are in a relationship with someone. That’s not the case in every situation, but it is in some. You should brush up on the facts before lecturing others.

And the stories about Angelina have never been confirmed any place reputable. But I’m done having the conversation. You obviously have a need to be right no matter what, so I think I’ll move on to having conversations with more reasonable people.

brannon on

this is incredibly sad. what is even more sad is how many people are willing to spite this baby girl to ‘teach madonna a lesson’ or celebrities in general… horrific.

Sam on

“That really sucks. But perhaps she should try adopting one of the TONS of children in her own Country waiting to be adopted?”

Not everyone CAN adopt domestically. There are so many reasons you can be reject in the US, just as in Malawi She is not a good candidate for older children who are in foster care for many reasons, including the fact that she has a busy work schedule and is a single parent. As for new borns, there are way more couples looking to adopt an infant domestically than there are infants available–I’m sure a 35 year old couple with a stay at home parent would be a much better choice than a 50 year old single woman who is off working and traveling most of the time.

For older, single parents, it is very often much easier to adopt internationally.

Sam on

“Sam, you’re very wrong. Even “normal” people get a choice in child. If you stay in country and just take a child that they place, then yes you may not get a choice. However there are things called waiting child photolistings and also just orphanages where you go and see what child you bond with.”

I have heard of that, too. And I agree that as far as adopting older children, it is better to spend some time with the child and “choose” the child you want (although I think it would be sad if all the pretty, cute children got adopted over the less attractive ones). But how come so many people who adopt from China, Korea, and Cambodia don’t choose? Is it because they don’t have the money to go over there and spend significant amounts of time there?

Sam on

“Reading some of the comments on here from people who quite clearly have no idea about the adoption process Angelina Jolie use is both annoying and humorous at the same time.
Seriously, a simple Google/Wikipedia search on Angelina Jolie will tell you all you need to know. Perhaps people should check before writing about things they know nothing about?”

Estelle, I’m the one who brought this topic up and I clearly stated that I was unsure of whether or not Angelina handpicked the children. I was not stating facts about “things [I] know nothing about.” I was merely stating what my impression had been and inviting others to correct me. I appreciate you clearing things up, but there’s no need to be nasty.

nimbusi on

i remember reading that little girl’s grandmother didn’t wanted hher granddaughter adopted ang mentiones that orphanage granted that she could raise her after girl turns two. maybe court considered this

Artemis on

I think that was the right decision. If laws are not “good” this doesn’t mean you should break them, you just have to work and try to change them if you want. But as long as the rule is there, everybody has to obey them, even Madonna.

I don’t know what are the grounds for this law, but I think if the family of the little girl didn’t want her to move out there’s little room for any discussion. Just because she’s going to be a rich American celebrity’s daughter doesn’t mean she’s going to be happier than she is now with her family.

Elle on

“this is incredibly sad. what is even more sad is how many people are willing to spite this baby girl to ‘teach madonna a lesson’ or celebrities in general… horrific.”

No one is spiting this girl. No one is thinking ‘good now this girl can go back to living in an orphanage, done and done.’

The fact is these laws are there for a reason. No person is above the law, and since Madonna does extensive work in the country she above all people should want to do this adoption the correct way. This ‘lesson’ so to speak could have been easily avoided. The crux is, because she’s madonna people are assuming she’ll have a great life. That could very well be true. However, a lot of other adoptive parents could provide a good life to Malawi kids, but they have to follow the law.

Some countries will not allow a 50 year old woman to adopt. If she had tried one of those places and got denied what would be the defense then? I feel as if the law that got her rejected seems trivial to some. It isn’t. As someone said before, culture is very important to these people and in addition to the law Madonna made a promise to the folks of Malawi that she didn’t keep.

Lisa on

I am an American who has lived in Malawi working with various NGOs and orphanages. One thing to understand about the family infrastructure in Malawi is that often times when a family member dies, their relatives are unable to take care of their children at that moment in time. They are able to put them into an orphanage for a period of time until the children are older and can be a little more self-reliant.

This was my big issue with her adopting little David as well. He had a known father (rare in orphanages) and it is likely the father would have retrieved him from the home when he was older. I have seen this happen in many cases. It sounds horrible to those of us on the outside, but actually it is a very normal cultural practice. The parents or family members really are trying to do what is best for their whole family.

See this quote from Madonna: “This adoption (David’s adoption) essentially was the beginning of the creation of adoption laws in Malawi. I am the template or the role model so to speak for future adoptions.” While I am ALL FOR international adoption and plan to adopt from Malawi one day, the Malawian laws are in place for a reason. Any non-Malawian famous, wealthy, or an average Joe who expects to walk in and over-rule any of these laws, is arrogant and does not really have the child’s best interest in mind. She is anything but a role model for future adoptions. Plenty of honest, good, law-abiding people have adopted from Malawi without playing the martyr every chance they get, as Madonna has done.

dee on

I think that most on here are from western countries with different standards of living. Just because Madonna has money, it doesn’t mean that the child will have a happier better life. Living in hotel rooms, being cared for by a different nanny every few months/years? Yes, maybe the homes and orphanages are not like in America, with carpeting and hardwood floors…but this is how it is. Not everyone in the world needs a fancy place to have a “good life”. I don’t think that many of you know what it feels like to lose someone in your family to adoption because you don’t have enough money. My grandmother raised me and my cousins, and she could not take care of 3 small babies, eventually my cousins were taken away. We have always been in pain and have never gone a day without missing them. Luckily we were able to see them, but don’t think that Mercy’s grandmother doesn’t love that baby. I think she will love that baby more than Madonna. Madonna can live in New York and have her kids stay in London for periods of time. In the real world, I know few mothers who can leave their kids for more than a day.

Mia on

Although its tragic that a young child won’t have the benefits of a more fruitful life and she may be stuck in that orphanage for a while, I will also say that Im glad Madonna’s plea/request fell through-

I’m sure her intentions are good, and I think adopting a child to give them a better life is a great thing, and I’m all for it, but you know-she isn’t following the rules, and she thinks because she has all of this money they are just going to give her whatever she wants, and she isn’t really doing her research. If she really wants to adopt so much, there are so many other countries in Africa and other regions wheres she could adopt from-legally, and don’t have such long periods of residency required for the adoption.

And yes, technically David is in a better place now than he might have been in Malawi, but he seems really detached from his roots, and isn’t really in “reality” anyway, especially to what the average middle class family is like in America. If he was going around asking his father “why are you so poor” and “do you have a horse, I do” I think there is something really wrong with that on that basis of cultural values, and manners.

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt follow the rules to the T, they keep their children’s cultures alive and well, and although they have so much money they seem to keep their kids well grounded and they are always polite and well-behaved.

Sara on

I have not read all the previous comments, so I apoligize if this has been mentioned. I am a little confused by the use of that picture for this post, as most people know it was originally a picture of David’s visit with his father and his father has mostly been cropped out (you can see a bit of his sleeve). Does this situation need that additional controversy?

—-
We try to use the most recent photo we’ve posted of a child, in a cropped 150×200 size, to illustrate a story. In this case, the two photos we posted of Madonna, David and his biological father on Wednesday were the newest.

-CBB Staff

Amie on

Janey Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:50 am
“filed adoption papers on Monday”

Does that sound right to ANYONE? File adoption papers on Monday pick up your baby on Friday?

Exactly!

Elizabeth Delaney on

While it is unfortunate the Mercy will not be able to become adopted, I feel that this is fair and square. Madonna did not obviously live 18-24 months in Malawi so she should not get preferential treatment over everyone else just because she is a celebrity. I’m glad they laid a firm hand down and “followed the rules”.

Grace on

Alex, I’m a British subject, and have probably lived in as many countries as you have. They all have their pluses and minuses, that wasn’t the point of the post. Feel free to bundle the UK into my statement and relabel it “Western”.

My point is, setting up a West v. Everyone Else dichotomy and then implying that the children are better off in the more wealthy society is grossly oversimplified. Madonna adopting a healthy child with living relatives from the Malawian-style orphanage system is not justified by saying that with Madonna, she’ll get better healthcare and education and conditions. If I were adopted by Madonna, I would also see an improvement in my conditions, because she is a hugely wealthy woman.

The laws preventing out-of-country adoption often have very good motives behind them. India does the same thing, to an extent.

Kimberly on

Mercy does have family in Malawai, I seen on tv where she is staying with her grandma. I think as long as she has family there that can take care of her, than why pull them apart? I’d say she should go else where.🙂

Alexis on

If Madonna loved the people and culture of this particular country so much that she needed to adopt two children from there, I don’t understand why she couldn’t live there for 18 months? Did she see it as such a sacrifice to spend that short a period getting to know the culture, lifestyle, language of her children’s natural home? Malawai’s residency requirement says, to me, that they see it as fundamentally important to pass their culture down to all of their children, rather than having them whisked off to learn the superior ways of the western world. The fact that both David and Mercy have living relatives who clearly love the children…

Supporting underpriveliged children can come about in many different ways, and the solution isn’t always to hand the child over as only “we” can provide them with the life they deserve. Madonna may be rich, but as someone said above, we have no idea what kind of mother she is, or what her motivation is. Children have a much more rich tapestry of needs than just good healthcare and education. They have deep emotional needs born of a desire to belong, to be valued for who they are rather than what they are, to feel connected to their wider community, spiritual needs, as well as love and education. It’s not always a simple thing to adopt a child and see it as a solution. That’s why I think Angelina Jolie is a better candidate as an adoptive mother, because she seems to be making a conscious decision to keep her children’s cultural background alive – teaching the boys Khmer, and all the children French, having international nannies, celebrating cultural holidays, and frequently visiting their places of birth.

D.S. on

Amanda – If you’re trying to insult me you’re doing a bad job! You can say all you want that I don’t work in adoption but I do, and have done for the past 14 years. With that in mind, don’t tell me I don’t know the laws. Yes, it is quicker to adopt a child rather than an infant but it depends on the country you’re adopting from. That country still has insanely long lists of waiting parents with MANY of them switching to take an older child to make it happen quicker and because of that, the wait for “non-infants” has actually risen to between 1 and a half to 2 years. Getting an infant from there takes a little longer. As for the other countries that we weren’t talking about, yes there are some that you can get a child from quicker, but still none of them happen in 4 months.

becka on

People, the judges decision is clearly about Madonna’s lifestyle (“flying in and out”), which is not suitable for any child. I too, would not grant Madonna the child. Children are not trophies. You have to be there for them, not hand them off to nannies.(For those who wonder how she got David, well, it could have been a different judge this time).

D.S. on

JMO – It’s taken that long because of the 18 months residency that had to be split. And that’s after the long process of filing the papers.

Alexis on

Where are you getting the 4 months for Pax’s adoption from? Brad and Angelina filed for adoption around Shiloh’s birth in early to mid 2006, and it was finalized in March 2007. That’s at least 8 months, by a conservative estimate.

D.S. on

Alexis – You have to wait 6 months after the birth of a child before being allowed to apply for adoption. They applied when Shiloh was 6 months old and Pax was adopted 4 months after filing.

Alexis on

How do you know they didn’t apply before Shiloh’s birth? I’ve read before that they applied in early to mid 2006, and since Shiloh was born in late May, that doesn’t rule out their having applied any time through May.

Alexis on

DS – here is our answer. You’re right, the application was initiated in late Fall 2006. However, it wasn’t fast tracked because Angelina was a celebrity, but because Pax needed a home. From a People article dated April 2 2007:

“Contrary to some reports, Pax’s adoption was not fast-tracked, nor did Jolie, who requested a healthy boy—many of the children at Tam Binh are HIV positive—donate money to the orphanage in order to curry favor. “Things just fell into place,” says Heidi Gonzalez, the Vietnam adoption program coordinator for Adoptions from the Heart, the Pennsylvania-based agency that arranged Pax’s placement. “Angelina contacted me [in late fall] as I was looking for a home for Pax.”

After being given information about the boy, Jolie followed up with a November trip to Vietnam, a country, along with all of Southeast Asia, where Jolie has said she feels “at home.” Pitt and Jolie visited the Tam Binh orphanage, “but she didn’t meet with [Pax] individually,” says Gonzalez. “She didn’t want to single him out. So instead she met with all of the toddlers and brought them gifts.” But even from a distance, Jolie clearly clicked with the “friendly and very shy” little boy, says Gonzalez: “It was like it was meant to be.”

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20061744,00.html

Ty on

lol just reading the posts here.
Alexis… Anyone who “read” anything about it should stop believing what they read and perhaps start reading adoption laws instead!
My brother was in this situation. He and his wife had filed all the papers but 8 months later found out they were expecting. They had to wait until their newborn son was 6 months old before RE-filing. They then had to wait another 18 months before they finally got their daughter. And the applied for a 4 year old, so anyone who says you can legally get a child in a few months doesn’t know what they’re talking about. The old home studies don’t count because now your family dynamics have change and you have to go through the whole thing again and it is also harder because the adoption agencies would rather give kids to families without newborns. My brother and sister-in-law are fantastic parents and it’s ridiculous to say that Angelina should be allowed to bring home Pax 4 months after Shiloh was born when my brother had to wait another 2 years (18 months + the 6 month after newborn wait) because they had to follow the laws! I’m not saying Angelina is a bad parent. I don’t know her. But I do know that laws are broken when it comes to getting a child so quickly. That is my problem. Laws that can bend and break for celebrities but not for parents who are doing it legally. It’s unfair on them, and it’s unfair on the waiting children. If celebrities can adopt kids so quickly, then why not everyone else?! Oh yes, because there are laws preventing it! Laws that are broken for celebrities who make large donations! (aka buying children)

AmyBatoh on

Why don’t these celebrities consider adopting older children in this country who are about to opt out of state care and end up on the streets?{PBS special,NY Times, broke my heart,they are so alone and seem so hopeless} I feel sorry for these children in other countries,but children in America seem to get overlooked.The homeless children in this country are as desperate as homeless children in other countries,hungry,cold,destitute,desperate and hopeless and feeling unloved. Yet I don’t see celebrities concentrating on them. Brad,Angelina,Madonna,I know you’re trying to do the right thing,but you are American citizens. How about the destitute and needy in your own country? Just because we’re “the most powerful” and so called richest nation doesn’t mean we’re taking care of our own! Step up,do the right thing,if you want to adpot again do so in this country! Shape a needy and deserving child’s life here before they become another statistic!!

D.S. on

Alexis – Please don’t believe everything you read. People lie, even to magazines! I’ll give you 1 example that actually shows that I know what I’m talking about and it comes from your own article: “Angelina contacted me just as I was looking for a home for Pax” Do you really think that there was no-one else waiting for a healthy boy? As I’ve said, there is a huge list of people waiting for these children. She hadn’t even done the paperwork, as it says in the artice, it was first contact with the agency, yet she was moved to the top of the list. So if you want to believe the article, it certainly doesn’t make things better for Angelina in terms of laws.

halifaxhoney on

Malawi seems like a complicated area to adopt from. I’m not so sure how the average person would even try to adopt from there considering the residency part of the agreement. I figured that that this would probably happen to Madonna considering all the difficulties that she had with David’s adoption. It’s too bad, because say what you will about Madonna her children seem to be well cared for and she could certainly provide a child with anything the child needs. At the very least at least Mercy will be able to benefit from the assistance that Madonna can support.

CelebBabyLover on

Alexis- Thanks for posting that! You just saved me from having to dig around and find the same article! I can see where you were coming from earlier, though. They DID say that the process began “shortly after Shiloh’s birth”. However, six months after the birth DOES still fall into the “shortly after birth” category in my opinion.

D.S., I can also see where you were coming from. The thing about any new children needing to be six months old before you adopt from a foregin country came from Angie’s own lips, in an interview this past Fall. I was a bit confused at first because, like D.S. said, if they applied when Shi was 6 months old, it only took 4 months to adopt Pax.

However, I think one of two things might be true:

1. Angie was speaking of the adoption process in the country they’re planning to adopt from next.

or

2. Maybe the rules were a bit different back in late 2006 when Angie applied to adopt Pax.

In anycase, I agree with whomever it was that pointed out that the Zahara stories (about her mother still being alive) have never been confirmed by any reputable source. In fact, after the latest story (the one from In Touch early last year), the adoption agency Angie used to adopt Z refuted the claims, saying that, before Z was adopted, her biological grandmother testified in court that Z’s bio mother died shortly after her birth, the birth father was unknown, and she (the grandmother) was unable to raise Zahara due to a lack of money.

I also agree with the people who said that the only child Angie chose was Maddox. I remember reading in the PEOPLE that Zahara “assigned” to Angie. Similarily, I also remember reading here on CBB in a post about Adoptions from the Heart clearing up the Pax adoption rumors that what happened was this: Angie asked for a healthy boy between the ages of 3 and 5. Pax was the only one who fit the bill, so they sent her a “referral” about him, and she “accepted the first and only referral given to her”.

All of that said, do those of you who have said Mercy and David wouldn’t be better of with Madonna honestly think they would/will be better off in the orphanage?

I mean, no matter what country you’re from, life in an orphange is never ideal. However, in most third-world countries, children in orphanages face starvation, dehydration, and dieases (Zahara was suffering from all three when Angie adopted her, and the doctor who basically saved her life even said that Zahara would have died had Angie not adopted her).

David, for example, had one or two bio siblings that died before he was born, and was suffering from Pneumonia when Madonna applied to adopt him. Had Madonna not adopted him, it’s very likely that he, too, would have died (sadly, countries like Malawi do not have the resources to properly treat dieases like Pneumonia).

Mercy seems healthy enough, but unless Madonna’s appeal succeeds (yes, per PEOPLE, she has appealed the court’s decision), Mercy is more than likely facing a bleak future.

Sam on

“Why don’t these celebrities consider adopting older children in this country who are about to opt out of state care and end up on the streets?”

Not everyone is elligible to adopt domestically. For a single, 50-year-old woman who works as much as Madonna does and who has three other children still living at home, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to adopt an older child from US foster care.

“I feel sorry for these children in other countries,but children in America seem to get overlooked.”

Actually, there are a lot of people on waiting lists in the US to adopt older US children through foster care, but the children just don’t get matched up with parents that easily. Finding a new home for a ten year old child is much more difficult than finding a home for an infant, even if there are lots of people willing to adopt those older children. While I find it sad that so many US kids do not have permanent parents, I understand why the process is so difficult. What if an 8-year-old child is adopted, then doesn’t get along with his/her new parents and the parents said the child back?

Ty on

Celeb Baby Lover – You are correct when you said Angelina said about the 6 month law herself in an interview. I just want to say that 1, 6 months after the birth of a biological child is the legal wait for all countries. It’s a childrens rights law as well as an adoption law so it stands for every adoption from every country. And 2, the same law applied in 2006 (and earlier). I know this for a fact because my brother had to abide by it back then and I remember my sister-in-law being extremely upset by the fact that they had to do it all legally and wait (as I said in my previous post, 2 years in total) while Angelina got Pax in 4 months. I find it disgusting, but that’s just my opinion.

Alexis on

“Alexis – Please don’t believe everything you read. People lie, even to magazines!”

Please. I’m not as naive as you seem to think I am. Of course people lie, especially to magazines. However, the woman that the article quoted is a professional – not an “unnamed source”, but the coordinator of an adoption agency who worked directly with Angelina, who gives her name and is on record. People magazine is one of the more reputable magazines – they, at least, check their sources. Considering that people upthread were taking the stories of tabloid magazines who spin rubbish about Zahara’s mother wanting her back and so on, I’m slightly incredulous about being called on my reference to People.

“Do you really think that there was no-one else waiting for a healthy boy?”

I don’t know. Certainly I don’t know any better than you, which is to say neither of us know for sure. However, even if there was more than one person on that ‘list’ – for healthy 3-year-old boys from that particular orphanage in that particular region of Vietnam – do you think Angelina contacted the agency and said “I demand to be at the top of the list! Another child just won’t do. I must have this one NOW.” What difference would it make to Brad and Angelina whether they adopted Pax in March 2007, or another 3-year-old boy in September 2007? Why would they demand that their application be processed first? They already had three children and had no reason not to be prepared to wait. (It seems they didn’t even expect the application to go through so quickly themselves, given that Brad was tied up with work commitments and not able to pick up his new son in person). So if anyone rearranged the order of the list, it was the agency or the orphanage staff. Blame them, if you need someone to blame.

Kirsten on

It doesn’t matter if its Madonna or a nameless woman from the Bronx. She is trying to help another person on this planet have a better life, and if you question that living with Madonna would not be better than an orphanage, are you serious? No mother vs a mother, siblings, and every possible opportunity.

Finally, it doesn’t matter what country she adopts from – the US or Malawi. She obviously feels a bond with the country and wants to help its people. Is it better to help an orphaned American or an orphaned Malawi? It should be the same, if not more important to adopt a Malawian because the serious and real threat of death for Malawian orphan.

I have no idea why people are so angry with her. She may have bent the rules before, but seriously – a rule designed to make it hard for people to adopt helps who? The residency requirement literally helps no one – not the orphan or the hopeful adoptive parent(s).

I am not a huge Madonna fan, but I am a huge fan of helping every human being that I can. I hope that everyone on this planet feels the same.

If you are angry with her, why? I would rather see celebrities do adopting kids than flashing their private bits to photographers, beating each other, or divorcing.

Sam on

Alexis, it IS the agency/orphanage that people are blaming, not Angelina and Brad. It is unfair when celebrities are given an advantage, but the blame goes with the agency/orphanage.

D.S. on

Alexis – Don’t tell me I don’t know any more than you do since I do know what went on as I have been in this business for my entire working life and unlike you I don’t get my information from tabloids. And I don’t know where you come up with this stuff. I never said they DEMANDED anything. I was simply stating what happened. If you choose not to believe that, that is your choice, but it doesn’t change the truth. I know what I’m talking about as this is the field I work in. I work closely with orphanages from around the world as well as adoption agencies. Trust me, I know more than you do, and much more than tabloids! I don’t have to explain myself any further to you and I’m not going to respond to your ignorance anymore either. Find someone else to insult. I’ve got better things to do!

shay on

I don’t usually post on these things but I have to say something to Alexis. Are you a huge Brangelina fan or something? You seem to be extremly defensive towards them! I read what ds said and I don’t know if you misread what was said, if you just misunderstood or you are too big of a fan and believe she can do no wrong. I read what you said and ds never said they demanded to be put to the front of the line. You have made that assumption by yourself and then blamed someone else for it. I have an aunty who adopted 3 times from 3 different countries and I have spoken at length to her about the rules and regulations and I have to say that everything ds has spoken of (laws ect.) is in fact 100% correct so I think the attacks on ds are completely uncalled for since obviously she/he does know what she/he is talking about! You have someone who is telling you the laws from someone who actually knows them, which have been confirmed by other people who have been in these situations and left comments (ty’s story for example) and now I too can confirm that the laws ds stated are 100% correct, and yet you still don’t want to believe anyone.
Oh well, each to their own!
I just had to say somthing because I believe that no one should accuse someone of lying, especially when you know nothing about them. It’s not right.

Hea on

Why are people surprised? The Malawi laws have not changed. Madonna knew that.

Jade on

Madonna can only blame herself. She does not love Mercy enough and is not committed enough to be granted Mercy. She has shown no proof of love and commitment. She couldn’t be bothered to respect the law because it’s inconvenient to her lifestyle. She expected to have a child just because of her wealth. Mercy deserves better. I hope Mercy will be adopted by people ready to respect her culture and prove their love and commitment. I admire Madonna charity works but adoption is not charity.You can help children without adopting them. If Madonna truly loves this child she can respect the law.You can’t expect to have children handed to you because you’re wealthy. Children deserve better, even if they’re poor.

Jamie on

The topic for this discussion is Madonna and what happened. Laws in Malawi and the issues. Why is it that Angelina Jolie is always the poster child for other people’s problems? She has nothing whatsoever to do with Madonna and this situation. Other celebrities adopt internationally, why aren’t you going on and on about them and what they did? Her name was brought up when Suleyman (sp) had her babies, again, why is there a need to always bring her into discussions? I don’t get it.

Lisa on

Kirsten & CelebBabyLover,

Do you two know anything about Malawi OTHER than the fact that Madonna adopted from there once?? Your comments are extreme generalizations about “third world countries” (more politically correct would be developing countries) orphanages, orphans, etc. If you truly understood the process of adoption in Malawi, the culture of Malawi, and the plight of orphans in Malawi, you would not be so quick to defend the pop superstar.

The issue here is not as simple as you make it. “I am a huge fan of helping every human being that I can.” We all feel the same way. However, if you understood more about the issue, you would see that this adoption is not “helping.”

“Mercy is more than likely facing a bleak future.” Please see my previous post:

I am an American who has lived in Malawi working with various NGOs and orphanages. One thing to understand about the family infrastructure in Malawi is that often times when a family member dies, their relatives are unable to take care of their children at that moment in time. They are able to put them into an orphanage for a period of time until the children are older and can be a little more self-reliant.

This was my big issue with her adopting little David as well. He had a known father (rare in orphanages) and it is likely the father would have retrieved him from the home when he was older. I have seen this happen in many cases. It sounds horrible to those of us on the outside, but actually it is a very normal cultural practice. The parents or family members really are trying to do what is best for their whole family. Chifundo’s grandma obviously cares for her.

See this quote from Madonna: “This adoption (David’s adoption) essentially was the beginning of the creation of adoption laws in Malawi. I am the template or the role model so to speak for future adoptions.” While I am ALL FOR international adoption and plan to adopt from Malawi one day, the Malawian laws are in place for a reason. Any non-Malawian famous, wealthy, or an average Joe who expects to walk in and over-rule any of these laws, is arrogant and does not really have the child’s best interest in mind. She is anything but a role model for future adoptions. Plenty of honest, good, law-abiding people have adopted from Malawi without playing the martyr every chance they get, as Madonna has done.

Alexis on

DS, I never said you don’t know more about this field than me – I’m confident you do. What I was saying is that you don’t know any more about this particular case than me. All either of us know is what’s released to the public. OK? It’s not a question of me believing or disbelieving you. Obviously you think you know what happens in these high profile cases with 100% accuracy – all I want to do is point out to you that no one here does. Knowing the laws is one thing, but speculating about Madonna or the Jolie-Pitt’s treatment is completely different, and one in which none of us have any personal knowledge.

Did you read my post? I said that I DON’T get my information from tabloids. I loathe tabloids. People is not a tabloid.

“I read what you said and ds never said they demanded to be put to the front of the line. You have made that assumption by yourself and then blamed someone else for it.”

*Sigh*
No, that’s not what I’m saying at all. I never said that DS actually believed or said that. All I was doing is drawing out DS’s line of logic – that if celebrities were somehow breaking the law by giving donations to somehow speed up the adoption process, by extension, it is the celebrities themselves who are demanding special treatment. Much more likely is that if special treatment does occur, it is outside the celebrities control, so attacking them personally does no one any good at all.

Adriane Miles on

Cry me a freaking river with this one. Oh a person has to be a citizen to adopt from that country? Why doesn’t Madonna adopt a child from the US? There are plenty of children here who need homes. She gets all this special attention and moved to the front of the adoption line because she is a celebrity when infertile couples like me can’t even get one. I have to wait years for one. Hopefully the appeal will also be rejected. She should have to live there-I fully agree with the judge on this one, good going man!

Sam on

“People is not a tabloid.”

It isn’t the NY Times either.

Alexis on

OK, fine. People doesn’t report on world news and the stock market. It is a celebrity magazine. But it’s one of the few sources for information on issues regarding celebrities that is likely to be legitimate.

Does that pass?

shay on

Alexis – I still think your misunderstanding what ds said. What ds is saying is that he/she does in fact know more than what we know (and tabloids and People) about internal information of these celebrity adoptions purely because of the work this person is in. I work in fashion which, involves celebrities. Because of that I have a LOT of extra information about certain celebrities because, as with any job, you talk about your work, especially if it’s a person of interest. And even if it wasn’t you that had that particular client, every detail has soon been discussed, not only thru our office but our other offices right thru the world and even to so called “rival” companies where we have friends. It’s also something that we are allowed to do as long as nothing gets told to the press by us and isn’t taken out of the field we are in. Now I’m not saying that to make myself sound important because ‘I know more than you do about famous people’ I’m just saying that to show an example. I think what ds was saying was that he/she DOES know more because people talk to each other in their own fields of work and I would imagine that high profile cases (with the additional “inside” knowledge of each case) would be spoken of between them whenever they occur. I am absolutely positive that someone who has been in the field for as long as ds has been, has knowledge that People and the rest of us could only dream of in matters like this, by virtue of just being in that field and having conversations with others in that field. By taking my own job as an example, I am poitive that ds knows perhaps even exactly ALL the details of these adoptions as a fact.
That’s the point I was trying to make to you earlier.
And to me and a lot of people, tabloids and celebrity magazines (like People) all fall under the same catagory. I consider any magazine speaking about celebrities to be a “tabloid” simply because NONE of them have a squeeky clean record for telling the whole truth. People is certainly one of the better ones but I have read things in it that, when asked around, turned out to be only part of the truth. Some exaggerations were applied to the story. Which is why I see all magazines with celebrity information as tabloids. You don’t have to feel that way but I do, most people I know also think of them as tabloids, and by the looks of it, ds does too. I’m only saying that because I think maybe the word tabloid should have been replaced with magazine just to stop the confusion of the meaning of the word, so everyone knows where everyone’s coming from.
And as for laying blame, I feel both the celebrities and the agencies/orphanages (depending on the situation) are to blame. They are both doing something which KNOWINGLY ends up with laws being broken which is only hurting the adoption process as a whole. I don’t care if it’s a celebrity or not, it needs to stop because it’s unfair to everyone else who is following the law rather than breaking them, which again is the point people are trying to make. Fingers are being pointed at certain people simply because laws were broken in their adoption process. It doesn’t matter who’s to blame, that’s not the point. The point is that laws were broken and I’m sure even you’d agree that that’s completely unfair to anyone who is waiting years to give a child a loving home because they have to follow the laws while others get special treatment by breaking the law (whomever it was broken by).

Janessa on

This is so sad i feel sorry for those kids that need a home. I was adopted from Haiti 14 years ago and i was older then those who get adopted at a young age. That country should be glad anyone wants to adopt a black kids. It is hard to for black kids to get adopted i mean there go to china and china is not a poor country compare to majority of other countries around the world. Anyways it is so sad now that child has no one and who will adopt her most likely she will spend her life in an orphanage.

CelebBabyLover on

Lisa- What I meant by Mercy facing a “bleak future” is that she is very likely to suffer from starvation, dehydration, illness, or all three. Like I pointed out earlier, Zahara was literally at death’s door when Angie adopted her (from Ethiopia, not Malawi, yes, but from what I’ve read, Malawi is one of the poorest countries in the world, and Ethiopia isn’t that much better off), and David had Pneumonia when Madonna applied to adopt him and would have very likely died as well had it not been for him being adopted by Madonna.

I guess what I (and possibly Kristen) am trying to say is this: Would you rather these children be adopted and be assured plenty of food and clean drinking water, or stay in the orphanage where they face the very real risk of dying in childhood?

Also, as far as David’s adoption…Haven’t you read the articles that quote him as saying that he is now happy that Madonna adopted David? It sounds like maybe he realizes that this is what’s best for David.

Alexis- I agree with you completely (and yes, Shay, I’m a HUGE Jolie-Pitt fan. That doesn’t, however, mean I think they can do no wrong. I hate when people assume that someone being a fan of Angie and Brad automatically means they think they can do no wrong!)! I’m not denying that D.S. is in the adoption business and knows more about the laws than we do. However, I would be very surprised if she knew the details on Pax’s case.

This is because I’m guessing that Angie and Brad probably made sure that the details of the adoption would be kept private. In any case, I also agree with you that PEOPLE is not a tabloid. In fact, they’re the only celeb magazine that I trust!

Sam- I disagree with a lot of your comments, but I DO agree with you on the adopting from America thing. I also want to re-itirate what a previous poster said: If Angie and Brad adopted from the U.S., can you imagine what would happen? It would be the “Zahara’s birth mother wants her back!” situation multipled by at least 10.

At the tabs’ urging, everyone with even the slightest possible connection would come out and claim they were related to the child and that they wanted him/her back (and some might even do so without the tabs urging them)! Also, Angie has been very open about the fact that she abused drugs in the past (during her “wild child” phase). From what I’ve read, parents with a history of substance abuse usually aren’t allowed to adopt from the U.S.

As for Madonna, as other commentors have said, as a 50 year old single mother, she would more than likely be turned away if she tried to adopt here in the States.

Lisa on

CelebBabyLover- Once again, you are making the issue too simple. Yes, Malawi is (last time I checked) the 6th poorest country in the world. But the orphanage Chifundo is in, Madonna funds. She is being taken care of. Orphanages are not ideal, but here in the West we have a very one-sided generalized view of the life of an orphan. Orphanages in Malawi are NOT the same as they are in the U.S. In the U.S., parents give up their kids with the purpose of their kids being adopted by other parents. This is not usually the case in Malawi. If the child has family, usually the family puts them in the home for a time waiting for the child to get older and waiting for their family situation to become more stable.

You and others make the argument that this is obviously what is best for Chifundo PURELY on the basis that she is an orphan in a developing country. There is more to the issue than this. As many others on this board realize (even those in favor of the adoption), making it this simple shows a lack of true forethought on the real issue.

Madonna is constantly playing the martyr in these adoptions. And THAT is what makes me the most mad. Poor me. Why would someone want to keep me from “helping?” Why don’t people want what is best for these kids? She is more worried that she gets what she wants than what is best for this child and this country.

Lastly, OF COURSE David’s father NOW says he is glad he is being adopted. He is a father who was bombarded by American media, pressured by an American superstar to adopt, and involved in a suit that involved more money than he could imagine! We will never know his true feelings.

tiera on

After reading all the posts I have to say that I don’t care if anyone has inside information or not in the case of Pax. We all know that you have to wait 6 months after the birth of a baby before you can adopt (from Angie’s own mouth and confirmed by other comments) and Pax came home 4 months later which is, for the regular person adopting, illegal (again as stated by many people on here who have actually gone through the process, unlike us who haven’t so let’s be honest, we wouldn’t know.)
And I have to agree with Shay’s last post when she says that someone who works in a field knows much more information than everyone else and it makes no difference whatsoever if it was a private adoption. If you work inside the industry, it is still talked about within those boundries, private or not because it is all information that is part of the business. You would be silly to think that just because an adoption was kept private to the outside world that the details wouldn’t be spoken about “on the inside.” I don’t feel it necessary to discuss my field of work but there is private information involved all the time. The privacy of these “matters” are to be kept quiet to the outside world, but for those of us in the job, we absolutely discuss it, no matter who it is or how private it’s meant to be kept. We are not only allowed to do so but it’s encouraged. It is how you learn to better your work, to keep up to date on the business and to also keep an eye on the legalities of everything. Because of that I have no doubt that anyone who works in the adoption industry, especially for such a long time, knows the details of private adoptions, including celebrity adoptions.
I also agree about the tabloid/celeb magazine situation. Where I’m from the two words are interchangeable. They both mean the same thing because none of them have ever been without fault. People has been court ordered in the past to print retractions for false stories as have, i’m sure, all the others. It’s OK if you see them as seperate, but I understand that people do use these words differently.

Now I think it’s time to quit the arguing. Misunderstandings seem to have occured and people are spouting of facts even though they have never adopted nor know anyone who has. The one source of information we had on here (DS) has now said that she or he isn’t going to reply anymore because of the few people who don’t seem to understand that if you work in a field of expertise, you have more information (including private information) than the average man and just because you haven’t seen the private information doesn’t mean no-one else has either. I think you should re-read ds’s original post, and then see how far this argument has unnecessarily come. There were no accusations, there were no attacks. There was just some information about Angelina in answer to another comment left by another poster about keeping with-in the laws ie: the 4 months line jump (which if you check the birthdate of Shi and the time they bought Pax home is absolutely correct) and then some information about adoptions in Malawi which I personally found very informative.
Again, stop arguing and stop defending people you don’t know, especially when it involves an industry you and I don’t know anything about except for what we’ve read!

Alexis on

Thanks for explaining what you meant, Shay – perhaps you’re right. If DS had said that she did know (or had been told) internal details about Pax’s case in particular, I’d be more inclined to accept her authority on the matter. Even though, like you said, there is talk among people in the field, I’m sure that like any workplace, that talk is sometimes tinged with gossip.

“And as for laying blame, I feel both the celebrities and the agencies/orphanages (depending on the situation) are to blame. They are both doing something which KNOWINGLY ends up with laws being broken which is only hurting the adoption process as a whole.”

That’s very true. But I wonder if, while the theory is good, there are problems with the application – what do you suppose Brad and Angelina could have done differently to ensure that they weren’t fast tracked? How could they have prevented it? That’s what I don’t understand. If they couldn’t have done anything differently, they can’t logically be to blame.

Thanks CelebBabyLover – it’s nice to have someone understand where I’m coming from. Like you, I am a fan of the Jolie-Pitts but don’t defend them blindly. I know they can do wrong. In this instance, though, I feel as though they’ve been wrongly targeted.

Anyway, I’ll be quiet now. Thanks for hearing me out – and thanks, Shay, for taking the time to understand what I was saying.

Sam on

“- what do you suppose Brad and Angelina could have done differently to ensure that they weren’t fast tracked? How could they have prevented it?”

I would never ensure I wasn’t fast tracked! I would never prevent that, even though it is unfair. And I don’t blame them for not doing so. I blame the agency. It’s their responsibility, not that of the potential parents.

lil on

Alexis – Hi,
I just wanted to say something in regards to “what do you suppose Brad and Angelina could have done differently to ensure that they weren’t fast tracked? How could they have prevented it? If they couldn’t have done anything differently, they can’t logically be to blame.”
How could they have prevented it? Easy!
I believe Angelina is very intelligent in these matters and knows the laws and she could have said No, thank you, but that’s illegal and unfair and we’ll wait like everyone else has to.
I say that with knowledge of adoption because my parents adopted 2 of my siblings and I have asked them (my parents) if they would agree to being fast-tracked if they were given the option. My parents told me that, while it would have been absolutely fantastic to have gotten my brothers in just a few months, they would have felt horribly guilty knowing that they has taken a child that someone else has been waiting for years for because they had to obey the law and for whatever reason, my parents didn’t have to. My mother told me she would have, heartbreakingly, have said No, I’ll wait my turn. I have also asked the older one of my adopted brothers (no point asking the younger one who is still disappointed he wasn’t adopted by monkeys!) how he would have felt if he found out he was fast-tracked and he said, after much consideration, that he would have been torn. He told me that wanting a family is huge for orphans but they also know very well (and from a very young age) what people have to go through to get them. Because of that he said that if he knew about it when he was young, he would have felt guilty and then very confused about who he is and who he potentially could have been if he had gone to the family that went through all the trouble and time to legally adopt him rather than being given to someone who didn’t. He also said that now as a teenager with full understanding of it all, he would feel the same as his younger self but now he would also feel sick to the stomach about himself just because he says he’d feel like a criminal somehow. Even though it wasn’t his fault, he was involved. I found that really very interesting because a lot of the focus is on how the parents feel and we aren’t recognizing the fact that these kids are going to figure it out at some point and probably feel the same as my brother would have, as in, while extremely appreciative to finally have a family, they are also very confused about who they are because of what might have been and the knowledge of their adoption being perhaps illegal and at the very least immoral. I’m sure that once my other brother/monkey gets a little older and was asked the same question, he’d feel that way too. I just wanted to say what my brother said so that people can hear this from a different point of view, from an orphans (or ex-orphans as my brothers put it!)point of view.
But getting back to it, in answer to how could they have prevented it? Well, I’m not for or against Brangelina but I do think we should be fair in saying that even if they had nothing to do with being moved to the top of a list, they could have said what my mother would have said…thanks but no thanks, it wouldn’t be fair on everyone else, I’ll wait.
And in answer to how can they be to blame? Angelina and Brad could have done, let’s not even worry about the legal thing, but the right thing, the moral thing, and again said no but they chose not to. That was absolutely their choice no matter how the situation came to be. They are adults. They weren’t forced into being fast-tracked. They could have said we’ll wait. But they didn’t. Their choice, their blame.

CelebBabyLover on

tiera- Please don’t make such broad assumptions. For example you seem to assume that I and the other people who have been speaking out in favor of Madonna’s adoption attempt and defending the J-Ps don’t know anyone who’s adopted. Well, at least in my case, that’s NOT true. I DO know people who have adopted. Granted, I don’t know the details of any of the cases (other than that one was a private domestic adoption, and that a few others involved international adoption), but the fact is that I DO know people who have adopted.

Sam- ITA! Personally, I cannot see Angelina basically saying that’s she willing to NOT give a child a home. Also, Adoptions from the Heart, which is the agency Angie used to adopt Pax, stated that the adoption was NOT fast-tracked and that Angie was required to and did follow the same rules you or I would have to follow.

Considering that lying about that could have cost the agency it’s reputation, I tend to believe them. At any rate, I believe that Angie followed the rules, and that, if there WAS any fast-tracking involved, it wasn’t her doing it. Also, either the agency or some other reliable source said that Pax’s adoption DID take nearly a year to go through.

Perhaps you get in contact with the agency and file papers stateside first, and then when everything is in order, you file the papers in the foregin country. It might not be until the latter step that the six month rule goes into effect.

Anyway, I agree with tiera. I think it’s time to stop arguing. We’re just going around in circles, so to speak, at this point.

From Our Partners

Sign up for our daily newsletter and other special offers.
    Choose your newsletters
Thank you for signing up! Your request may take up to one week to be processed.
    see all newsletters